Aibu in being shocked at this school newsletter?

[whensitmyturn]

Aibu in being pretty appalled at this school news letter or am i being naive?

Children attend a catholic primary school- dh is Catholic I am not. Never had an issue with the school, children are in the last couple of years there.

Had a newsletter home tonight saying that a new ‘children and social work act of 2017’ has been passed and that parents will no longer be able to remove their children for PSHE lessons but that the government are still deciding what content the lessons should have. There is a public questionnaire on gov.uk to write your ideas.

The newsletter then goes on to say that we need to ensure that things that are age suited to children get suggested and I quote ‘to avoid respect for alternative lifestyles being allowed to undermine Christian principles of marriage and family life’.

It then goes on to link ‘coalition for marriage’ for help with us filling in this questionnaire.

Coalition 4 marriage is a group that promotes a traditional family set up and states that children should be taught that ‘marriage between a man and a woman as the gold standard of adult relationships’ Also that ‘they believe there is no age-appropriate way to teach primary school children about same sex marriages or transgenderism’. In blinding hypocrisy it then goes on to say ‘we should be teaching children broad values of tolerance and respect’.

!? I thought that in this day and age in the uk even if you attend a faith school inclusivity was seen as important/ the norm.
Would you be angry at this or just see it as an unavoidable downside of attending a catholic school?

I went to catholic schools so seen this same attitude towards same sex marriages myself they would cover it but they would always finish up with how it goes against the god and it's a sin.

This is exactly what I think should not be allowed.

I think we had a misunderstanding sunshine

Catholic don't recognize it as a marriage.

They don’t recognise it as a marriage ^as understood by the church’. They don’t recognise it as a Catholic marriage. Fine, good, up to them.

Not ‘recognising’ secular marriage as an institution that exists under the law and confers certain rights and recognitions under the law is back to not believing in cheese. It exists. It’s fine to believe it doesn’t count with God. It’s not rational to believe it doesn’t exist in law, and to pretend to children it doesn’t exist in law, and is perfectly valid but different from religious marriage.

YABU to be shocked, it’s a catholic school, what did you expect.

YANBU to disagree with their stance if it goes against your own moral code and to pull your children from the school, opting for a ND school instead.

It’s a trade off. Have your kids taught their values 6 hours a day in exchange for (generally) better academic outcomes. Surely you knew that?

Hi whenisitmyturn.

My children also go to a catholic school; I'm not catholic, husband is. I don't think that the fact your children go to a catholic school means that this letter is ok. I've not heard of the questionnaire tbh but as it's public I don't think the school have any right to influence your responses. It sounds like they are panicking about what they'll have to teach!

I've struggled at times with having the kids baptised and them going to a catholic school but I think we give them a balanced upbringing and view of the world that reflects our beliefs, not those of the Catholic Church. My husband was brought up catholic in N Ireland and it's an important part of his heritage. I respect that. There are many open minded Catholics. It's not hypocrisy, it's having faith whilst having own values and beliefs based on your own judgement.

Yes, religions should always be taught for knowledge not instruction.
I have not said otherwise .

Have your kids taught their values 6 hours a day in exchange for (generally) better academic outcomes.

That’s another misconception; faith schools only do better when they are able to select their pupils (because selection by faith skews away from the general population towards the socioeconomic groups more likely to attend church; those groups tend to be associated with better educational outcomes).

This briefing from the Commons Library is really interesting; looking at comprehensive secondaries; faith schools had fewer pupils of low prior academic achievement and more of higher prior academic achievement than non-faith comps; so they were already ahead of the game on intake alone. But the results and progress made are much narrower - when prior attainment was taken into account, the difference was about a tenth of a grade higher per subject per student.

Its no excuse for some posers to say don't tar all Catholics with the same brush. If you are not an intolerant homophobic parent then dont belong to an intolerant homophobic club. End of.

Julie8008

Do you say the same about Muslims?
Jews? Christians?

Religion is not a club it is a personal faith.

If it was an individual personal faith they would be part of a church, which is a COLLECTIVE fsith /belief

At least it wasn't Mermaids

People get so angry at others beliefs.

People get angry about actions.
Actions that don't happen in a bubble.

