Live webchat with Richard Dawkins, Wed 23 June, 10am-11am

[GeraldineMumsnet]

We're pleased to welcome Richard Dawkins for a webchat on Wednesday 23 June from 10am-11am. Richard is a celebrated evolutionary biologist and atheist, and author of the best-selling God Delusion.

He has presented programmes on Channel Four that range from enthusing about the Genius of Charles Darwin to arguing against religion in Root of All Evil?

His latest project is taking a long hard look at education and the role religion continues to play in it.

He wants to hear first-hand from Mumsnetters what faith and church schools are really like. How successful are they? Are they selection by another means? Are they divisive? And are they making hypocrites out of non-believing parents who go to church just to send their children to them?

If you can't make the discussion but want to contribute, please post your views here.

Thanks and hope you can join us.

I have never had to fill in a form mandating a religion in this country. Which NHS Trust was doing this? I find it quite surprising. I found an NHS form online and the choices were Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Judaism, Other, Mind your own business and No Religion.

Yes - but many aspects of our life are secular. Religious education ought to be, and is, covered in the place of worship. Nothing is lost if schools do not fulfil this role.

I'd like to know how Dawkins would advise a literature teacher like me to teach A level texts like 'Hamlet', 'Paradise Lost', 'Frankenstein' or 'The Power and the Glory' to teenagers with an ever decreasing knowledge, awareness or understanding of Christianity. It is a real problem. If you c ome at one of these texts (and so many others) with total religious ignorance you are a bit buggered, really. Speaking candidly, as I know RD would have me do.

donnie, I think Dawkins recognises the place the Bible's place as a piece of literature and source of many sayings and aphorisms "You'd be rightly written off as uncultivated if you knew nothing of the Bible. You need the Bible to understand literary allusions" www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article1767506.ece

SomeGuy in answer to your question it was at both Kings and St Thomas's in London.

Hello Mr Dawkins.
I have an important theological question which I would like answered.

Why?

Thank you.

Bertolt Brecht, another famous atheist, always said that his biggest artistic inspiration was the bible (the bottom line in western literature).

There's no conflict in wanting people to be properly educated about just how influential and important christianity and OT was in western culture, and to understand the psyche and attitudes that went with that, while rejecting its belief system.

None of us have to believe in Zeus et al to "get" The Iliad. We do however, need to know about the religious and cultural world view in which Zeus and the other gods (and humans) are presented. Same with Paradise Lost, Shakespeare, John Donne TS Eliot, etc. I don't see the big problem tbh.

I am vehemently opposed to state-funded schools being allowed to deal in religious discrimination. As has been pointed out before, you only have to apply the idea of it to any other state-funded activity (NHS hospitals, council bin collection etc) to see how ridiculous and divisive it is.

I don't see any conflict with texts from the world's major religions being part of primary and secondary EDUCATION though.

I actually wish the schools I went to had done more RE as a general knowledge exercise. I feel staggeringly ignorant in matters of RE, despite going along with singing hymns and 'saying prayers' every single morning of my school life. Can't help thinking now (as I did then) that was a thousand or so hours which could have been better spent.

What a privilege it is to have Professor Dawkins come on here.

I am a life-long non-theist and here are my views.

Does any other country have a state-funded school system that can select its pupils on the basis of what the parents belive?

Even if I were religious, I would not see the faith school system as a fair system. IME the high performing faith schools are not open to educating the most deprived children in town. Faith schools may have selection by church attendance but after siblings, they allocate priority via distance to the school. The areas around the best faith schools are populated by the well off.

Those who do have a religion, don?t necessarily have the right type of faith school in their local area. There are many practicing and faithful christians who aren?t able to use C of E schools because they either do not go to the right church ? the particular C of E one affiliated to the school - or do not attend a C of E church at all. In my town the faith schools seem to have received preferential treatment over the years in being exempt from expansion. There are no other one-form entry schools in my town (all other schools have had to add new buildings and admit extra pupils over the years) but all of the faith schools are small, one-form entry schools which probably contributes as much to the ethos of the school than the religious side.

