Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Church schools should stop discriminating against teachers and pupils, say church leaders

375 replies

edam · 30/08/2008 09:40

This news story is interesting. New group of church leaders and 'secular figures' campaigning to stop religious schools discriminating against non-religious families and staff, or those from the 'wrong' denomination.

(I have looked to see if there's a thread on this already but couldn't find one.)

OP posts:
msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 22:55

Actually, I think it's the entire point of law.

IorekByrnison · 03/09/2008 23:02

So presumably you will be campaigning to have the Beth Din abolished?

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 23:05

beth din rulings have no status whatsoever in English Law, thank God completely irrelevant

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 23:17

The bit rhat made me actually shout at the radio was when ABC said in all seriousness that it was a problem that some people couldn't 'relate' to the law of the land. Oh dear, diddums. F**k off then!

nooka · 03/09/2008 23:22

Actually I think it is a problem, and should be addressed. But not by introducing different legal systems. I think there should be more education and explanations of the law. Of course this can be difficult when so much is based on case law, but I do think that the fundamentals of law should be taught at school, and probably also be included in citizenship type courses.

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 23:26

This is interesting and intelligent on the matter blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2008/02/one-cheer-for-thtml/

IorekByrnison · 03/09/2008 23:27

If you think the Beth Din irrelevant then logically you would think that Sharia Courts operating in a similar way equally irrelevant.

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 23:31

I think the Beth Din is wrong, actually, and in an ideal world would not exist, but thank the lord, Beth Din rulings do not supersede the law of the land. And that is what ABC was talking about wrt Sharia - parallel religious courts and systems with equal power as regular courts. "One law for all" is right at the heart of justice, not a moveable feast.

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 23:32

and given the grotesque inequality of women under Islam a Sharia court would be an appalling step backwards - which regardless of the whole moral principle of one law for all - should have prevented the ABC of promoting Sharia.

donnie · 04/09/2008 08:36

there is an enormous amount of envy on this thread. Nasty, pernicious envy.If I cannot have what you have then you cannot have it either.

Deal with it.

msdemeanor · 04/09/2008 08:46

Some people have morals and ethics and know discrimination to be wrong. Other people just can't bear to give up an unjust privilege. They remind me of white South Africans tbh.

bossykate · 04/09/2008 08:48

crikey! i can think of worse unjust privileges in this society for you to fulminate against.

donnie · 04/09/2008 09:05

I agree msdemeanour. Discrimination against people who are religious is indeed immoral, unethical and cruel.

AtheneNoctua · 04/09/2008 09:06

I don't think the existance of faith schools qualifies as discrimination. Not until you separate church and state can a preference for the Church of England be qualified as discrimination. Removing the church attendance criteria for entrance is far more moral in my opinion that providing good schools for rich kids and bad one for poor kids. That can only widen the gap of wealth distribution.

Let's take this discrimination argument further afield. What about countries like Iran who have a clear preference for Islam in their legal system. Is this discriminatory? What do you think the reaction would be if built a mega cathedral in Tehran. It would of course me met with staunch opposition. They are an islamic country. That's fine. It's none of my business what religeon they choose to follow. Likewise, the United Kindon is a Christian country. And that's okay too.

If it is okay to be an Islamic country, then surely it is okay to be a Christian country, or jewish country, or even (just for CD) a Wizard of Oz country.

bossykate · 04/09/2008 09:06

think i have worked out who msdemeanor is... or used to be.

AtheneNoctua · 04/09/2008 09:09

Oh did the brass lass name change?

donnie · 04/09/2008 09:10

yes I was wondering about that bossykate. It's the 'imaginary friend' phrase which gives a lot away.

Portofino · 04/09/2008 09:17

No-one seems to be condoing discrimiation against religious people. The argument is that all children should have equal opportunities no matter what the religion (or absence of)of their parents. If there is a primary school next door - ALL local children should be eligible to attend it, not excluded on grounds of religion.

Someone earlier made the point that they are active in the "community" of their children's school even though it is in a different LEA. If that poster made the same efforts at her local school, and in her "own" community, maybe the local school wouldn't be so crap. You get out what you put in.

I know this doesn't solve the problem of cachement areas where house prices go up around the "better" schools and push others out and I guess this a whole other topic.

Here is Belgium the majority of schools are secular and you can choose whether you want your child to receive RE lessons - or to recieve what they call "Moral" lessons instead. Belgium is predominantly a catholic country and there are church affiliated schools - but they are not allowed to discriminate against non-catholics. Everything is done on a first come/first served basis.

