Secular schools

[Dragonrider]

I don't want this to sound like an anti-Christian post. I can understand that religious people might want a religious school and I think it's great that religious parents have this option. But, I think it is hugely unfair that atheist parents are not respected in the same way. I resent that my decision to bring up my child/ren without a religion will be undermined. I have some years before we actually have to make any kind of decision, but if we don't move then we have a choice of a CofE voluntary aided school and a Catholic prep school. I am not likely to be in a position to home educate, but if there isn't a suitable English school we would get a place at the (secular) German school (dp is German), but that's in Richmond.

I hope this isn't too controversial. I'm not anti-religion, I just resent having it forced on me. It makes me a bit embarressed of the English school system that we would have to move and send our child to a private foreign school to get a secular education. This has got me quite worked up (I need to find something better to do with mat leave! ), AIBU? (I'm hormonal, so please be nice to me if I am!)

Do you think there is any chance of secular schools being set up, or are foreign schools the only option? Would you consider a secular school if there was one available? I don't even reall understand why it's forbidden. I know it's a Christian country, but there are non-Christian schools. Does anyone know what would I need to do to petition for schools to be allowed to become secular?

I would not choose to. Not sure why it's relevant.

Dragonrider, What is wrong with children learning about values that are common to all people, irrespective of background but it just so happens to be in a Christian context because we happen to live in a Christian country?

Considering the laws of the country are also Christian based (thou shalt not steal, commit murder etc), how would you reconcile your aversion to Christianity with teaching your child to uphold the laws of the country?

Ah Spokette, are those laws based on Christianity, (well, if you want to be pedantic, Judaeism) or are the christian laws based on laws that almost all societies, regardless of their religion, conform to?

According to the Census, only 37% of the population of England and Wales identify themselves as Christian. How does this make us a Christian country?

And why, seeker, would you not choose to live in Saudi Arabia ...?

From Slug - Oh it annoys me that "But we reserve a third of the places for non-Christian children" argument.

It wasn't intended as an argument, simply as a corrective to the suggestion that all faith schools reserve all places for the children of believers. They don't. I'm not saying that this is fair, unfair or anything else. It was intended as a factual statement and nothing more; you can make of it what you want.

If you read what I've posted you will see that I agree that there is a problem when the proportion of places in faith schools in an area is greater than the proportion of families who want their children to attend a faith school. In areas where new schools are being built, that seems like an opportunity to create more non-faith schools. There's a separate but related issue, I think, about the act of collective worship in all maintained schools. Personally, I'd be quite happy for that to become optional, so that schools are not required to hold an act of worship, but that requires a change in the law.

spokette - not to get technical but those 10 commandments you allude to are actually originally Jewish, aren't they? In which case, are you obliged to say they were 1st Jewish, then Christian and Muslims follow them too, etc. etc. Why teach these "laws" in any religious context at all? Why not just teach them as civic law, or if you want - values - in a non faith school? And teach them as God bestowed commandments in a place of worship or in a faith school?

I would not choose to live in Saudi Arabia because the laws relating to the behaviour of women in that country would not suit the way I live my life or the way I wish my daughter to be able to lead hers.

Again - how is this relevant?

Spokette, I don't mind them learning ABOUT religious values, I object to them being expected to take part in Christian prayer. There is no way I can avoid this without removing my child/ren from assembly (making them the odd one/s out), home educating or sending them to the German school (an option most people are not offered). I don't see it as fair that the rights of religious people are protected, but not for non-religious people. Are we some kind of second class citizens or something?
This country is only Christian because those in power are determined to keep it that way. Less than half of the population are Christian, so why is it ok to force Christianity on the majority who may not want it?
Also I do not think the laws of the country have very much to do with Christianity. Very few of the laws relate to things even mentioned in the bible. I think they are just the 'rules' needed to enable society to work properly.

We finally get there.
On which religion are those "laws relating to the behaviour of women" based? Can you see now why I am happy to live in a country that is broadly Christian. And I would like it to stay that way, which is why I do not mind them perpetuating it in schools.

I'm sure that you would pefer a totally secular country but I don't think that such a thing really exisits eg France and America are theoretically secular but their populations are actually much more actively religious than Britain's.

England has had some very sexist laws based on Christianity, so I don't think your point stands codinbatter. It's just that here, as in some muslim countries (e.g. Turkey) we have been able to move beyond what religion dictates to be able to have laws which are fair. Infact some of the biggest anti-women's rights people in the UK are and have been Christian movements.
In France and the USA those people CHOSE to be religious. It's not that I have anything against Christians, just that it shouldn't be compulsory.

I have become slightly nervous of engaging with you on this one, codinbatter. In the back of my mind I've got a warning light flashing - you're not saying that if we didn't have a requirement for broadly Christian education, somehow we would become an Islamic state, are you? Because if you are, I think this thread should stop now. If you're not, I apologize and please could you explain what you do mean?

MadamBad. I never said that all religious schools only accept only religious children.

What I object to is the concession of giving access to a minority of the places to the majority of the population being used as an argument for maintaining the unequal system in the first place. Are we supposed to be grateful that there are a few places reserved for us taxpayers who exercise our right not to conform to a minority religious view?

