to not allow my child to do a reading in church?

[GooseyLoosey]

Dh and I are atheists. The dcs attend the local school which is C of E (although wholly state funded). There are no alternative non-C of E schools locally.

The school tends towards being very religious and there is a special Easter service in church for the school this week. Ds (5) has been given a reading to do at this service. It includes many "Praise God" and "God is good" type statements.

I don't wish to over react but getting ds to actively participate in an act of worship may be a step too far for me. AIBU to object and to consider telling them to get someone else to do this?

To move away from the debate about whether Jesus makes a persuasive case as a homeboy...

Could this be an enriching experience for the OP's ds? Public speaking? Exploring a faith he has not been raised with?

Presumably if he's at a C of E school he's singing that "The Lord God made them all" five times a week in assembly anyway - so how does that differ from his giving a reading?

Just scrolled back to SGBs last post. Which part isn't acceptable because I agree with it completely.

You have to realise that to me (and probably to many others) there is no difference whatsoever between someone telling me that jesus speaks to them or someone telling me that their garden gnome speaks to them. That's not a figure of speech chosen to be annoying. It's just the way it is.

I know christians will hate the comparison, but it's necessary to make it clear what I am saying. If I put it tactfully then I'd be saying something with a different meaning.

The point is that knowing I see it that way. What kind of respect could I possibly have for religion? I could lie to be nice (and I do sometimes as I said before) but there is no honest way to discuss it withour revealing my opinion.

I respect people's views on say Communism versus Capitalism even when I disagree with them. I can see that Tory/Labour voters both have valid points of view. Religion doesn't have such a basis for itself, just a wish for things to be true followed closely by a decision that therefore they ARE true.

Gracie, that's not really the point (and I would strongly question what they mean by Christian cos I have dozens of friends and know only two who go to church!).

The point is that religion should be something that is taught by parents at home. Religious education (learning about all religions) should, of course, be taught at school, but all state schools should be secular. The fairest way for all - religious tolerance would be far higher too as people wouldn't be ghettoised into their different religious groups. (You only have to look at Northern Ireland to see the danger of religious segregation at school).

I once dated a Jewish guy who had been educated at a Jewish school - the things that he had been taught about Muslims were too shocking to repeat. That could never happen at a secular school because there would probably be a Muslim sat in the same classroom who could point out the untruth of what they were being told.

I agree that most of them probably don't practise their 'faith' (if they have any) but they called themselves such on the census, and there was an atheist box they could have ticked.

I understood that you were saying religion should be taught at home, but I don't agree. Your religion has a huge impact on, for example, your views on history and also science. I know I'm going to get a bashing now ;) but I want my son to be taught evolution as theory, not fact, and that would not happen in a secular school. Likewise a muslim school would probably teach that egypt is the Jewish homeland, not Israel. Faith makes a big difference on your view point, which is why if I was an atheist I would not send my kid to a christian school.

Please note: By atheist I mean someone who has made an informed choice not to believe; not someone who just hasn't given it much thought. If you aren't bothered, then by all means send your kid to whichever school you like. ;)

Your son will be taught about evolution the same way whether he is in a state faith or a state non-faith school. Please, please don't get everyone fretting about that again...

Not true fallenmadonna! My husband is a teacher in a christian school. Evolution is taught here as a theory. It really p*es of the non-christian teachers, but they have to do it because the head and head of dept say so.

Also, my biology teacher taught me it as theory, even at A'level. I guess it just depends on who your teacher is and how vocal parents in the community are...

What do you mean "as a theory".

He teaches the National Curriculum I assume?

"Evolution is taught as a theory"!

Please don't tell me they teach creation as fact?

The perfect argument for making all schools secular!

I'm astounded about the strength of feeling from some quarters here towards parents wanting a secular education for their children.

Our experience was that we very definitely wanted a secular school for our little boy, particularly at infant level, but were in the position described by several posters here in that we live in a fairly remote rural village. Our nearest school is about 6 miles away, and is very very CofE. An example of this is that the school rules are described as "God's Rules" (in a huge display inside the school hall), which to my mind is quite a disturbing piece of propaganda. That's just one example - I could go on ad infinitum.

Anyway, the two next nearest schools (8 miles aprox) are also CofE - there are in fact NO non CofE schools within a huge radius of our village. We visited these two, and whilst still CofE we felt that the emphasis was very different, and that whilst not ideal for our outlook on life, it was livable with, and we really had very little other option. Like the OP we live in a lovely village - are very much rooted in our community, and would never consider moving.

