New schools to give Communion lessons during classtimes

8kvscdpglqnyr4

This is disappointing ...
http://www.independent.ie/education/latest-news/new-schools-to-give-communion-lessons-during-classtimes-1537124.html

From the article:
The bishops confirmed again their desire to see the additional model of patronage in Community National Schools succeed. They emphasised their wish to be able to assure Catholic parents of pupils in Community National Schools that their children would follow the same religious education programme as in a Catholic school.

I really hope this isn't the way the government see the future of education in Ireland.

"Minister O'Keeffe gave an assurance that the commitment to provide religious instruction and faith formation during the school day on a denominational basis for the pupils whose parents request it stands.

If I have kids, the religion I want to bring them up with is FSM. Will Minister O'Keeffe give an assuarance that my kids can learn about the FSM during the school day?

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but what do you think is the general feeling to faith schooling being provided by the government?

Zillah

I just had a horrifying image. A school room full of children, their teacher infront of them, shortly after maths class, history is later. She explains the whole Jesus zombie story and expresses it as fact.

*shudder*

It would be hysterical if it weren't so awful.

8kvscdpglqnyr4

Zillah wrote: »

It would be hysterical if it weren't so awful.

Sometimes when I really think about it I find myself laughing!

It's really hard to believe given the advances in science we have made that we're still propagating these bronze age myths to our children in the classroom to our children.

I'm not saying we don't teach them *about* religion ... infact, I think that's a great idea. I also believe a more philosophical approach to the subject would be a great help.

Dades

"Minister O'Keeffe gave an assurance that the commitment to provide religious instruction and faith formation during the school day on a denominational basis for the pupils whose parents request it stands.

To be fair, if it is by request only it's not that bad.

Although in theory that suggests it's not compulsory, but you'd wonder if the Irish kids won't just get herded up and sent off to be 'educated'.

Whispered

It's not going to affect your child is it? It's there if the parents request it. It's not like every child in the class is being subjected to it, like what was happening years ago. No big deal really IMO. People are entitled to believe and practise what they want so long as they are not shoving down other peoples throat. Which is exactly what they are avoiding doing by having it on a request and denominational basis.

Just as a matter of interest, and a bit OT. If it was announced that schools were going to teach kids about all of the major world religions. But that the lessons would be presented as a lesson in culture and NOT as fact. Would people have problems with that?

jill_valentine

If it was announced that schools were going to teach kids about all of the major world religions. But that the lessons would be presented as a lesson in culture and NOT as fact. Would people have problems with that?

That would actually be a useful tool, IMHO.

Dave!

helena.ryan wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest, and a bit OT. If it was announced that schools were going to teach kids about all of the major world religions. But that the lessons would be presented as a lesson in culture and NOT as fact. Would people have problems with that?

Lots of us would support that. Richard Dawkins actually advocates too that AFAIK

Charlie3dan

helena.ryan wrote: »

It's not going to affect your child is it? It's there if the parents request it. It's not like every child in the class is being subjected to it, like what was happening years ago. No big deal really IMO. People are entitled to believe and practise what they want so long as they are not shoving down other peoples throat. Which is exactly what they are avoiding doing by having it on a request and denominational basis.

If it's requested by the parents then the child is still having the parents belief forced upon them. They will still be exposed to misirepresentation of facts and backward religious practises which could be damaging.

helena.ryan wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest, and a bit OT. If it was announced that schools were going to teach kids about all of the major world religions. But that the lessons would be presented as a lesson in culture and NOT as fact. Would people have problems with that?

No that would be much better. If after these lessons children decide to follow a particular religion at the very least they will have had some say in it. The lessons would have to be objective though, not just a way for religion to sneak in through the back door.

flogen

Charlie3dan wrote: »

If it's requested by the parents then the child is still having the parents belief forced upon them. They will still be exposed to misirepresentation of facts and backward religious practises which could be damaging.

Well I would have thought the main problem was how exclusionary it can be - you have a situation where the class is split up or perhaps even a small amount of children are isolated because they're not going out of class to do the above.

What if there was one or two atheist or Jewish or Muslim children in the room and the rest were Catholic?

Besides the potential for isolation it only encourages a perception amongst the children that they're different from each other and should be treated differently.

