To think MIL being judgemental and over-bearing about DC's baptism.

[Rollergirl1]

DH and I are not religious. DH's parents are practising catholics and DH was heavily involved in the church until he was a teenager (was an alter boy). I was christened when young but haven't gone to church since i was little. We had a civil ceremony when we got married. DD is due to start school in Sep 2010 and I have started looking at local schools. The two best schools in our area by a mile are the two local catholic schools. So we are now getting DD (3) and DS (1) baptised. And we are getting them baptised at PIL's local church despite it being 200 miles away from where we live. The reason that we are doing this is because local churches expect you to go to church regularly before they will consider baptising. So this is purely down to laziness and convenience. MIL knows the exact reason we are doing this and knows that we are not religious. She is making a big deal of it, arranging marquee for after the ceremony and inviting all their side of the family, etc. And I am happy for her to do so because she is doing us a favour. One of the godparents (my best friend)is unable to make it as they have other plans for that date. I wouldn't dream of making her change them as she knows this is not a big thing for us and we are really only doing for reasons cited above. Also my Mum won't be able to make as she is having a knee replacement the week before and won't even be able to walk. And she is not religious and not catholic. And it is happening 200 miles away. But my MIL is now saying that if my best friend can't come than i should ask someone else to be the godparent and has firmly stated that she thinks my mum should be there. I'm now getting stressed as I really don't want to make a big deal of this as we are only doing for the reason of schools but then think am I being unreasonable as MIL doing us a favour by sorting this out for us?

Betsy, where do the other 40% go? (Sorry if I am issing something obvious!)

Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet but catholic schools are not wholey state funded as many people on here seem to think.

They receive some funding from the state but a large part comes from the diocese to which the school belongs.

Catholic schools also ask parents to pay a small amount each year (Voluntary) which also goes to the diocese and is then used to fund additional costs at all catholic schools, ie repairs to the building

No, an equal admissions policy isn't going to make the crap schools any better. But it makes all schools accessible to all of us and I am entirely fed up that about 50% of my nearest primary schools are faith-based. Whether that's part of the admissions criteria is a red herring to a large degree - I believe in an absolute separation of faith and state, like they have in France or Turkey. Our situation in the UK is utterly absurd - our efforts to become a multicultural society are totally undermined by the fact that our taxes support religious schooling of any faith.

Anyway, as is my wont with these threads, I will sweep in, say what I think and sweep out again.

and also something else that has occured to me - many of the village CoE schools round this area have TINY intakes (I'm talking 12 reception places in the one school I'm certain of figures of). So faith school criteria, or LEA admission criteria - there are unhappy parents.

KingCanuteIAm not sure what you mean?

about 25% (1/4) of primaries are CofE (there are RC, Jewish & Muslime primaries too, but a small number in the grand scheme of things)

of the 1/4 CofE schools less than half (ie approx 1/8 of all schools) are VA (ie some/all admissions based partly on faith)

not sure where the 40% you mention comes from?

spicemonster - take away the faith schools and it STILL doesn't make all schools available to everyone.

Most LEA criteria go

(something along the lines of)

Children in care
Siblings
Distance to school.

If the good schools happen to be in expensive areas to live that is excluding those on lower incomes.

Sorry, that was not very clear was it? I mean this bit...

"Also church schools have approx 30% of pupils that are eligible for free school meals (one way of measuring "deprivation" in the area), which is roughly the same as non-church schools."

30% ish free school meals to church schools
30% ish free school meals to non church schools
where do the other 40% go?

Oh, hang on, do you mean 30% of the pupils at the church schools are eating free school meals?

I read it as 30% of the children who are eligable for free school meals go to church schools....

My bad?

that's the one KC - 30% of all of the childdren in church schools are eating free school meals (my own included )

30% of children in all the other schools are also eating free school meals

I just don't buy all this them and us stuff. I know it is a popular opinion but I think it is more based on envy and "rightious indignation" than actual events and facts.

and when I look at DS1 (and DS2's) playground it certainly looks pretty multicultural to me, at least one Ba'hai that I know of, 2 muslims, 1 Hindu for definite, oh and one or two committed atheists , plus a good splattering of agnostics, black African, black Caribbean, Polish, Thai, and numerous others which I wouldn't like to guess at .

FAQ I live in Inner London where lovely areas jostle cheek by jowl with council estates. So we don't get that 'expensive area' thing going on - well, not in the same way. What we do get is selection purely on basis of faith. The catholic school is good. Primary criteria? Being a member of the catholic faith. The nearest school to me is excellent. It's primary criteria is not only that you need to be an actively worshipping member of the CofE, you have to do it at their church! One way of getting the congregation numbers up I guess. Same rules apply to the muslim school and the jewish school. There are a couple of schools that are non-denominational but they are few and they are a bit rubbish. I would just like to be able to have a level playing field, rather than be penalised for being an atheist.

Horrifying grocers' apostrophe in that last post

well I live in a smallish town with a very wide range in areas - all squashed close together. The local church school is attended by people both from the council estates and the "posh" area (as all of the rest of us "non-council estate but can't afford up there" call it) and the few little bits in between.

Before I moved back to this current house I lived in a very nice area - which was literally across the road from an awful area - one that I wouldn't even walk through in broad daylight. And with only 3 senior schools to serve the whole town the senior schools are even more mixed.

Am I being unreasonable to be totally shocked at how many people actually believe all that religion guff in this day and age??

Totally bizarre

AIBU to be amazed that so many people don't believe in God in this day and age??