Anyway, long story short we expressed our "preference" for the two alternative schools, which both turned out to be oversubscribed, and our little boy was offered a place at the catchment, deeply religious school. We were very uncomfortable with this - went to appeal, on religious ground amongst other things, but this was obviously considered inconsequential, and we lost.

Our little boy used to regularly come home having absorbed many ideas about God etc, interpreted very literally. This left us in the difficult position of either discussing these ideas with him (sensitively) in relation to our own atheist beliefs - which generally led to huge confusion and upset on his part along the lines of... "Well my teacher told me God is real, and teachers don't lie about thing do they?", or making what amounted to "no comment" type responses, which sat very uncomfortably with us as parents. Now I would very happily have had these kinds of debates with my son at a slightly older age, but I felt that at the age of 4, it was literally impossible to handle the issue both sensitively and truthfully (from my point of view).

Interestingly, he is also now at an independent school - also run along religious lines. That was our choice however, and we are very comfortable with the presentation of religious ideas here. Also, he is older, and more able to process the fact that different adults in his life hold different viewpoints about some things.

OP - I had all those same squirmy feelings when we were back there in your position, and I would have been tempted to say something to the teacher I think. It will probably raise eyebrows though, so be prepared to be a bit assertive.

Well, it is a theory. An extremely sound, well-supported one. There are different interpretations of it too. I do teach it as a theory. But not with a face IYSWIM.

I think your point Gracie123, that religion colours how you view the world, is EXACTLY why we need to seperate education and religion.

FFS! I can't stand it and have to say something.

Evolution is a theory; that is why it is called the theory of evolution.

Gravity is a theory; that is why it is called the theory of gravity.

In science, theory does not mean 'speculative and somehow less true than a fact.'

A scientific theory is a an explanation of a group of facts; it is a predictive and explanatory description of them.

What antagonises me is not that people don't believe in evolution; it is that they argue about science when they don't understand the basic concepts.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory.

Creation isn't taught in science though, it's taught in RE as a belief not a theory.

cathpot, well put.

Sorry, cross post.

No, experimental science is not taught a theory (e.g. can we test it now and watch it happen), however you are correct that a lot of science on the National Curriculum is theory, although most schools don't bother to present it as such, and it's only when you get to undergraduate level study that you start to realise this.

No creationism is not taught as fact. It is also taught as theory, and still given much less classroom time than evolution, because evolution is what they need to know to pass their exams. I don't have a problem with DS learning about evolution, but I want him to recognise that it is a theory and an untestable one at that.

It's my view as a christian, and I respect the atheist decision that they can teach it as fact if they want. But that is why I think parents need to have a choice where they send their schools. By saying you won't incorporate religious beliefs into education, what you are actually saying is that an atheist should get everything their way, and anyone of faith should have to pay for the privilege of having the same right or homeschool

Ivykate-it is a church school; church schools go to church-if people don't like it then they shouldn't send them to a church school.

Thats my point - there shouldn't be religious schools. You go to school to be educated not take part in religious services - fine to learn about religion but not actually take part each day or week, leave that type of thing at the school gate.

Atheists get everything their way do they?

I refer you to my post a few goes back.

Gracie - is your DH a science teacher? Because we most certainly do teach about scientific method in school. And experimental science - by definition surely? Is creationism given classroom time in science lessons? I mean planned in, as opposed to responding to questions? What kind of school is it he teaches in?

I don't think atheists always get their own way.

I just said that if we take all religion out of education, then that is the atheist having their view point pursued, in as much as another belief underlying the teaching system is having their faith agenda advanced.

He is a year 5 teacher (and mostly teaches their classes at the moment) but also does some geography and maths with older children.

No, atheists aren't getting everything their own way - they won't be 'taught' atheism, they will be taught to have open minds, to be tolerant, question everything and come to their own conclusions - this simply can't happen in the same way at a faith school.

They will be taught alongside people of all faiths and none, they will be given choice.

Do they agree with their parents' religion? Do their understand their parents' atheism? Does another belief system make more sense than the one they see at home? That is ok too. Isn't it?

At home, they will be given their religious (or not) guidance, and they will be able to compare their own religious observance with others of different faiths. They will understand there are differences and that that is okay.

It should lead to a more tolerant and open society on all sides.

Not secondary then?

I was unaware that evolution was taught in primary school.

I thought that they just looked at adaptation.