Would you call this RE or worship?

[whatsthemattermaryjane]

Before I take the story further please understand that yes, this is a CofE school, but that we live in one of the rural areas where the only schools are church schools. We did not therefore 'choose' this school the way parents in more urban areas might - it simply is the school to which village children go. Next school is 5 miles, also CofE. Next school after that, another 7 miles, also CofE...

So, my point. Every week, along with daily short class assemblies and prayers, and a weekly whole school assembly, there is a 'lesson' called 'Open The Book'. This lesson is taught by the vicar, who reads a Bible story to the children and then they must act the story out. The children are told that this is a true story that they are re-enacting. This happens every week all through the year for all age groups, always led by the vicar and always a Bible story.

Mumsnetters, in your opinions, is this Religious Education, or is it an act of worship?

I really struggle to understand how fairly mainstream secular values can be implemented in a way that is intolerable to you. Can you give us some examples?

I think it would be fairly easy for a school to be secular, but not for a school to be without values. The values shared by the school underpin its whole community. In the same way that the commonly shared values underpin the wider society and a lack of values would lead to some sort of anarchy.

How is that fair?

I didnt think we were discussing fairness. Life isnt fair.
The post was about RE and Church schools and what options there may be.

On the positive side, knowing Bible stories can be useful when studying other subjects. Much of history was shaped by religious feeling. Artists and writers designed their works to be interpreted by those who knew these stories. I've heard university lecturers bemoaning the loss of this common understanding in current students. In the OP's position I think I'd allow my child to hear the stories, but would discuss their interpretation at home.

Pico2 ,I gave a number of examples further back. I am sure a secular school would not be without values, its those values that worry me and they are certainly ones I do not want my DC to be given.

What values do you want your DC to be given?

What values do "secular schools" (not that there are any in the state sector in the UK) impart that you find worrying?

"I am sure a secular school would not be without values, its those values that worry me and they are certainly ones I do not want my DC to be given."

This seems like an odd statement from someone who claims "I do not do God".

The examples you gave are of an anti-bullying peer scheme (which does sound crap) and sex ed lessons, which I am pretty sure you can withdraw your child from. Not from assemblies espousing the values listed. I'm really sorry if you don't want your children taught tolerance, friendship, respect a sense of community etc. I think that is pretty unusual and you would need to set up your own school for intolerance etc. However you might find it hard to recruit other parents/pupils.

SevenZarkSeven,

I have already given someexamples of the values I would prefermy Dc not to be given

a)sex education - its OK to have sex in a relationship when it feelsright..... No! in my view it is not. Its OK if you are over 16 , which is the legalage oryou are a consenting adult. Promoting a vlaue of " feels right, si probably what allowed the grooming of young girls in recent times. It certainly allowsan agenda where grooming can take place of a child is not clear about what is wrong and right (even if it is only in law)

b) anti bullying strategies which promote the bullies to positions of trust and confindence where they can further intimidate and bully their victims.I suppose its good for the school. They certainly will never be aware of having a bullying problem when they have such a policy in place. The children are too scared to come forward.

c) tolerance, - only as long as the person you are tolerating has average in step views. Lets not tolerate Abbey because she doesnt agree. Lets give her the inquistion for not agreeing with the average. ( I recall history tells that the RC Church used similar tactics in Medievil times). I guess my final inquisition here will be my ex communication if I continue to refuse to agree with you...... so much for tolerance .Tolerance is accepting that others can be different , whether we always agree or not but that isnt the secular value as promoted hereis it?

Further, I am not sure secularism has values of its own except survival of the fittest ( Darwin and Dawkins).

The concepts listed were:

"anti-bullying, tolerance, respect, friendship, community".

Well anti bullying I covered and tolerance.

Respect? Where is the respect in life skills education which promotes relationships without regard to the law ( as per my sex ed example) and from that community ( which requires a adherence to a groups rules even if we do not agree with them ,unless we wish to live on an island alonethat is) , freindship (requires respect for the person , which is clearly not in place if you promote hedonism - if it feels OK)

Further, I am not sure secularism has values of its own except survival of the fittest ( Darwin and Dawkins)

That's actually quite offensive.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_ethics

And if I may quote the Dalai Lama, re compassion and affection: "We need these human values. I call these secular ethics, secular beliefs. There’s no relationship with any particular religion. Even without religion, even as nonbelievers, we have the capacity to promote these things."

sclerderabbey - OK, we were not talking about fairness (even though it is patently unfair). But you said "There are many schools which are not religiously endowed. Tax payers can choose one of those quite easily." That is just not true, at least at primary school level.

Many non-religious families do not have the choice of a non-church school in their area. Church-goers can actively choose a faith school within a fairly wide distance, but can also opt for their closest community school if they prefer; non-church-goers just get a school allocated on the usual criteria (mostly distance and siblings) and cannot use their lack of faith to get priority in admissions for non-church-linked schools.

Where I live, there are four faith schools and one community primary school within a roughly one-mile radius. One school is Catholic, so my children would never get a place there; the other three faith schools are voluntary-controlled CofE so are allocated in the same way as community schools. Where my children are given a place would depend entirely on distance from each school; even if I put the community school as top preference and said on the form that I was atheist and did not want a church school, if I was closer to one of the church schools that is still where my children would end up.

