Would you/have you started going to church to get child into a good church school?!

[Bomper]

My ds should pass his 11+, but I am not 100% confident he will. The comprehensive schools in my area are pretty awful, except one, which is a C of E school. Lots of parents have now started to go to church in order to be able to apply, and I am being urged to do the same. Most of me thinks - 'this is my childs future, I will do whatever it takes', but a small part feels guilty. WWYD?

IMO Twinset you can't

'My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.'

I can't see how new-right politics really falls within that

are you pissed on communion wine and nibbles as well!

No suck luck, jainism today- no alcohol and not much to eat ( mean, not even potatoes!!!!!)

But exam now over in that- call it demob spirit

lol

vote the wrong way and the kitten gets it.

Twinset: if a school has inspiring teachers, a prevailing ethos that minimises bullying and encourages self-esteem... oh, and enough money to provide decent facilities, it will be a 'good' school whether or not any particular brand of mythology is associated with it.

And anyone who really thinks that "faith" schools are automatically superior should maybe go and google 'Michael Pearl Child Training'... instilling a religious faith in children does them so much good, doesn't it?

Oh, and another thing, given how much gloriously unexamined opinion there is on this thread... "tight-knit community" is one of those phrases usd to indicate Good Things when it can just as easily translate as "inbred, ignorant bigots".

I have never said anywhere that chruch schools were automatically good, infact I have said the opposite.

A tight knit community can mean that but clearly that wasn't what I meant!

I may be wrong as I got bored looking but I don't even think I ahve used the phrase tight knit community anyway.

Because 'Michael Pearl is an example of an average British Christian isn't he and runs lots of schools here.

I do think mademez that you are in need of some education yourself, even a few days at a bog standard comp deserted by m/c parents frantically reciting their hail Mary's in ear shot of the vicar, would do you good.

The conservatives are the true party of proper Christians in my view but let's not get into that. The right serves the poor better for thousands of reasons.

On the topic of the thread well I just said that in case it might be right, about religious homes producing better children. It's worth arguing, may be true. You give children some rules, some morality, teach them not to put themselves first, to work hard, help others, probably the parents stay together more for religious reasons (unless you get an annulment like I did) and as said below probably a less chaotic house with history of religious attendance etc.

Actually my mother taught very very poor classes of 40 children after WWII in one of the poorest parts of Newcastle in Catholic primary schools, fathers in and our of prison etc. but even so I think there was still structure in the home, rules and probably quite good teaching.

Cameron should be sending his children to good private schools. By not doing so he is making them suffer for his politics which is morally wrong in my view.

Sorry twinset, wasn';t specifically aiiming whole post at you. I tend to read about 30 posts at once and then dive in. This whole discussion is scattergunning a bit between state schools, faith schools, good schools, bad schools and what each of those definition means - and it's probable that the only definition we could get an objective agreement on would be "state" schools...

It is always said that the C of E is the tory party of prayer and having sat through a C ofE sermon where the vicars wife whinged about how hardher life was and the fact that no one respected her and the local yobs played in the church grounds I can see that is true. But if you get me started on the Church of England I will offend people.

the right serves the poor for many reasons? whilst keeping them poor and giving them handouts - as and when they see fit, not letting them into your communities , your schools, mind you you can vote tory and keep away from the great unwashed becuase thatcher made sure of that.

and the right is christian? WTF. becuase the left is socialism which is the colour red which was the same colour as the commies and they did away with them there religous types? tenuous.

i always see tory voters as masons. dip dip shake yer knob.

why are the children suffering for his politics, from what I have read Cameron's children are going to a very good school.

The right has done more for the poor in the UK than the left in all kinds of area but we were trying to talk about schools.

On the first post I wouldn't feel guilty about doing something that helps the children and also the churches do like it. It doesn't matter what method is used to bring people to God and a lot of people as someone on the thread below said, come to church and stay and that helps grow congregations. Also a lot of people who became more agnostic as teenagers when they get older and have their own children often find their religious belief again. It's a fairly well recognised pattern and not just that people are after a school place.

Why don't agnostics form state schools? If my local hindus can petition for a hindu school and we already have a Muslim one and loads of Jewish primaries where are the agnostics in all this or is it that the legislation doesn't allow that? Isn't there some group of parents in London who have taken 10 years to get state funding for a new state school they want to set up? So suppose that may be possible even if you're not religious or coudln't the clever middle class agnostics all flock towards non religious schools?

I knew one day Xenia we would agree on something.

ON that note I am going to retire to by boudouir in our bid to create yet more catholic life to fill up those school places and keep those goody two shoes m/c types out!

Because agnostics don't want "agnostic schools", they want "schools".

But surely an atheist school would be just that a school as you wouldn't label yourself as being a school that doesn't belive in something that doesn't exist anyway.

A bit like me setting up a I don;t belive in unicorns school.

But it wouldn't just be for atheists/agnostics, that's the point - that's not, I don't think, what most non-believers want, or ar arguing for on here.

We just want SCHOOLS. For everyone. Where you, like, go to learn. You know - no faith schools, no political schools, no football schools, no vegetarian schools, no nuffink. Just SCHOOLS open to the local community. Open to everyone. It's not rocket science. Is it?

I think I was saying the same as you but in a not very coherent way as Ia hve drunk a bottle of wine.

WhatI meant to say was that an atheist school is just nonsense as it would be defining itself by wahtit does not believe in. I think Xenia was saying, and I agree with her, that we need not stress about schools if all the m/c parents who at present were pretending to be waiting to take over from mother theresa just used their local school. This would mean thatwe could reduce the number of church schools to accomodate those who genuinely want a religious education.

!hic ! twinset.

Yes, there is a problem with labelling.

Twinset: but that's the whole point! Access to education should not depend on which brand of crap one's parents believe or profess to believe. If anyone's keen on bringing up their children according to some of the rules of some mythology (because these days, some rules of some mythologies, like sacrificing chickens and goats, building wickermen or stoning your neighbours to death for various transgressions without the intervention of the justice system, have generally been done away with in the West) then that's stuff they can do at home and/or in the local place of ritual.
Nothing wrong with schools teaching children comparative mythology and including references to mythologies in history and indeed geography - but teaching kids that one set of superstitions is actually true is not the business of state schools or any decent educational establishment.

well my dd does go to a decent educational establishment, infact IMO you would struggle to find a better one and she is educated in her faith but she is not indoctrinated and when she is older she will make a choice, this will be a genuine choice as dp is an atheist as are much of my family so she will get to hear both sides of the argument.

Right I am off to procreate!

"educated in her faith" versus "indoctrinated"....she wasn't born Christian. SO there's very little objective difference.