Is being pubicly atheist a recent thing, especially re. collective worship?

[wanderings]

Firstly, I'm taking no sides - I had strong atheist views when I was younger, but gradually changed my mind.

There are many threads on MN about this, especially annoyance by atheist parents about collective worship in schools, and I have been wondering if it's recent that people have felt so strongly about it. I find it hard to imagine buses in the 1980s and 90s saying "there probably is no God", or parents taking their children out of assembly, or people muttering and sneering in the back row when attending baptisms (under duress): if it happened I was blissfully ignorant.

Speaking for myself, I rebelled with my heart and soul when my parents suddenly dragged me to catholic church every Sunday when I was 9. I saw the whole thing as utter nonsense, and a waste of valuable weekend time. However, I gradually changed my mind as an adult, but went CofE rather than catholic. I took the view that you did not have to take a literal view of the Bible and the church's teachings; as a child I was very literal-minded. I also love the sense of community in church.

Does anyone think it is because a generation of young adults are remembering being forced to obediently sing hymns, hear prayers from their school days, had to learn "impossibilities" such as the great flood, and are now making sure their children won't have to do the same, now that they have the right to say something which they didn't as a child?

I think the thing I find most irritating is the disingenuous faux ignorance.

"Yes, my particular group has privileges largely for historical reasons. I can see that it's not fair but I'm not willing to give them up because, frankly, who would willingly give up their privileges?" is perfectly fine.

"Privilege? No, my group isn't privileged- Why can't you just live and let live" Or even "My group is actually persecuted because one of us had conform to [insert piece of equality legislation here]" Not fine.

The thing is people having privileges, that I do not, does not really irritate me per se. I cannot help but acknowledge wealth and power comes with it's own responsibilities; extra responsibilities that I might not welcome, personally. However saying this, corruption and abuse of wealth and power does disturb me.

I don't think blanket equality is a right in itself because if we all had equal power and wealth there would be no opportunity to improve. Equal opportunity is a different thing, though, but complex. Inherited wealth and power can be easily squandered and lost, hardship (although I would never want to engineer this) can motivate people to do amazing things. I do not resent people being able to inherit wealth, I can't, because I would like to be able to choose what to do with any wealth I accumulate, after my death.

I see provision being made for Christian worship in school in terms of providing opportunity - not taking it away. I, and many others, value a provision being made for spiritual development. It is optional and I support making the option being as fair as possible. Opt out (as I have stated many times previously) should be opt out of worship only and non stigmatising. I have also said I would support every parent making a choice regarding receiving worship provision or not so there is no blanket assumption, no exceptions to the general rule. I have also said I do not support admissions privileges based on faith of the parents for state schools.

The thing is, regarding privilege, if a gift (as in giving up some privilege) becomes obligation the act of giving is negated.

So I do not resent people who keeping what they are allowed to keep by law. It is their's to choose what to do with. Their responsibility.

And it remains that the provision of Christian of worship in schools is not mine to give up. What is mine, is my vote, my freedom to campaign within the law or not. To believe as I do. Would you take that away from me? If not, why the irritation?

Oh, I see Bertrand you think it is fine, as long as I accept Christianity holds a privileged position in this country. I can accept this as far as that privilege goes.

I am also not particularly complaining about persecution, persecution has been much worse historically in this country and currently in other countries. I still think we have to guard against against unfair discrimination against people of particular beliefs and non though. For example, I believe there should be no stigma attached to opting out of worship, no stigma attached to opting in. No other 'whole school community' events should be missed by either group. I don't agree with the suggestion that the religious on this thread are 'hard of thinking' or that people of faith cannot be scientific either, as recently discussed in these boards.

Where I suspect we differ, is that I am totally ok for people to be allowed to (legally as the law stands) worship in public, at public events and for provision to be made for this..whether that worship is the same as my own, or not.

"Where I suspect we differ, is that I am totally ok for people to be allowed to (legally as the law stands) worship in public, at public events and for provision to be made for this..whether that worship is the same as my own, or not.

So am I. That is not what happens in state schools.

So am I. That is not what happens in state schools.

It is. It should be. There are state schools which are affiliated other faiths than Christianity. There is provision for worship. It could probably be done much better within the current law. I don't dispute this.

No. Provision is not made for Christian worship. Christian worship is a legal requirement- and provision is made for those that do not want their child to take part. That provision being the opportunity for a child to miss all or part of assembly. If you cannot see the difference, then this discussion is even more useless than it normally is.

It is a legal requirement that provision for (broadly) Christian worship is made. Otherwise schools would be able to opt out of provision, for their own internal reasons, regardless of whether it was wanted by the wider school community or not. As it stands currently any parent and every parent can opt their child out of Christian worship - so it is not 'obligatory'.

I don't think the Christian worship should be causing 'suffering', as you out it.

My stance is neutral regarding opt in / opt out. If everybody chose an option, as I, personally, believe they should then schools could most effectively cater to the religious / non religious stance of the school community. Just about ever time this is discussed I stress this and every time this point is ignored! Resulting in people forming a 'straw man' of my position.

Put it, not out it. Typo.

Bigdorrit, mn is a largely a community of atheist Left-wing feminists; of course you will see a lot of angst about their cherub having to pray at school.

In RL not many folks give a craps and can see that Christian worship is a force for good in this country until it is stamped out by Muslims and other haters such as yourself.

You may think Mumsnet is a microcosm of Britain at large but it really isn't.

Bert, you are the one being disingenuous if you are happy to live in a capitalist society where privilege rules and yet squeal in protest that the dominant religion has its own 'privileges'.

I would refuse point blank to send my child to a Muslim school if this country became predominantly Muslim. But that is because Islam's hatred of women and infidels is abhorrent to me, not because I have a problem with the ethos of worship.

Well no, Big, if you read my post properly I am telling you that you are not an expert on the whole country.

That's what I find crass about certain long-term Mumsnetters: they really do believe that this internet chat room is RL.

It's a fact though, as pointed out by Ricardian. Not many people are as vehemently against worship in schools as the likes of you. You are the minority.

...but Mumsnet loves a minority so it is no surprise feminist liberals love it here

Embarrassingly feeble attempt at disingenuosity.

BigD I am surprised you consider yourself as having a 'ghast'' to flabber...

I have said why I want to keep the compulsory element in provision, that is so schools cannot remove worship for their own internal reasons, that unrelated to what the wider school community wants.

That are. Typo omission.