AtheneNoctua · 04/09/2008 09:26

" know this doesn't solve the problem of cachement areas where house prices go up around the "better" schools and push others out and I guess this a whole other topic. " by Portofino

This is not a whole other topic because removing the faith aspect of schools will most certainly contribute to furthering this gap.

I can not turn the local school into the school they now go to. There is no CofE primary school in my town. And, actually, even if I could I would never in a million years sacrifice my children's education for the benfit of the school. I'm happy to do my part, but not at my children's expense.

cestlavie · 04/09/2008 09:38

Hmmm. Although I am fervently against faith schools I think people who are also against it should stop using derogative words and phrases like "imaginary friend" against those who do believe. It's childish, shows a lack of respect for different belief systems and weakens what is a fundamentally strong argument. The entire point of this debate (and of being a 'good' atheist) is understanding that whilst you have your belief systems, others also have theirs and that none should be discriminatory against others.

AN: Firstly, no-one is condoning discrimination against religious people - we're condoning the unfairly preferential treatment that people get based solely on their religion. There's a very big difference.

Secondly, countries like Iran are what we call theocracies in which there is no separation of church and state - if you look back through the posts, it's pretty clearly articulated that there is a de facto separation of church and state in the UK; if you wish to argue further that there isn't then (apart from reading the previous posts) try and think of another material state activity in which religion actively influences policy (defence? health? foreign affairs? economy?).

Thirdly, if we were a solely Christian country I'd have some (limited) sympathy for a shared values system/ community argument, however, we're not. Only approximately two thirds of the population are, the rest being Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, atheists and all the various others. It is clearly not a Christian country and even within those Christians there's a wide split between Catholics, Anglicans, Protestants, all with different value systems (as, for example, the debate about homosexual ministers makes clear). Allowing faith schools does not create a shared community except in a very local and insular sense and actually fragments the wider community.

Peachy · 04/09/2008 09:52

Aggree with cestlavie

'there is an enormous amount of envy on this thread. Nasty, pernicious envy.If I cannot have what you have then you cannot have it either.

Deal with it. '- dont know about others but no envy for me, mine do attend the best local school (a faith one but locality was the factor as we moved here mid term and lea placed us in catchment school when someone left).

Athene- I do nderstand where you're coming from, I guess its a matter of personality? To me, all the aprents who couldn't get a place at that local school also pay their taxes no doubt, giving them equal entitlement to a palce at a local school. Now, if church schools were independently run from the main provision that would be different, but they're aprt of the manstream provision, many villages only have a C of E school.

I do struggle with the putting my kids above others to their detriment a bit, it's something I deal with at school daily- little X wants to go into class with her favourite teacher but teacher is DS3's 1-1 (happened today) and I struggle with whether to do the Christian thing and put the other child first (as ds3 is oblivious tbh) or exert 'silent' pressure by waiting for X to go in. I now do the second- putting ds first- because the school has a habit of trying to use his funded time for whole class purposes, but I feel immensely guilty all the time as a result.

AtheneNoctua · 04/09/2008 10:02

I disagree cestlavie. We have a union between church and state. I can see some people disagree, but their conclusions are for from haveing unanimous acceptance. And since don't have a separation of church and state, then we can hardly regard that union as discriminatory.

Therefore the crux oif this deabte is not why do we have faith schools, but rather why do we have a state church, and we do have a state church. I do not need to produce evidence of another state material activity for this to be true.

If faith schools are such a bad idea, why are they in such high demand? You won't be able to get rid of them because they have overwhelming support from the parents of their pupils. If you change the criteria by which students are accepted to primary schools then you will have another group of people claiming discrimination on some other grounds. The only people who are upset about faith school are the peole who are upset that their child didn't get in.

CountessDracula · 04/09/2008 10:06

No that isn't true

I am in no way upset that my dd didn't get in to a faith school. I don't want her educated in a faith school. I am very very happy with the school she attends.

What pisses me off is that my local school is a faith school at all. If it were a faith school and didn't discriminate I still wouldn't have sent her there as I don't want her raised in that kind of atmosphere.

I don't think state funded schools should be faith schools. That is my point.

MrsBick · 04/09/2008 10:13

why don't the catholic church pay for their schools if the catholics are so keen to keep them? that way everyone wins.

the church has enough money see here

it would also give them something other to do than hide peodophile priests in the vatican, it would eliminate the arguement of discrimination "everyone is paying taxes so all schools should be inclusive" and all the catholic parents saying that they shouldn't fund their schools privatly won't have to.

MrsBick · 04/09/2008 10:13

oh here's an idea- why don't we just go back to educating boys?

Swipe left for the next trending thread