All of the faith schools in my town have a uniform that is akin to a private school. Specific jumpers and ties and caps and summer dresses that can only be bought in a specific school uniform shop. The one that has a high percentage of children that go onto a (non faith) independent high school insists on shorts for boys throughout but in recent years dropped the insistence on a navy blue wool duffle coat! If faith schools really believed it were their religious ethos that produced their better results (rather than anything to do with careful selection) then, in the name of charity, why do they not exist to specifically educate the deprived children of society, regardless of that child's parents' beliefs?

My children go to a non-faith school and one RE teacher (a well-meaning Christian TA given the task of delivering this subject) was able to undo all my hard work in bringing my child up to be free-thinking, with her weekly RE lessons. They did include scant teaching about other religions but there was a greater emphasis on christianity and I was left in no doubt what the views of the ?teacher? were. I just don?t understand why anyone in a school has the right to tell my child, as fact, that there is a man in the sky that watches us or that there is an afterlife or that a dead person loves us. My inquisitive, deep thinking little girl stopped asking the big questions she?d been renowned for.

I would like to see RE, as a subject heading, banished all together as a primary school subject (and definitely the act of worship). Much of what they are taught in Primary school could come under the heading of history and cultural studies. I would like to see all schools ?teaching? critical thinking and philosophy. I would like to see the government drawing upon evidence-based (not evidence-biased) data for what makes the best type of school for ALL children.

In my vehemence earlier I forgot to say welcome to Professor Dawkins, it is indeed a privilege to have you here. Pretty much my entire degree curriculum was based around the Selfish Gene and it is truly one of the most useful books I've ever read.

Anyway, just wanted to clarify that by RE I mean learning about religions from a cultural/historical/general knowledge point of view (though obviously this in itself is fraught with practical difficulties). Something very roughly in the manner of a good quality Wikipedia entry I suppose, if that makes sense.

And yes I'd definitely add critical thought earlier rather than later to school syllabuses.

I agree Her Beatitude, the problem is that atheists claim to know what Christianity is [homophobic/bigoted/misogynistic/vengeful hateful God etc] and simplify Christ's message to 'he told everyone to be nice to each other'. Which renders any argument philosophically facile, as Eleison said. The atheists that have a meaningful understanding of theology and christianity have a slightly more interesting take on the issue. Many bigoted/homophobic/misogynistc christians are to blame, certainly, but intelligent atheists don't seem to look any further as the bad stuff justifes their aims.

I don't know much about Islam but perhaps the same issues are applicable.

'And to Santymoanyarse who feels that his/her children are better off in 'a faith school' than not, I wonder how you would feel if the school were to be run by Orthodox Jews or muslims - would you still be happy? Or are these religions a bit too like the scary Christianity of old before it lost the upper hand to logic and reason in the UK, and had to become a bit more wishy washy'

Sorry?

Firstly I would ahve no issue with a faith school being run by Jewish people etc any more than Christians.

Secondly either you have me confused with someone else or misread my post:

I feel that every child should have the choice of a secular school before faith schools are provided, and I am angry that my children were puashed into a faith school simply because it is our catchment school. In faxt the school I am actively asking for invoplves driving past a higher performing faith school that is 2 minuytes from my house to drop ds4 off. It will mean 4 children at 4 different schools (2 at SNU's), noty a choice I actiuvely wpould wish to make!

I reiterate: I have no issue with faith schools if every child has access to a non faith, secular school that could serve anyone regardless of their faith first. I want my kids raised alongside Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, Sikh, hindu peoples: not shoved into a little uni faith enclave whilst those with a different faith end up living elsewhere becuase of the lack of choice offered here. I was training towards being an RE etacher of the kind who believes education about all faiths stops prejudice (as opposed to the you should beleive in this variant) and would wisg that for my children and their peers (training given up on with dx's)

Is that clear enough?

Hello Professor Dawkins,
ANother fan of yours and militant atheist here, with a question on a different topic.
I'm a BHA wedding celebrant and I know some of us in the BHA want Humanist wedding ceremonies to be as legally binding as CofE or registry office ones.
My personal take is that everyone should have to sign the register to be legally married and then be able to have whatever ceremony they like - I think that's less divisive than having only Christian and Humanist ceremonies as inherently legal.
What do you think?