Malari

helena.ryan wrote: »

It's not going to affect your child is it? It's there if the parents request it. It's not like every child in the class is being subjected to it, like what was happening years ago. No big deal really IMO. People are entitled to believe and practise what they want so long as they are not shoving down other peoples throat. Which is exactly what they are avoiding doing by having it on a request and denominational basis.

Who's going to do the religious instruction though? If it's the teachers expected to provide it then it is being shoved down their throats.

helena.ryan wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest, and a bit OT. If it was announced that schools were going to teach kids about all of the major world religions. But that the lessons would be presented as a lesson in culture and NOT as fact. Would people have problems with that?

I think this is the way religion should be taught. You can't ignore it - religion is one of the foremost forces in culture, politics and ethics all over the world. And a fascinating historical and physchological topic!

jimbling

Malari wrote: »

I think this is the way religion should be taught. You can't ignore it - religion is one of the foremost forces in culture, politics and ethics all over the world. And a fascinating historical and physchological topic!

Ya, but what age do you see this happening at? I mean surely young children are not really ready for that sort of analysis on religion?

Rev Hellfire

flogen wrote: »

Well I would have thought the main problem was how exclusionary it can be - you have a situation where the class is split up or perhaps even a small amount of children are isolated because they're not going out of class to do the above.

What if there was one or two atheist or Jewish or Muslim children in the room and the rest were Catholic?

I guess then its a case of the boo-hoo's for those kids, but that's life.

Where do you draw the line when it comes to kids feeling left out. We've already got the ridiculous situation in our school where kids aren't allowed to invite other kids to parties in school in case some sensitive little soul has a bad case of damp eyes :rolleyes:

Ultimately schools are there to prepare and enable children to operate constructively within our society, if some sections of that society want to have religious element to that education so be it as long as it is not forced on others. Though by extension the decision of others to not have such an education shouldn't be used as a reason to deny those who do.

WetDaddy

Maybe I'm missing the point a bit here, but I don't really see what the issue is. Not all children in the school(s) are being "force-taught" Catholicism; just the children who's parents request it. Parents who choose to raise their children Catholic will, more than likely, avail of this. Parents who choose to raise their children with different / no religious views will not avail of this.

I really think the question of "forcing religion upon children" is an entirely different matter. Also, regarding the options of *other* religions / choices being taught in primary schools:

If I have kids, the religion I want to bring them up with is FSM. Will Minister O'Keeffe give an assuarance that my kids can learn about the FSM during the school day?

Well then you'll have to work with those in charge of FSM (i.e. the equivalent of the bishops / Catholic Church) to get them involved in the school system. That's not an issue for O'Keeffe, at least not until the other religious bodies get involved and request that they would like their views to be taught in the school.

I'm 27 and a Catholic. The primary school I went to taught us Catholicism and indeed we said the Angelous at noon. However, when I went home after lunch, at least half of the kids I went and played with were Protestant. The only difference we saw at that age was that we had to go to *different* schools; we would've loved to be in the same school!

There was never ever a feeling that some kids were "weird" because they had a different religion. We were all taught to have an inherent tolerance of others, and I think *that's* the most important factor when teaching children about religion. I know that Ireland is more of a multi-denominational country nowadays, but it still holds true.

Whispered

Charlie3dan wrote: »

If it's requested by the parents then the child is still having the parents belief forced upon them. They will still be exposed to misirepresentation of facts and backward religious practises which could be damaging..

I know what you mean, but in all fairness, every single one of us has had some aspect of our parents beliefs or opinions "shoved" on us. It's what parents do. For example, your parents could be communist, they could think all alcohol is evil, they could listen to really crap music (like my parents) they could be vegetarian, almost all of our life lessons until a certain age come from our parents, it doesn't mean we carry them with us and believe them forever.

Another slightly OT question, do most athiests tell their kids about santa? If you do (and I think every child should experience the magic of christmas in that way TBH) could you look at parents bringing their child up in a religion as being similar, telling them fairy stories until they are old enough to say "OK Dad, I don't believe this anymore". I may be simplifying it a bit, and I'm not talking about religious fanatics, just normal, run of the mill believers.

flogen wrote: »

Well I would have thought the main problem was how exclusionary it can be ........Besides the potential for isolation it only encourages a perception amongst the children that they're different from each other and should be treated differently.

This is a huge problem with religion in general, everything is the "one true way" everyone else is wrong. I never thought about it like that, that could cause problems.

Malari wrote: »

Who's going to do the religious instruction though? If it's the teachers expected to provide it then it is being shoved down their throats.

