Baptism for non religious reasons?

[Penguin2]

Has anyone out there had their children baptised for non religious reasons, eg to get them into a school or to provide them with a broader social life? Are you prepared to talk about it?

Lets go to the yurt beets and have some cakes and chill!

Am there already!

Beetroot,

The line of argument you seem to be taking would justify all sorts of fraud and theft - provided it gives you a leg up to the same place as someone else. Do you really believe this about the whole of life, or just education?

As far as the school issue is concerned, I suspect that many of the highly-oversubscribed faith schools have long-since added additional criteria (eg church attendance) in order to merely stop baptism alone entitling children to a church school place - certainly that is the case locally (faith schools being 2 out of the 3 "top" schools in the borough). From my perspective (former church school governor), I'm not unhappy with the atheists/agnostics etc who do go through the required amount of church attendance in order to secure a school place. In general this has benefitted the church (the keenest are generally on Sunday school rotas etc), and gives the church the opportunity to share the gospel with these families in a way which wouldn't otherwise be possible.

As for other people who baptise their children for non-religious reasons, I supsect that if we are honest many people do. It is a social occasion to mark the arrival of a new baby, and is a good opportunity for friends and family to get together to celebrate. What the new church memebership actually implies for the infants is rather dubious, and infant baptism isn't particualy biblical anyway. It dates from a time of high infant mortality and a belief that those who are not baptised must face damnation (or "limbo" if catholic - try justifying that one from the bible!). Naming ceremonies etc are starting to become more common, but until they become the "norm" I guess we'll see lots of christenings etc even where the parents aren't church-goers, just because we do all want some way of welcoming new members of the family.

You are assuming of course that beety wants a leg up she may just want a level playing field for her kids. I was the chair of governors of a church school and have to say since it was the only school in the village it seemed most unfair that the criteria was set the way it was. Some children even had to be bussed out to another village ten miles away. How christian and inclusive is that?

There's difference on the funding etc depending on whether it is vc/va or foundation. These are usualy reflected in the admissions criteria eg voluntary controlled schools have their admissions criteria set by the LEA.

I'm not defending the existence of church schools btw, but whether Beety wants a leg up or a level playing field, not everything is equal. And having people either lying about their address or their beliefs or anything else won't make it so, but will probably give a fairly immoral message to the next generation.

I agree with you lm but I'm not sure this is immoral. You have said you dont mind people going to church simply so that they can get theifr kids into the right school I am not sure that beety said we should lie! She said she would do what she could and that is the same as going to church as a non believer when you simply want your kid to have the best education. We all want the best for our kids. I do not however want to go to church in order to get them into a school and whilst I understand it would rather be honest about my beliefs to the school. I have discussed this with a great friend of mine who is a worker priest and does not think parishes should exist. Where I live now in Blackburn I feel that the church schools also allow white ghetto behaviour since Blackburn has a strong muslim community and the church schools then allow parents to start segregation.

It was the thrust of Beety's argument at 9:52 today that I was concerned about. The implication being that if she thinks she should have the same right as anyone else to something then, if the legal means aren't available she should find whatever other means to get it. I saw the statement being wider than just the baptism issue, and hence why I asked whether it was just education or is this a wider theory. If I see my neighbours get benefits that I don't, should I misrepresent my circumstances in order to get the same?

LM I cant talk for her she can do that pretty well for herself However I was angry with the statement regarding hypocratic people and some of the fnudamental attitudes being exhibited. Whilst the church does pay for some of the schools they do not pay for it all and it seems poor practice to operate an exclusive system which means some get something and others dont. I am not sure what jesus would have had to say about that! As I have said we all want whats best for our kids and if our neighbour was going to a better school than us simply becuase they sat in a particular place each sunday and did abit of singing that does not seem fair and isnt that what you were advocating earlier?

Just out of interest Jesus said, 'Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven'. If there is merit to being baptised, then I would have thought that Christians should be happy that children are baptised, even if the adults concerned are not believers. (and I am a lapsed baptist, who has not had her children baptised or sent to state faith school.)

Judge not and all that Donnie? How is your eye?

here here! now lets go eat cakes in the yurt! I do want a revolution by the way and still love che. Oh sorry this is religion not politics.

Acutally you didnt choose me and am sulking! I chose you !!!!!!!!!!!! Oh sorry not rich enough

no????? at least I dont have to remember all their birthdays

But Beety, if parents want different things from their children's education why should they be forced to have an equal one? Why not allow the parents some choice? I bet there would be a stink if everyone was forced to send their child to a CofE school...

We should be like the french with no religion allowed lady muck imho

Also choice does not make for good education it can make it worse and how much choice do people have when all the schools around are rubbish and they cant move or go private

If the church makes rules we are only doing as many in the bible would do in breaking them. I teach my kids that rules are created from fear and mistrust they shoudl always be questioned. The problem with religion is when it becomes exclusive and not inclusive, or inclusive so long as you obey this or that rule. Education should be a free and wonderful thing a right which we give all children and we shouldnt have to shop for the right school.Every school should offer kids what they need and a decent standard or edcuation which expands their minds, spirits and bodies!

Not convinced. I think parents who have strong religious convictions should be able to send their children to schools where those convictions can be upheld, though not at expense of others education. So where faiths put their moeny into building schools etc, then I think that it is fair for state funding to be provided - and the fact that the Government is trying to create more faith-schools is a good thing imo. The good school/bad school issue is a different one, and the themes there currently seem to be as much to do with parental attitude as with school resources. But how you get motivated parents to turn around failing schools is a whole different ballgame....

The race issue again is a complicated one as the ethnic mix of the country is very different from area to area.

Yes but I would totally oppose state money going into building a religious school of any description and here that would include a muslim school. We tend to talk about ce or rc but when the faith also included things like women wearing the veil or there was a school for jehovas who refused blood transfusions what then? I am all for tolerance but personally feel that indoctrinating children in one world view ncan be abusive and if we permit one religion then can not say no to others.

Glitterfairy,

The French ban in state schools is a peculiar one. My understanding is that the catholic schools in France (which are strictly "private" ) are over 95% state funded, so really aren't much different from va schools here. So in effect they are banning all religious items etc except in faith schools.

That is why the latest rules are seen to be targetting Muslims. Although they strictly apply to Christians as well, in reality most Catholics will be exempt as they attend catholic schools...

I think it sets a really good moral example to children when parents can say - 'This rule is wrong, wicked and discriminatory. Therefore we do not have to respect it." Just like the black people who refused to stand up for whites on buses in the segregationist era. Just like the Suffragette movement. Obeying stupid rules that you consider to be morally repugnant is NOT a good example to set children.
The rules that deny children a place in a state-funded school purely on the basis of their parents' beliefs is IMO utterly wrong and utterly immoral. I've said it before. If schools were rejecting children because of their parents colour or their politics, we'd consider it outrageous. I see no difference between this and rejecting on the basis of parents' religious beliefs.
Having said that, I would not have my child baptised - I just couldn't do it. But I have no problems at all with parents who play the system. If the system wasn't wrong they wouldn't have to do it.