Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Original poster

what's the take on recent debate about perents effectively lying to get their kids into faith school?

119 replies

peacelily · 26/01/2008 19:34

Not lying to the headmasters with a forged baptism certificate per se, but baptising their children into a faith which neither parent has any conviction to or alleigiance in so as to get them into better c of e or even better catholic schools (popular viewpiont not neccessarily mine).

Is this acceptable, is it ok to lie about your spirituality for the sake of your children's education and what does this teach the kids?

In light of a recent debate on "any questions"

OP posts:

redadmiral · 27/01/2008 22:43

I still don't understand why it's "deeply unfair for those parents who do have strong religious conviction to a certain faith and whose places are being taken by children from non believing families."

Tortington · 27/01/2008 22:46

my kids had to jump through hoops, get a letter off priest, go to tribunal thingy to get into a catholic school when they were both altar servers in church.

thats not right. nardly ever saw thse kids at church - in fact 90% never entered a church.

it is not ok to mock ones faith - there seems to be something 'fair game' about christians tht becomes racist when talking about Islam

LittleBella · 27/01/2008 22:55

Custy I'm quite happy to mock any faith. In the right context, of course. I'm not saying that it's always appropriate in every circumstance, but I am outraged by the proposition that religious ideas have some kind of special status which protect them from derision. It strikes me that religious people who believe that, have a hell of a sense of "entitlement" tbh.

Tortington · 27/01/2008 23:11

i think mocking a faith and challenging the belief system are tw entiely diferent things

LoveAngel · 28/01/2008 09:16

I couldn't give a toss, really. You can't stop people lying if they really want to. There is no 'faith test' other than to get your kid baptised and turn up at church on a Sunday (do you even have to attend Mass for C of E?). You can't read people's minds to see if they really, really do believe in God.

LoveAngel · 28/01/2008 09:18

(said as a non-Catholic probably going to send son to RC school).

Peachy · 28/01/2008 15:40

Well of course you don't attend mass for C of E- there isn't a Mass, you attend the C of E service instead!

Why is it deeply unfair for practising adherents to a faith to get passed over for a palce in favour of non-beleivers?

Well just one reason springs immediately to mind, but in the cases where a school is at least aprtly funded or assisted by the Church as many are, if you've been contributing to the diocese pot for most of not all your life, you might be a bit narked? just an idea (although Church funding for schools of course varies across the board).

Still not in favour of faith schools, but can see that argument.

LittleBella · 28/01/2008 15:50

Peachy I could see that argument if the school was wholly funded by the diocese and not partly (and mostly surely?) funded by all taxpayers, not just the religious denomination ones.

redadmiral · 28/01/2008 15:53

Assuming that tax payers and have paid into the school as well, as they do in our local faith schools, why then is it 'deeply unfair'?

redadmiral · 28/01/2008 15:54

Sorry ... Assuming that taxpayers have...

UnquietDad · 28/01/2008 16:01

redadmiral - because all taxpayers have paid for something which only some are allowed to use.

I sometimes feel like banging my head against a brick wall when people don't get this simple issue.

It's like having faith-based bus services, roadsweeping or hospitals. Or schools divided up by parents' allegiances to football teams or political parties.

UnquietDad · 28/01/2008 16:04

The question of schools partly funded by the church muddies the issue somewhat. I've heard the argument before, for example, that the buildings are owned by the church and therefore couldn't be just handed back to state control.

In that case it is prudent to ask who pays for the upkeep of the school buildings... and who pays for the resources, from the smallest marker pen to the head's salary.

SugarSkyHigh · 28/01/2008 16:05

my dc go to RC school,can't imagine why anyone would want to go there if they weren't RC though- I wouldn't !!
also when my dc were baptised, (each at 6 weeks give or take, and in a totallly different area altogether so it was not with any particular school in mind) the priest wanted proof that the godparents were all RC aswell. if you were getting your dc baptised under false pretenses then how would you get round this one? or maybe other priests are not so strict?

Peachy · 28/01/2008 16:06

Actually UD that does vary.