You think that sex education contributed to the abuse of children in rotherham? You think that telling children that sex should be something that two people do together because they want to leaves them open to abuse?

Come off it. That right there is really offensive. And demonstrates a total lack of understanding of any of the issues, and an amazing lack of reading the news.

• If that were the case you'd never hear of sexual abuse of women and children in closed religious communities. And. Erm.

Plus what Bigfoot said.

I am really glad that state schools in the UK do not espouse your "values".

If you feel offended I am very sorry. I have no reason to discuss anything further. I said what I had to say to the OP.

If we cannot have a full and frank discussion,then there is no point in continuing.

You can say what you like. Thereare many shades of belief and value in this country. You conflate many by putting Buddism on a par with secularism.It is not. It is a belief system.

Ifyou remove all the belief systems in place, you are left with little that espouses your so called " secular values". Try it and see.

I will not engage this further.

And if I may quote the Dalai Lama, re compassion and affection: "We need these human values. I call these secular ethics, secular beliefs. Theres no relationship with any particular religion. Even without religion, even as nonbelievers, we have the capacity to promote these things."

You have the capacity to promote these things. That is not the same as them being part of the system.

You think that sex education contributed to the abuse of children in rotherham? You think that telling children that sex should be something that two people do together because they want to leaves them open to abuse?

I think some of the children actually said in interviews that they were not believed by their social owrkers and police.In one instance ( on the channel 4 documentary) a girl said that her social worker called her abuser her " boyfriend" and even sent her back to him when she asked for help on the basis that she was in a relationship with this abuser as he was "her boyfried" - so he was OK was the message, as was the sex.

I do not think it gets much clearer than that that both under age sex and abuse are readily condoned when you do not es[ppouse values other than societies " all things are acceptable. So much for our " communities" there.

If that offends then I am truly sorry because you fail to see howeasy it is to not promote good values. I wouldrather protect my DC from that in all ways that I can.

I am really glad that state schools in the UK do not espouse your "values".

Since I have not given any indication of my " values" since you have never actiually asked - no one has - you asked me if I agreed with the values you placed on a list, something very different.

Thats rather a big assumption you make there.

Remeber, before you continue to criticise that I am the only person it seems here, who has actively sought to exercise my right to remove my DC from morning worship and sex education. I have put my actions where my " values" (undefined) are. I have not chosen to try and changethe schools.

On the other hand I am going to great lengths (and drive many miles) to change to another school.

Big Foot: Further, I am not sure secularism has values of its own except survival of the fittest ( Darwin and Dawkins)

That's actually quite offensive

Is it really? If you read Dawkins properly, you will find it is a basic premise of his. There is no hiding from it.

So you think that all athiests have nothing holding them back from raping and murdering.

Bit rich given the atrocities meted out by people of various religious persuasions over the years.

"I think some of the children actually said in interviews that they were not believed by their social owrkers and police.In one instance ( on the channel 4 documentary) a girl said that her social worker called her abuser her " boyfriend" and even sent her back to him when she asked for help on the basis that she was in a relationship with this abuser as he was "her boyfried" - so he was OK was the message, as was the sex."

Fucking hell + jesus wept.

Not going to engage with you any more.

Like I said, I am really fucking glad that your values are not the ones taught in our schools.

At the end of the day we can discuss the rights and wrongs of faith schools being funded by the state but they are and I doubt there is much we can do. If they were not they would become private schools or close down which would mean that poor people (poor people do go to church) would not be able to attend a faith school so then it becomes something that the rich can access.

So you think that all athiests have nothing holding them back from raping and murdering

Some may appear to have adopted values belonging to other belief systems ( mostly Judeo/Christianity it would seem ) which would "hold them back". But without those we have seen a large number of atrocities committed in a very short time in the name of atheism ( Lenin, Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot just to name a few)

Bit rich given the atrocities meted out by people of various religious persuasions over the years

Yet those atheists there killed more people in less than 100 years than all of thoseinvolved in religious wars beforehand. If you scratch the surface of most wars and insurgencies you will find it isnt religion so much as greed and survival and land grabbing at the bottom of it. You will also find a larger number of atheist activists there too. Religion is often used as a front piece because it also covers racial and nationalistand tribal differences in many instances.

jesus wept

Whilst I have no personal knowledge of this historical figure, I sure he did weep for her ( or would have had he been around here and now) - and for the fact that a vulnerable child was left without support and sent back to her abuser by a secular system that could not find within it a value to protect her.

You do not want to engage that reality? Fine.

We are discussing the values of that secular system with all its tolerance, anti bullying and emphasis of community and respect arent we here?

It wasnt the Church who let those abused kids down. It wasnt Christian values. It was the community and the secular system full of social workers. They espoused tolerance (and whilst I am not one to point fingers because I cannot judge), it seems to me it was " tolerance" without any form of holding back that causes many problems. That an a community in denial, of course because we respect others , we do not criticise do we?

If those are your values SevenZarkSeven, I am glad I do not share them.

Yes, I am sure many people weep over that.