FAITH SCHOOLS! If you don't agree with them, step this way, my dears.

[onebatmother]

What can be done?

It seems to me that many of us don't agree with them, and some of us (not I) are quite knowledgeable about the ins and outs.

Could we not start a movement?

It's all so wrong, really, isn't it?

Very well thought out post Blu - a lot of good comments

Someone somewhere up there asked why people would want to send their children to faith schools.

Don't you think that this thread answers that? You don't have faith. No problem. But if another parent does then why shouldn't they want their child to go to a church school where their beliefs are not sniggered at as "imaginary friends" (aka Greensleeves).

UQD - You need to stop being so emotive about faith schools. They only turn you away on the basis you don't want to join in. It's a bit like wanting to join the library but refusing on principle to fill-in the joining form.

no libidolees I dont believe that children should be exposed to religion in an ideal world just like they should not be exposed to drugs or violence in an ideal world but unfortunatly the world is not ideal (gods fault?)and they will come across them at some point.
BUT this is just MY belief other people have their OWN beliefs and it is for them to decide whether to pass their beliefs on to their OWN children. Schools have no part to play in teaching belief.Schools are for education and learning of FACTS

I just searched this out of one of my archived messages, as this topic comes up, ooh, every few weeks or so.

Imagine I am an Eccentric American Billionaire with an unswerving belief in The Church Of The Invisible Pink Unicorn.

I buy up some land in the UK, get planning permission and build a new church, and a new primary school for a small community which does not have one. All pupils attending the school must swear daily allegiance to His Holy Invisible Horn and offer up praise to His Glistening Invisible Mane. They, and their parents, should be expected to be regular attenders at the Church.

Should I expect that this school is to be funded by:

a) The state, through general/local taxation?
b) My own personal wealth?
c) Parents' contributions, through fees and donations?
d) The church's money - perhaps through trusts and charities set up over the years?
e) A combination of the above?
f) None of the above? (Please give alternative suggestion.)

Well IMO they shouldn't be allowed to. Their children should go to a school where they get taught the facts as they can be empirically understood, and get taught about religion as a general phenomenon, so that they have a rational viewpoint and can choose religion for themselves if they want to. Does a child belong to its parents? Why is it fine to force your irrational, unproven beliefs on someone just because they're your child? It always amazes me.

oops fast-moving... that was in reply to libidoless

I don't tend to discuss anything but science in my science lessons. I have been challenged many times on evolution and always respond that in science we stick to the scientific method. And you can write about evolution without saying that you 'believe' in it. Or not.

I'm surprised you have the time to discuss religion in your lessons ST

UnquietDad, your argument is interesting. Is your point that faith schools are ok as long as they are inclusive, i.e your gripe is with the selection process?

Jackstini, The onus isn't on me to prove it's false, but for someone else to prove it's true as with Thor, odin, easter bunnies etc.

I purposely made it a statement that time which was a little rude of me because Scienceteacher had just said "The Good News, btw, is that Jesus died for your (yes your) sins" which was also expressed as a statement and wasn't prefaced by "I believe"

No offense meant Scienceteacher, I was just trying to make a point.

But that's the point, Swedes: the library form doesn't require me to sign a declaration stating that I believe in something I don't - let's say, fairies. If it did, I wouldn't.

I don't get your point, SL, because I never actually teach religious doctrine. I am willing to answer questions when they arise, but I do not consider this to be teaching as such.

One of the things that we do have to do in Science is to get pupils to recognise what information and opinions are based on. They have to be able to recognise when a point of view is based on scientific hypothesis, evidence/experiment/opinion/emotion etc. We absolutely do not neglect opinions based on anything other than hypothesis and experiment. We would be doing the pupils a real disservice if we did (both in their exams, and in their life skills).

How come this seems to have turned into an anti-faith thread? I consider myself to be a christian but I expressly would not want my children to go to a school which was in any way controlled by the church, syangogue, imams or whatever. I think there is enough division in society as it is without bringing it into the classroom. My DS goes to a community school (as I believe ordinary primaries are called) which celebrates Christmas, harvest and Divali. I have no problem with this and I'd quite like him to learn about Eid and other non-Christian religious festivals, and to discover that there's nothing weird or unusual in different people thinking and believing different things. I also wouldn't want atheists telling him he was wrong if he decided he believed in God.

I don't like the idea of faith schools being funded by the state. I know it is a historic thing becuse in the 19th century the church was the only organisation providing schooling - but surely that's something that can be rectified now?

We all indoctrinate our children in what we believe to be right. And others will disagree with the principles and beliefs we try to instill.

I think to get rid of them all would be a very hard thing to do, Wordsmith. But to change the entrance requirements: very easy.

libidoless - no, not quite; my point is that if X wants to set up his own school and fund and run it himself then it's his own damn business. I don't have to send my child there, and more fool the people who pay to do so.

But if the money comes out of taxation like that of all other state schools - and the school is "in the pot" for "choice" like all the other LA schools in the area - then it's my business and that of every other parent, and we should be allowed to have an opinion on it.

"We absolutely do not neglect opinions based on anything other than hypothesis and experiment"

Well then I'm concerned ST, because as a science teacher you should. Science is about hypothesis and experiment and that is how scientific truths are obtained. Other opinions maybe of historical interest but if you start discussing them in the classroom as if they have validity, science as a concept is being undermined.

"I'm surprised you have the time to discuss religion in your lessons ST "

The joys of teaching in a private school

sidenote: This thread comes up every few weeks and it is always an "immovable object versus unstoppable force" one.

"Well then I'm concerned ST, because as a science teacher you should. Science is about hypothesis and experiment and that is how scientific truths are obtained. Other opinions maybe of historical interest but if you start discussing them in the classroom as if they have validity, science as a concept is being undermined. "

Tell that to the QCA - they make us teach what is called "How Science Works", where pupils have to separate out opinions based on science from opinions based on emotion, etc. I do think it is a good lifeskill.

Unless I'm missing something, we are a secular society, having recognised (thankfully) several hundred years ago that there should be a division between religion and government, and the services that the government provide. This was called the Enlightenment and has generally been recognised to be a 'good thing' along with, for example, the abolition of slavery and child labour. For countries which do believe in conflating religion and government, please walk this way and sign the petition saying "I'd like to live in a theocracy please".

Whilst we recognise that everyone should be free to allow to practice their religion, there is absolutely no requirement that they should get state funding to do so. The solution, to me, seems pretty bloody simple - require that all schools which receive any level of state funding to be secular. No assemblies, no religious preference, and religious education is taught in an entirely non-denominational manner. Any schools which wish to do so lose their state funding.

I know UD and I should have left it alone...

Maybe there's still time to do a bit of work...

Very true Unquiet Dad. But onebat asked what can be done.

I suggest that banning faith schools, even if desirable, is politically an impossibility.

Petitioning to make them conform to fair and transparent selection processes is far more achievable, and this is what we should be pushing for, imo.

Does anyone know where to start?

School is about more than teaching 'facts' it is about teaching children to reason and argue, present a hypothesis, test it and discard it if it is incorrect. There is very little that is set in stone. To take one very simplistic example, people used to think it was fact that the world is flat and clearly it isn't.

It is irritating that people who have no faith seem to think they have a monopoly on knowing what the truth is when really there is an awful lot of stuff that is up for debate. Religion is just another example of this.

I see no harm in teaching comparative religions in schools. Let the children learn how to think it out for themselves. Believing there is no God is as much a matter of faith as believing in a God in my opinion. Neither stance can 'prove' the existence or non-existence of a God.

wow - I think UQD had admitted to being in favour of private education