Dear Professor Dawkins,

I think scientists should always be curious in a non-judgmental way about natural phenomena, including religion. When I came to see you speak a few years ago, I didn't sense much of that curiosity - more something like disdain - you seemed a bit tired of it all - do you feel that curiosity though, or not?

For me, the fascinating things about religion are:

1. Its universality (I like David Hume's account of this in The Natural History of Religion - do you like this? I think it's great). I am currently looking for something equivalent written post-Darwin - can you recommend anything?
2. Its capacity to bring the comfort needed to keep a human being going when the rational course of action might be suicide.
3. In the case of Christianity, Jesus's radical step of treating those at the bottom of society as people to be valued(what a shame Christianity went downhill after that).

Thanks for answering!

My comment:

Our local primary schools are mainly C of E. When we sent our children to the nearest one (non selective) we expected them to learn about Christianity. Despite being atheist we did not have a problem with them learning about Christianity.

However, we did not expect Christianity to be taught as fact. We did not expect our children to be told they would go to hell if they did not go to church, but they were. When our oldest was seven we asked if she would like to opt out of "christian worship at school" she decided against this because those who did were teased.

When the time came for our oldest child to go to secondary school we had three choices.

A church school which required church attendance (70% GCSE a to c )

A comprehensive in special measures (18 % GCSE a to c)

Private school (which we cannot afford)

We are unable to move so our children have one choice of secondary school. They are discriminated against because we do not go to church. My child was the only one in her class going to the comp and was teased and made to feel worthless. I was told i was wrong because i refused to lie.

I have name changed to write this. There are many many more things i could say but I would not want to identify myself and find that my children suffered as a result.

My child has hand written you a long letter themselves. I will post it to you or email it directly to your website. I feel it would not be right to post it here.

To answer your questions:

How successful are they?

Fairly because of intake

Are they selection by another means?

Of course

Are they divisive?

Yes

And are they making hypocrites out of non-believing parents who go to church just to send their children to them?

Yes

My question to you:

Why don't you start an athesist free school ?

If anyone can do something to change this ridiculous situation it is you. Please help.

Personally I'd be delighted if there were truly secular schools. I do think that faith schools are devisive and make hypocrites of otherwise morally solid people.

DD attends a state primary that is non-denominational however in the two years she has been there she has developed a keen belief in God and Jesus. Her Rainbows leader stopped me the other day to say that dd had decided to lead grace at a group picnic that they had attended, and how pleased she was because the leaders aren't allowed to. I suspect she thought that dd had learned that at home, but it could only have come from school, we are not a religious household at all even though I am from a staunch Catholic family.

However I do wonder if there were secular schools and dd were to attend one, would I then be denying her her right to a Christian education if that's what she wants? I have always said that my daughters' faith will be their own choice and I stand by that - and I suppose a secular school that taught religion as a sort of social science would give a child a broad base from which to make a decision. However dd seems happy with her faith so who am I to deny her that?

I suspect I may be overthinking this somewhat.

both dh and me are atheists and we certainly wanted to have the choice of sending dd to a non religious school
I think we are lucky to be able to choose a good state school but we are fully aware that is not a choice available to all in all areas

many people advised us to baptise dd 'just in case' but if you don't teach honesty by example how do you teach it?

when it comes to secondary schools in our area our choices are pretty much religious school or rubbish school, we will probably/ likely get in, on their non religious quota (thank you)

• I worry less then, as hopefully dd would be more able to consider the influences from the school in that regard and have developed a more critical attitude, as well as be able to understand our reasons, but I am not really comfortable with it

I would much rather religion would not play a part in education other than cultural reference, I can't comprehend that children are kept separate on religious grounds at such an early age
by all means let parents take their children to perform religious rituals and studies outside school hours, but I don't think it has a place in the school

and just to be clear I don't want a specifically atheist school I just want a school teaching academic subjects and leaving religion asside

just a quick hello and much respect - your vocal criticism of Creationism often rstores my faith in humanity.

Another great admirer of yours here, Professor Dawkins. I am particulary grateful for the idea in the God Delusion that religious belief is NOT something that is, simply by virue of its nature, deserving of any particular respect or deference, any more than any other silly made up superstition is. I just wanted to say thanks for that because I had had never previously questioned the paradigm that it was wrong to "insult" people's religious beliefs. Now I do it with impunity!!!

