To think it is time to secularise all state-funded education?

[fideline]

Just that really.

House points (and ) to pointy for wringing some meaning from niminy's otherwise baffling post!

Yanbu. I don't believe the state should pay for religious schools.

YANBU

Religion has no part to play in education which should be secular, like in France.

Thank you.

I'm in favour of RE on the whole. The fact that DD1's current RE teacher is crossing the line between Education and Indoctrination is something we will just have to deal with, but I think RE can be a strong academic subject as well as a tool for fostering understanding.

Collective worship I can do without.

I think though that there is an assumption though that these schools exclude all other religions - they don't

I'm not assuming that sovery. It is irrelevant to me, personally speaking.

I just don't think any religious worship/instruction/observance (as distinct from RE) has ANY place in state-funded education. Why would it?

YANU to want it but the state definitely can't afford it so it won't happen.

YANBU.

Non-secular education is wrong on so many levels. Admissions should be fair (someone has already linked to the Fair Admissions campaign) ; religious education should be comprehensive and unbiased (that's where the US goes wrong, leaving it out so kids may only hear their family's beliefs); 'collective worship' should be abolished - go to your church/mosque/temple/stone circle out of school hours if you want.

I really don't see why those measures can't be legislated - the church schools could then carry on delivering their fabled much trumpeted 'ethos'. Whatever that's meant to mean.

It isn't going to happen any time soon due to the massive costs to the state of buying existing faith schools or building new ones. I would support the abolition of Compulsory Daily Worship in non faith schools.

I agree, my children's choices of Secondary school were greatly limited because they had the lack of foresight to be born to atheist parents, how foolish of them.

Personally I would like church and state kept completely separate.

Absolutely Suffolk we need more are RE and less Religion, IMVHO.

I understand. But there is a lot of history and considerations to think about. The primary my dad goes to was built on land bought by the Catholic Church and paid for by subscription from parishioners. The church also contributes to the running costs. So whilst I get the argument it would cost a massive amount to buy all the land and then provide the additional extra cash.

(in schools, i mean)

Sovery I am genuinely asking; is there any argument for state-funded faith schools beyond "I choose/like/want it"?

Totally agree. I'd happily join a campaign to end it.

I am not anti religious and I am happy for people to believe in a god if they so wish, but I don't think worship has any place in schools. I don't have a problem with RE.

www.secularism.org.uk/

Sorry, on a train of thought now!

I do wonder whether being tied to these old church school buildings has in fact been a negative effect on education.

Have they stopped state provision adapting to the changing demands in a town? Have towns and villages found themselves stuck with white elephant schools?

Where we lived in the Netherlands as new housing developments were built some of the buildings which were due to become offices and shops would first do time as Reception classes for the inevitable bulge in the early years. As these children got older they would then move to the more central schools.

During the time we were there we saw many of these 'dependence' classes come and go as the state provision flexed according to need.

I don't understand really. If the faith schools were holding the state to ransom with buildings, could the state not hold the faith schools to ransom over running costs? I know I am a simplistic fool, but is that not about the size of it?

I realise there is no political will for that, and perhaps that is how it should be. However, the situation must change for fairness to increase for all, so what can be done?

sovery, but that's the whole point - there is no real choice. It's a matter of luck as to where you live.

The state should not be paying to let children observe their parents' religion. This is something that should be left for home, and for when they're old enough to make their own mind.

A four year is not a "Catholic", they are a four year old child of Catholic parents and should be educated as such.

Couldn't agree more.

In Scotland, the west in particular, much is made of tackling sectarianism but not one politician will ever stick their head above the parapet and suggest scrapping catholic schools which would be the single most effective way of killing off sectarianism over a generation. But it wouldn't win much votes and is too controversial.

They have got some catholic and non denominational shared campus nonsenses. Just bite the bullet and merge the bloody schools already.

By all means teach religious education in schools and yes instill morals. But as for practising religion, do it in you churches/ places of worship. And that's the ultimate irony. What proportion of people actually practice catholicism that send their children to these schools?

Actually the reason why fair admissions won't happen any time soon is because there are a lot of middle class parents who love that there is a mechanism for them to have selective schools. Think of the number of MPs who won't dare send their kids private but make use of 'faith' schools ... there is zero political will to deal with this injustice towards other people's children.

Ah Errol that's the nail on the head right there. Sod it, I'm gonna be an MP when I grow up