Attempt to establish a secular school - article in Grauniad

[UnquietDad]

This came up in the blasphemy thread but I think it deserves a discussion of its own.

here tis

Me, I'm quite happy for my children to go to school with the children of Jews, Christians, Muslims, Seventh-day Adventists, Apocalyptists, atheists, agnostics, don't-care-ists, Worshippers of the Great Spaghetti Monster and people who believe the Royal Family are lizards and we should all wear turquoise. But some of them don't want my child to go to school with theirs.

Madamez - Not all religious art has been religiously inspired, but much has been, believe me.

Spaghetti Monsters and chocolate teapots are more recent arrivals though and an unnecessarily discourteous way of expressing one's view IMO
Good post scampadoodle. I'm more than happy to listen to an atheist perspective without feeling the compulsion to add a derisive little analogy time and again

"Are people who believe in leprechauns discriminated against by not having the Church Of The Pot Of Gold in their catchment?

You see, this is what I mean by the "all about me" thing - I find it so frustrating that religious people can't see beyond the end of the pew on this. If schools did not select on the basis of faith, nobody would be discriminated against." All you needced to say in that post, UQD, was the very last sentence - the last sentence is a powerful pov and one that i agree with. It is provocative to conflate Christianity with a theoretical e.g of worshipping leprachans, and totally unnecessarey to make your point.

I am v frustrated now because the article raises important questions about the establishment and the relationship between religoin and state n a democracy. No, no one has made any objection to a 'secular' school...and yet this school is meeting obstruction all the way. That is iniquitous,imo, and should offend all those concerned that things be done fairly and with freedom and justice in this country.

But, tbh UQD, you have been provocativbe and helped steer this into yet another predicatable thread about church schools. When it was intended to be about non-church schools!!

GDG: "how would it be different to the non-religious state schools we have now - like the ones my children go to where different religions are taught and celebrated? " But that's the thing - there are NO 'non-religious state schools'. Because of the National Curriculum, all schools are required to have a daily act of Christian Worship (though like the e.g at DS's school below, I'm sure most fudge that) and the predominant teaching in RE is Christianity. Which has a point when linked to the historical and cultural nature of this country, but is questionable when offered as Religious Instruction.

Anna - We are agreed. What someone once described as the "gentle courtesies of the Anglican faith". It is very civilised, even if you can't make yourself agree with or believe in the underlying principles.

I don't disagree in the slightest that Christianity has been a major force in shaping art, culture, etc. in the Western World. But so what? I'm happy for people to learn about this at school - I'm just not happy for it to be a criterion in school admissions processes.

Cammelia, I don't know what planet you live on, but on mine, children are not schooled in the state sector irrespective of their beliefs - as numerous people on here have testified, there are many areas where their local state school is a religious one and they are faced with the choice of moving, converting or lying. Not terribly equitable.

We happen to live in a geographical place and a historical time where one religion - a politically and economically powerful one - has a lot of influence (some might argue, a disroportionate amount of influence when compared with the number of its adherents). This is a pure accident of birth. Religion is socio-cultural. If you lived a few thousand years ago in Greece, you'd have been worshipping Zeus. If you'd lived in 9th-century Scandinavia, you'd have been worshipping Thor. It's no different. Religions and gods are man-made and come and go - only the human race survives.

Spaghetti Monsters and chocolate teapots are more recent arrivals as they are philosophical inventions designed to illustrate the nature of belief. They're not real beliefs - they are analogies.

Even if you can't take the leap of believing, the fundamentals of Christianity are not a bad set of principles by which to abide. I can't really see what there is not to like.

very true mrs depp there is a point to secular schools in NI and they should be the norm IMO as in France where the dc s get wednesday off to be able to attend RE classes if the parents wish(off school premises of course,NO religion or religious symbols are tolerated,threfore no kippas ,crucfixes or headscarves)If you want a religious school you pay,they are private.

As I always say, I don't see much wrong with a lot of what Jesus said. Where I diverge from Christians is in believing that it is in any way divinely-inspired, or believing in "the divine" as a concept.

And it's not exclusive to Christianity. That's the point.

Retires, since UQD has sabotaged his own thread, and is now so busy defending his need to use provocative analogies in every damn post that the ppoint that a model for a secular school is being blocked in a democratic country has been subsumed into the usual argument......

Good grief, I have to roll over and beg when challenged or I am derailing the thread?

Secular schools: my take is that I don't want them. I want schools where people go regardless of what their parents believe (note - their parents) or "believe". Whetehr one calls this a secular school is a question of semantics.

I set out my desire in my first post.

The problem with this is that some people see it as denying the religious a "choice". I, and others, don't.

That's the argument. In a nutshell. That's how it leads on to talking about religious schools, because the existing situation denies the non-religious a choice in some areas.

OK - UQD - do you not think that a 'secular' school would be, as you say, "schools where people go regardless of what their parents believe "? I understood the establishemnt of this school to be with exactly that aim in mind - and that there would be a cross section of children in it?

I think the article isn't entirely clear about what the headteacher wants. What is interesting is that it's being blocked politically (just backs up what I said about the church being politically powerful) and that it's seen as such an unusual proposal.

I agree.

I thnk the introduction of basic philosophical approaches would be an excellent addition to education / the NC.

One of the first things our students are asked to read on arrival here Blu is Sophie's World, by Jostein Gaarder.

It might be the Church being powerful, but it might be other factors too.

Yes, "politically impossible" is ambiguous - what does that mean? People in high places don't want it?

I wonder what they are afraid of? Children being encouraged to think for themselves?

I think it's a mixture of factors too, not just the Church. I am not totally convinced all the Bishops would be personally opposed to the school either - although the established view of the C of E en masse is, sadly.

Well, the article mentions Tony Blair - and I guess his personal views wuold be seen as aobstructibve - but then he should have been challenged.

The CoE spokesperson makes a very clear objection 'If he is arguing for a way for individual schools to opt out of those bits of the act he does not like that is not something we would support. Either overtly or by default, this country is still a Christian one.'...but CoE bishops do not make up the majority in the Lords so could be outvoted.

I think the issue has a lot to do with the deeply conservative reactionary nature of parliament, and everything fom nostalgia for their old school nativity play and carols in Kings college, to a suspicion of 'republicanism' would be wrapped up in it. Though they did legislate (succesfully or otherwise)let hunting slip out of the British Character.

The last thing I wanted was for this to turn into another heathens vs god-botherers debate (although when painted into a corner there is little I can do).

I am never going to convince a person of faith of the rationality of my atheism, and they are never going to convince me of the believability of their faith. I realise I am usually on to a loser there (and so are they) so that's not what I set out to do - although I sometimes can't help being mischievous.

The question is whether heathens and god-botherers should have their children educated in one system, where one's belief (or lack of it) is irrelevant to the school one's child attends.

I suspect this will not be resolved in my lifetime. I am certain it will not be resolved during my children's time at school.

Your second para sums up my suspicions far more articulately than I could ever do blu.
It's all about the Establishment at Prayer...and my personal perspective is that the ordinary bods in the pews in many parishes feel far less challenged by secularism, and cling far less to antidisestablishmentarianism, than the so-called Great and the Good.

third para

applause for Marina for working in the word

antidisestablishmentarianism

Your next challenge is to work in

Floccinaucinihilipilification.

I knew I'd squeak it in somehow, somewhere

Ds can spell it for a party turn