Incidentally, I found out, later on, that many of our local religious schools offered places to non religious children. However they distinctly failed to point that out in any of their literature. It's a bit difficult ot apply for a place when their literature states that applications must be accompanied by a vicar's recomendation, and applications without will not be considered. Just how you are supposed to mnavigate the byzantium labrynith and come out with one of the places for non religious children is beyond me. It was made pretty clear that they did not want pesky non believers in their midst.

Religion should be no part of education. It has no place in schools.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

codinbatter - please will you put your cards on the table so that we all know where we stand?

But not religious schools apparantly.

Slug

I really don?t want to get into a ding-dong about who said what.

I have not gone back to check who made the comment about faith schools being only for the children of believers but it was said or implied quite early in the thread. That statement was factually inaccurate and I wanted to correct it. I am not here as spokesperson for the C of E and I am not offering any view on the fairness (or not) of admission arrangements to faith schools and whether (or not) they are justified in terms of demand from people who actively do want their children to attend a school with a religious ethos. These are all big issues and they deserve to be debated but I?d be more comfortable if the premises on which the debate was based were factually correct.

I am as dismayed as you are if church schools in your area are not open about the fact that they do offer places to children from families who are not religious. You would be entitled (in my view) to take that up with the headteacher, the governing body or the LEA.

Where we differ, I guess, is that I have no objection as such to the existence of faith schools in a system which has a variety of schools catering for differing needs, interests and preferences. I do, though, agree that there is a problem if the number of places in non-faith schools in an area is too small to cater for all the families who want them. And (as I said before) I?d be quite content for the daily act of collective worship in non-faith schools to lose its compulsory status.

Btw codinbatter, I believe the French keep religion and state fairly separate. Religion in state schools in France is limited to learning about it, not practicing it.

It is all very well to say children can opt out, and perhaps in some religious schools this is possible where the religious content is confined to assemblies. It does depend on the teachers (specifically the Head) who can of course make religion become more or less prominent depending on their personal leanings.
Our school has just gone from being vaguely religious, with minimal reference and content in assemblies, to it becoming the very ethos of the school, seemingly pervading every decision that is made. This is down to a change in Head, the new one being a very religious man.

It also annoys me that people think KS1 children are able to 'not participate' in worship. IMO, these children are too young to be able to make that choice, and would instead take what they are being told (by trusted grown ups too)as fact.

It is not fact, and I dislike my children being told that good things happen because of god.

Why is it that some people think we would be unable to uphold our morals without some god overseeing us?

Nothing complicated, seeker. I'm not religious but I'm quite happy living in our curent situation where the supposed established religion is so benign that it will allow me to carry on with a lack of religion / a different religion / agnosticism.

What are you getting slightly nervous about?

Arrrggghhh madbad (good name btw) My issue is with faith schools per say. They discriminate they take resources from the majority of the population and insist that those who can access these resources must comply with a belief set that, given the population statistics, they probably do not hold. How is that in any way fair? Yet it is held up as an example of choice. the fact is that there is no choice for nearly two thirds of the population.

If the tables were turned and christian families were forced to sign a form to say they agree with the ethos of atheism before they are even considered for a minority of the available school places, would they then call it choice? No, they would be shouting it's religious discrimination.

If you want faith schools, which, having both been educated in and taught in, I am well aware are not beacons of rationality and fairness, then they should be funded entirely by the parents and the religious community. Why should the state subsidise school places that closed to the majority of the population?

Slug: I have been to the National Staistics website. It does not say that (only) 37.3% of Britains are Christian. It says that 37.3 million Britains are Christian - thats about 70%.

Ahh, but there is a difference between those who say they are Christian and those who practise their religion. In this case the percentage is much lower.

"The British Social Attitudes poll of more than 3,000 people showed 48% said they belonged to a religion, but of course not all those who have a religious affiliation would identify as Christians. Allowing for Muslims, Jews, Hindus and followers of other faiths, somewhat less than 50% of British people would regard themselves as Christians. The population of the United Kingdom is just over 60 million, so on these figures, rather less than 30 million people in Britain are Christians. This is a rather lower number than the official census statistics show, and may reflect the wording of the question asked in either case, as well as how comfortable people are, in either case, with stating that they are not Christians."
wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_Christians_are_there_in_Britain

OR

"The comprehensive professional research in 2006 by Tearfund found that two thirds (66% - 32.2 million people) in the UK have no connection with any religion or church. In 2003 August, 18% of the British public said they were a practicing member of an organized religion, 25% they were members of a world religion. According to these results, one fifth of self-declared members would also not describe themselves as practicing that religion. Presumably the others remain members for traditional reasons or due to social pressure"

www.vexen.co.uk/UK/religion.html

Slug

Parent's who want their children to attend faith schools pay taxes too. In addition, for additional building works, they have to contribute 10% of building costs unlike non-faith schools.

If you don't want the state funding schools that are closed to the majority of the population, then you also need to get rid of selection and therefore grammar schools etc.

Parents

Codinbatter, that's more like 58%

And anyway, why does that mean my children have to be brainwashed into being part of that 58%.

Why can't they be allowed to decide without childhood influences, as adults?