Ours is funded by a Covenant from a will in 1740-something which does indeed maintain buildings and a significant portion of outgoings such as maintenance: LEA input is quite minor in comparison, which is why school gets a lot of the benefits re admissions etc that a private does.

Why the Hell I am arguing the case for a school I ahte and a system I disapprove I don't know mind you.....

I must be very fair minded (or stupid)

redadmiral · 28/01/2008 16:13

Going to take you to task now UD That's the second time you've got my posts arse backwards... Go back, read them again, and then tell me the answer!!

UnquietDad · 28/01/2008 16:14

It's interesting to ask if faith schools could be invented if they didn't already exist.

If you were a rich billionaire of the Church of the Pink Unicorn and you offered your local community a school with new buildings, should this:

a) be funded through general taxation, and open to all pupils in the catchment whose parents pay taxes?

b) be funded through general taxation and only be open to all pupils whose parents pay taxes and believe in the Pink Unicorn?

c) be open to all pupils whose parents believe in the Pink Unicorn and are prepared to stump up for the fees to keep the place running?

d) be entirely funded by Mr Billionaire's foundation and/or personal wealth, plus donations and pledges etc. - and be open to all pupils in the catchment?

e) be funded by Mr Billionaire's foundation and/or personal wealth, plus donations and pledges etc. - and only be open to all pupils whose parents believe in the Pink Unicorn?

f) other? (please elaborate.)

UnquietDad · 28/01/2008 16:18

redadmiral - errrmm... ask it again and I'll come back to you. I think you may be asking two different things.

Theochris · 28/01/2008 16:18

Hey UD, aren't you taking about the new academies?

UnquietDad · 28/01/2008 16:19

In a way, yes!

Unless anyone wants to argue that the Pink Unicorn, bless his horn and may his mane shine forever, is less valid than other faiths...

Oblomov · 28/01/2008 16:19

I can't see anything wrong with it.
But then I am one of those people who are doing it, I suppose.
Agree with Littlebella, it you design a system of hoops, many parents will do what needs to be done to get the best for their child.
Dh's whole family is catholic, although none of them are practicing. The whole community is catholic. And the catholic school is one of the best in the country and received one of those Beacon status, now no longer in use.
The other two school sthat I put down for my 2nd and 3rd choices are so awful, the thought of ds going there ........
I am not catholic. We went to baptism classes when ds was 1 or so. I told the Father this, and he hasn't spoken to me since.
We have atteneded mass a few times per year, not regulalry.
He signed our application to the school. He didn't need to.
All this, "they are preventing other real believers from getting in ......"
How exactly is that happening, exactly ?
WHAT A LOAD OF NONSENSE. It is up to the school to decide. And the Father/Vicar/Priest would sign a form for somebody who started coming , just as the child turned 4, over someone who had been coming for years ????
Hypocriscy ?
If you are a real believer , you will get in. If you didn't there would be unroar surely.
I can't understand why everyone is getting in a tizz over this.
And David Cameron has a number of choices of school in his area. He has as much right to apply for any of those that he chooses. To argue anything else, does not make sense.

redadmiral · 28/01/2008 16:21

Really I would like Peacelily to answer, and I think she does understand the question.

MotherFunker · 28/01/2008 16:23

I can't understand why people get so het up over this issue.

UnquietDad · 28/01/2008 16:31

why not, motherfunker?

Would it bother you if children were divided according to parents' political party or race or affiliation to football team?

Or if hospitals were run on similar lines?

Peachy · 28/01/2008 16:33

Or indeed as in so very many more rural palces where the ONLY school is run by a faith group you may well not adhere to?

That's the bit that really bugs me I think, more than the rest. if there are going to be faith schools, then only in areas where there is a non secular option first.

Oblomov · 28/01/2008 16:40

Peachy, if you chose to live in a very small village, then you know what you are entering into when you choose to buy, surely ?
I mean, I lived in a very small village when I was in secondary school.
And if you did live in a very small village with only a faith school, and you were faithless, then why would you live in that village. You (I don't mean you specificallY !!)know that this is coming, when you gave birth to your child 5 years ago ?

Flip

1 2 3 4 5