King Canute, my argument does hold up - the difference in the numbers of free school meals and English as a second language in the two schools is very clear.

FAQ - "and for the last flipping time only a small number of faith schools apply their own criteria - Voluntary Controlled schools ALL follow the LEA admissions policy, and an increasing number of VA do as well."

Well that's good, isn't it? I have no problem with those schools. It's the ones that don't that I take issue with.

Agree with spicemonster.

FAQ - I enjoy your posts and think you are usually very sane but come on. ITS NOT TRUE. Its honestly not that difficult a concept. Science anyone?

YANBU to want your children to go to the best school they can. The system is BU by which some of the best (state funded, even if it's only a proportion) education is only available to some children. Religious schools should either - be totally funded by the church or - accept any child of any faith or none. I don't care that you don't believe in the service at all. However -
YABU to make a fuss about MIL's attitude. She cares about the baptism, she's throwing the party, so do what she says. YABabitU sending your kids to a catholic school pretending to be catholic as they will find it hard. I went to a catholic school (but never pretended to be catholic) and I had to attend mass twice a term and on special days, listen to biased sex education which was clearly pro-abstinence, anti-choice and pro-rhythm method - and learn about the catholic doctrine in my compulsory RE GCSE. It didn't turn me catholic - the opposite - but it was very boring/annoying/infuriating at times. We put up with it because the education was very good but expecting your kids to pull off fake catholocism is a bit much.

YABU also to post this Qu here - it was bound to piss off a lot of religious people, and understandably. It is taking the piss, and although as atheists we don't mind that, religious people are bound to and it's pretty insensitive to broadcast your disdain for their rituals.

"accept any child of any faith or none."

CoE VC schools (of which the majority are) accept children of any faith (or none).

and lots of science backs up many biblical claims.......and no I'm not getting into a debate about it.

Especially with someone who wants to call me insane because I have a faith.

I don't think you're insane because you don't believe......

spot on KC/FAQ with the 30%/40% thing, I could have explained it more clearly, bad me

spicemonster - obviously don't know the exact criteria of the CofE school you mention re their church, but our local one gives priority for those that live in the parish & worship at the parish church. As the parish covers a very rough council estate AND some rather nice houses (and a whole range in between) this gives equal opportunity to anyone in the parish who worship at their local church. Next criteria is those in parish who don't go to church, THEN church goers outside the parish, this stops those in a more well-to-do area further away come marching in with the faith card and getting the places instead of local families.

From what I've seen, in the main CofE VA schools do try & give priority to local families, the bigger issue IMHO is the RC/Jewish/muslim schools where most want faith above anyhing else. Eg my local RC school (about 30yds from my door, my nearest school, very good, but no way would I want DC going there) only gives priority to baptised catholic children in care & baptised catholic children with SN, WTF? Other children in care/SN come after all the catholic places have been filled (so in reality never get a chance as the school is very oversubscribed)

I don't think people understand what the word "hypocrite" means.

The OP is making no bones that she is baptising her DCs in order to get them into better schools than they would have access to if they weren't baptised, so she is not being hypocritical - she's being upfront and honest. Not hypocritical at all.

Good for you OP. If the only way I could get my DC's into a decent school was to baptise them, then I would do that. If I had to pretend to believe the world was flat, I would loudly and publicly scoff at the notion of a horizon. If I had to dye my hair pink and purple and cartwheel across tightropes, I'd start training right away and call the naff hairdresser. If I had to move house, I'd be on the blower to the estate agent tomorrow.

Luckily I don't have to do any of that. So I'm not going to condemn anyone who isn't as lucky as me.

but Kat - don't you see it.

In most areas of the UK the "best" state (non-church) schools are in areas that are more expensive to live. So it's STILL unfair even without the church school element.

The other outstanding primary school in our town is right in the top "corner" of a well off pocket of town. It's prime "family" homes - and the school is ALWAYS oversubcribed. Those that go to the school come totally from that one area of town (unless they happened to have move house to "the posh" area and have a sibling at the school so get a place based on that).

NO children from the deprived areas, although many of the well off area children end up going to the poor schools along side the deprived area children.

I don't think anyone said you were insane, did they? (sorry if they did and I missed it)

but it DOES seem very anachronistic, to those of us whose interpretation of the world is based on logical empirical evidence, that there are still people who believe in the supernatural to the extent that it is a major motivating and decision-making factor in their lives

it seems anachronistic and strange to me, certainly - I am curious about it

I feel the same way when somebody tells me they are Christian as I would if they had told me they were sun-worshippers

but I don't have contempt for them or think they are insane - we're all fellow travellers

I do, however think it is weird to the point of embarrassment that we still have state-funded state schools which exclude and discriminate against pupils on the basis of "faith". It's just wrong on every level. In fact I would think it was wrong even if these institutions were NOT using public money. I am for equality of opportunity and the eradication of cultural separatism, me.

DeFluff, out of interest why are you trying to turn a faith school debate into a faith debate? there is a whole section here dedicated to debates such as this, why not start a new thread there and we can keep the seperate topics seperate?

Lucille, it does not hold up, faith is not exclusive, anyone can have faith, low income or not. It is not the schools admission policy that stops people of low income applying, it is the faith of the people with low income (in your particular area) in other areas people of low income go to these schools too because they fit the criteria the same as those who are able to - but choose not to - pay for fee based schools.

hypocrisy - The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

So actually I'd the say the OP is being a hypocrite being prepared to stand up in church and profess beliefs that she doesn't hold.