I totally agree that no one has the right to indoctrinate any child into a religion and therefore faith schools are, to me, an abomination.

I was educated by nuns in the seventies and eighties in a very conservative Catholic Ireland from the age of 4 to 18. I don't think I ever really believed what they were telling me about the existence of God, but by the time I was capable of independent thought I had decided for myself that it was a human invention. This was not a view my parents would have countenanced from their children.

How ridiculous is that? To have to pretend, throughout your childhood, on pain of punishment, to believe in something that is plainly fictitious, simply because everyone else either believes it or can't be bothered to even stop and think about whether they believe it or not.

I should have offered it up, I suppose...

Prof Dawkins

We live in the catchment area of three primary schools; two Anglican, one Catholic. All of these expect parents and children to be church members and attend services, despite the fact that we live in a very mixed community with a large number of different faiths.

None of these schools could easily be described as good. The Anglicans localy discourage childhood inoculation, and hold 'healing' ceremonies in the local High Street which involve a sort of weird sexual rubbing. Since the bishop's official residence is in our Parish, we assume this behaviour is sanctioned from fairly high within the church.

The Catholics, locally, strongly discourage children from seeing themselves as English or British (indeed the terms Protestant and English are used interchangably), as a result we have a large Irish Catholic community which is one of the poorest and most marginalised in the country (with the shortest life-expectancy).

Parents who do not belong to either faith are obliged to find schooling elsewhere or home school (particularly prevailent among muslim parents locally). Since many schools within the city (Birmingham) are now faith schools and do not meet the needs of migrants to the city, those schools without a faith basis are becoming highly ghettoised.

At present our son attends preschool nursary five days a week; two privatelly and three at an infant school about seven miles away. We are informed that this 3 days of state provision will be withdrawn this summer since we are from outside the catchment area, so we will need to find other provision.

We are not sufficiently well off to afford five days private schooling, as my income is low (& erratic)and my partner is a full time student. Nor are we keen for my partner to withdraw from university with a year left of her degree to run; I was persuaded to take a year out of university while funding problems were sorted out (after completing two years with flying colours) only to find I had no place to go back to - and that the university would not allow me to transfer the points I had earned (I still have to pay back the student loan though).

I will not ask you what you think of all this, as I doubt you will approve anymore than I do. However I will ask you, as one of the country's most senior accademics, if you know any way out of this situation for us and parents like us.

There have been a lot of calls recently for the founding of an athiest or humanist school; however I would have reservations about this, since it too would only cater for families within its catchment area, who would not necessarily agree with its principles, and I would not like to see humanists or athiests becoming one more group fighting to impose their view on others. I would however strongly support any move to make all state funded schooling secular in nature.

All the best

Joe Bauwens

Dear Mr Dawkins.

Firstly, you are a hero of mine, for making proud atheism socially acceptable. Keep up the good work.

Onto the subject of discussion: I have a toddler, and in search of better state schools have recently moved house from south London to Hertfordshire (and incurred a massive mortgage increase in the process - we were very lucky that we could). Our London choices were paying more than the mortgage difference in private schooling, religious hypocrisy or her eventually ending up at a secondary where only 19% of pupils achieve 5 A-C at GCSE (UK average 49%). Hands up the functionally illiterate! (if you can read this)

Sadly the whole system is divisive and selective by either finances or pandering to the local flying teapot society. I'd like to second the suggestion from another member above to launch good, free, secular schools - maybe this should be the next TV reality show idea, as it seems the only way of getting political pressure to pay off.

If it's any consolation, both me and my brother went to CofE schools from age 5-13, and we are now atheists and proud, so for those atheist parents who've had to compromise and worry about it, independent thinking isn't totally stamped out!

MarkingMyPlaceToComeBackAndReadWhenThereIsLessCubActivityTiggaxx

Oh my I would love it if someone started a free Atheist school in my area.

I'd be signing up for it.

'The Anglicans localy discourage childhood inoculation, and hold 'healing' ceremonies in the local High Street which involve a sort of weird sexual rubbing. Since the bishop's official residence is in our Parish, we assume this behaviour is sanctioned from fairly high within the church.'

FFS, Where are all these loons? Where do you all live?