Yes I get angry at peoples actions too. When they hurt innocent people.

And the people who enable and support them?

It's a Catholic school. You should look closely at what is also being taught.

When my niece comes home singing about God putting all the fish in the sea, yeah its a cute song, but the message is wrong. All the prayers. Catholic school are pretty full on.

I am opposed to any kids being taught homophobic or any other bigoted views as facts in schools.

So don't send them there then! Or teach them there's more than one way to think out there.

It’s a trade off. Have your kids taught their values 6 hours a day in exchange for (generally) better academic outcomes. Surely you knew that?
This is the issue!

JassyRadlett
Not ‘recognising’ secular marriage as an institution that exists under the law and confers certain rights and recognitions under the law is back to not believing in cheese. It exists. It’s fine to believe it doesn’t count with God. It’s not rational to believe it doesn’t exist in law, and to pretend to children it doesn’t exist in law, and is perfectly valid but different from religious marriage.

How could you possibly believe what you have posted?
There are a lot of misconceptions here. In fact it is one long misconception from beginning to end.

Here's the deal:
The Catholic Church recognises civil marriage.
It acknowledges civil marriage exists.
It acknowledges and recognises that civil marriage is legal.
It recognises the validity of civil marriages.

It even participates in the civil requirement of registering marriage if a couple has not had a civil ceremony before a church ceremony in some countries.
In some countries, having a marriage in a church means a couple is automatically married in the civil sense too. (In some countries couples must do two ceremonies).

The Catholic Church completely accepts institutions that exist under the law, including civil marriage, civil courts of all stripes, criminal courts, divorce and family courts, etc.

The Catholic Church does not see a civil marriage as sacramental marriage.
There is a difference as far as the Church is concerned.
The Catholic Church recognises as sacramental marriage those that are conducted in the church between baptised Catholics, or those that are conducted between any baptised Christians.

It recognises as valid marriage (civil but not sacramental) any marriage contracted between two parties willingly and without reservation, in good faith, and without legal impediment. So no polygamous marriage, bigamous marriage, marriage of underage parties, marriage of parties unable to give consent (due to mental disability, mental health problems, intellectual inability to understand what is being agreed), clandestine marriage or forced marriage is recognised by the RC church or considered valid.

In fact, if you are a Catholic who was married in the church and you are contemplating divorce and then an annulment from the Church, the Church will only start annulment proceedings when your divorce is finalised.

So don't send them there then! Or teach them there's more than one way to think out there.

But the PP was concerned about homophobic or other bigoted views being taught as fact to any kids. She can only do the above with hers, but she will have to live in a society shaped by other kids being taught intolerant beliefs as fact, funded by the taxpayer.

math, that is ^exactly* my argument.

I was taking issue with a PP who was trying to advance the argument that Catholics do not recognise same sex marriage or other non-sacramental marriage, therefore they cannot be expected to explain its existence to children.

I was demonstrating that that contention was batshit bonkers. I’m glad to hear the Catholic Church agrees.

But the PP was concerned about homophobic or other bigoted views being taught as fact to any kids. She can only do the above with hers, but she will have to live in a society shaped by other kids being taught intolerant beliefs as fact, funded by the taxpayer.

Well,that's just it, isn't it? If you send them into a school that goes against what you believe in,you have to be prepared that there will be others out there that do not agree with your way of life.
The world is made up of lots of different people. They hold theirs, I hold mine. Live and let live.

It’s not about what happens within the individual school. It’s the societal impact of those views being taught as fact at all. Because the children who are taught those things will grow up and live lives outside the school community. And unfortunately not everyone holds to your tenet of live and let live. That can come out through policy - churches not wanting civil marriage to be extended to same sex couples - or through other, less civil forms.

If we want a tolerant, mutually respectful society then we should surely be using taxpayers’ money in ways that will promote that mutual understanding - the teaching of religions to promote understanding between people of different beliefs, but being very careful to differentiate between that which is objectively reasonably factual - that is, grounded in evidence - and that which is a matter of personal belief and institutional dogma.

That’s the issue, for me. The difference between ‘we, as x religion, believe that gay sex is sinful’ and ‘gay sex is sinful, full stop, not up for discussion or debate’