Faith schools should say homosexuality is normal..

[daftpunk]

Why can't people just leave us alone

This is why we have separation between church and state; so that people have the freedom to live how they like.

Uh... we don't. Even though the C of E doesn't itself have a clear line on homosexuality, it Bishops in the House of Lords, and a voice in matters such as whether homosexuals can be married (as distinct from civil partnership)

DP - I have just read the smug thread from about 6 months ago, it is very funny (is linked to on the fave mn moments thread).

The nice thing is that you have posted on that therad in abundance and it shows the DP we all know and remember - funny, witty and friendly.

Why do you keep posting this controversial and contentious shit. What is the fucking point?

mayorquimby, in answer to your question, the unfortunate fact about English education is that though many faith schools are private, some are not. And if you live in a place where there is only one school, then you may be stuck with CoE or whatever else the local brand happens to be. I imagine this would rarely be the case with Catholic schools though; on the whole, they tend to be in more urban settlements, so closer to other schools, and are often oversubscribed, which might mean they would not be your first choice unless you actively wanted that particular choice.

Very few state schools are completely devoid of religion; they have to have assemblies for a start which are supposed to have some sort of religious content. Ime infants schools are often quite Christian in tone, whereas many junior and secondary schools do the bare minimum.

Dcs' infants school was not a faith school, just ordinary state school, but it was closely affiliated to local CoE church; the vicar is always on the board of Governors, and takes regular assemblies etc etc. The junior school have an assembly or two in their local church every year but apart from this seem to keep religion out of it (other than objective teaching as per National Curriculum).

But saying something is wrong or holding such a belief is not discrimination. Treating them differently would be.
More people than you'd imagine will hold strong views about race-mixing, I'm fairly sure an old boss of mine did but he didn't discriminate against me. He may have held personal beliefs but he was professional about it.
As such a school could have a certain stance but once the people are treated equally you could argue that they are not discriminated against. Then again due to the position of power the school holds it could be argued in the opposite direction. At what point does the discrimination begin.

"legally you can't discriminate against people in terms of their sexuality. So surely schools must reflect that? And if they fail to teach it, then at least they shouldn't say it ISN'T normal?"

See unfortunately that's overly-simplistic. The most important thing in law is that there are always exceptions or mitigating circumstances. We'd say wholesale "you can't discriminate based on race" yet if i was casting for a movie of Othello or a Jimmy Hendrix biopic tomorrow I could quite easily specify I only want black actors to show up.
similarly we allow for religious organisations to give preference to members of the faith re: employment. And as such in a faith based school it could be argued that there is a right for parents to raise their children in accordance with their religion and they are entrusting the school to do so and so there will be natural bias' with regard religion (surely the notion of a faith based school is sectarian at heart and would be in immediate violation of any equality legislation on the grounds that they are giving preference based on religion?) and the doctrine of that religion. In this case it's the Catholic church and it's quite clear what their stance on homosexuality is and has been for years.
I'm not saying I agree with the stance (one of the reasons I left the church) but I respect their right to these views and am merely saying the issue isn't as black and white as some would like to paint it.

Normal is not solely a statistical term, as I'm sure you know, and it's far from disingenuous to point that out.

You are, actually, abnormal. "Not typical, usual, or regular." As am I. Using "normal" in the normal way does not mean we have to use "abnormal". "Abnormal" carries an inference of unnaturalness.

Normal is in this context used to mean what, then?

daftpunk. Catholics schools will teach that sex outside marriage isn't on, so although people maybe homosexual, it doesn't matter because. they won't be having sex anyway. Just like any non married person.

Why do you keep posting this controversial and contentious shit.

It's not controversial though, it's just plain offensive.

Parts of this thread look like the sort of arguments that were being bandied about 20 years ago. Society has moved on. It's pointless and stupid to be discussing it like this.

What does normal mean, in this context? I don't get it. What's wrong with saying "natural"? Why do we have to say "normal"?

ok Grimma, sorry, that was badly worded I agree (my post that is). I just meant that the church doesn't actually govern the country, making it distinct from countries that do, or have had, a faith group ruling them, making everyone in the country abide by the tenets of the faith, whether or not they practise it. That's all. There may be bishops in the House of Lords, but there are only 26 of them. They by no means hold the majority.

I'm not quite sure what you are arguing.

Abnormal is nearly always used with its perjorarive, non-statistical meaning. I think Mr Clegg meant 'normal' as a corrective to that mindset in relation to homosexuality. Not that it was at the midpoint of a distribution of sexual behaviours.

Being a Catholic is just as abnormal in the sense that homosexuality is abnormal

There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying 'natural' but theres nothing wrong with saying 'normal' either in normal colloquial English

Part of the normal range of behaviours.

MP;

you clarly have a massive issue with religion.

I wouldn't dream of going into a Jewish school and telling them how to teach their children.

There is a lot wrong with saying normal because it's just not true.

I'm glad you see there is a specific sociopolitical reason the word "normal" is being used in this context.

Oh sorry and "not quite sure what I'm arguing" -- I'm pointing out just that: it's not an accurate use of the word and there's a specific reason why "normal" is being used in this way in this context. It's often better though, not to point it out directly, but to allow people to arrive at the conclusion themselves.

"Part of the normal range of behaviours" , yes, as in "part of the normal range of hair colours". That is true.

Did you go to Confession after the Christmas do then Daftpunk?

nah, its just the normal word normal people would normally use

As I do a lot of coordinate geometry I more normally use normal when referring to perpendicular lines but in that respect I will admit to being abnormal

I don't usually get into faith based posts, cause on secular sites it's just pot-stirring, but I can't help myself here.

Daftpunk, speaking Catholic to Catholic here, yes, Catholic churches and schools should treat the religion as it is, not as individuals want it to be. However, it is not the State's job to make being a Catholic easy for us.

Expecting a serious and thoughtful apologetical discussion of tough theological issues on a secular parenting website is naivete at best and trolling at worst. It will win you no converts and harden the hearts of any who might sympathize in other circumstances.

Christ told us not to be of this world and Mumsnet is a microcosm of that world. The day you log on to find everyone agreeing with you is the day you're doing something wrong.

So man up, suffer for your faith a little, and don't make everyone else suffer through your flamebait.

No hard feelings, eh

I don't think that homosexuality should be taught as anything (harmless or otherwise) - it is what it is.

Sometimes women are attracted to women and sometimes men are attracted to men. Some people are attracted to both sexes but the majority of women are attracted to men and vice versa.

Homosexual relationships are not considered 'the norm' in our society. There is nothing wrong in stating this 'fact' to children surely?

Or is there?

Even as I was writing it I could imagine the angst/fear/despair at finding oneself marginalised in this way as a teenager. That is what schools must guard against.

I did not snog another mumsnetter at the christmas meet up..., Reality has an enthusiastic way of saying goodbye...that's all.

One of my dictionaries has 'natural' as one of the many definitions of 'normal' anyway.

I think you're overanalysing, peacocks!

"its just the normal word normal people would normally use"

See, now you're using "normal" to mean "typical" or "usual". The normal
meaning of the word, if you like.

MP; you clarly have a massive issue with religion.

I spend about ten hours a week working for the church - does that help at all?

too little too late

"I think Mr Clegg meant 'normal' as a corrective to that mindset in relation to homosexuality"