I would have assumed that a religious person would do it? I could be wrong, but I went to a convent school, and even there, the lay teachers did not teach us religion, the nuns did. Maybe that is not standard, but I can't imagine a teacher being forced to teach a subject they know nothing about.

getz

i do not think a specific religion should be given in school lessons-this is the problem of schools in ireland-a christian type all prayer would be far better in this day and age or alternatively left to the church outside school hours-

Tim Robbins

Raylee Scarce Right-hand wrote: »

This is disappointing ...

This is something that really irritates me. I don't know what's more annoying:
1. Government policy
2. All the atheists / agnostics / secularists that moan and moan and moan and moan about it and do absolutely nothing about it. Join the humanist society or the educate together movement or shut up.

If the these movements had the hundreds of thousands of Irish people that feel this way, the government could not - repeat could not - ignore them.

They don't. And hence the government can treat them as irrelevant moaners while they listen to a well organised religious machine.

That's the way politics works. Government look to see whose hasseling them most, how much support they have and then act - when they have to and only when they have to. They don't care what's fair or what's right.

According to the last census there are alomst 200,000 people ticking the unreligious box. It's probably double that considering all the Mothers who tick the boxes. But, the humanist association only have 300 members. Educate Together put a public internet petition for its schools and had only 3,000 signatures.

So from Government perspective small organisations can be ignorned.
Because they are not politically powerful.

So get active or shut up moaning I say.

Charlie3dan

helena.ryan wrote: »

I know what you mean, but in all fairness, every single one of us has had some aspect of our parents beliefs or opinions "shoved" on us. It's what parents do. For example, your parents could be communist, they could think all alcohol is evil, they could listen to really crap music (like my parents) they could be vegetarian, almost all of our life lessons until a certain age come from our parents, it doesn't mean we carry them with us and believe them forever.

Yea of course our parents will influence us as will our friendships and experiences etc. But the schools would be facilitating a system where beliefs can be forced upon children and where religion could be misrepresented as fact. Which I don't agree with.

If we took the other approach where the schools taught religion in a cultural context,then even if a child has bible bashing parents the schools could counter act this by simply informing the child that it's ok to question things.

Charlie3dan

Tim Robbins wrote: »

So get active or shut up moaning I say.

Well you've inspired me to sign the educate together petition and look into joining the humanist society (links would be helpful). But stop giving out to people for holding a discussion, it's a frickin forum.

I understand your frustration though, part of which surely comes from the humanist society and educate together needing to make people more aware of what they are doing.

Whispered

Charlie3dan wrote: »

Yea of course our parents will influence us as will our friendships and experiences etc. But the schools would be facilitating a system where beliefs can be forced upon children and where religion could be misrepresented as fact. Which I don't agree with.

If we took the other approach where the schools taught religion in a cultural context,then even if a child has bible bashing parents the schools could counter act this by simply informing the child that it's ok to question things.

I would much prefer to see religion taught in a cultural context, absolutely. I just don't see the problem in A parent wanting a religious aspect in their childs education.

School is not just about a text book education, it's a social education as well. I've been thinking about the comment about children learning that they are different. I initially agreed with it, but the more I think about it, I'm beginning to sway in the direction of this not being such a bad thing. We are all different, it's a good thing that children learn this.

I agree with the problem being religiong presented as fact, but if the childs parents are that way inclined, to want their child to have these religious classes, then it is going to be presented as fact by the parents anyway in te childs everyday life. As for the comment about a school facilitating a certain system, if I have kids, I intend to bring them up vegetarian until they are old enough to know different. I would absolutely expect the school to allow for this (in the case of school dinners, tours etc). I believe this is similar? I have certain opinions on something that are not shared by everyone, but it is my right to have this facilitated in a way that does not effect other children.

getz

as long as the schools are run by the churches,and the teachers are nuns brothers or any other religious teachers ,you cannot expect them not to teach there religion -the only answer is to have non religious schools run by the goverment [ireland cannot afford this] as yet

Malari

jimbling wrote: »

Ya, but what age do you see this happening at? I mean surely young children are not really ready for that sort of analysis on religion?

Well, it doesn't have to be so thorough and analytical when they are young, but even young children have a superficial understanding of some topics like politics which they pick up from their parents or the radio/tv and develop as they get older. A simple basic explanation of what people believe in different countries, etc would be reasonable analysis for young kids.

Malari

helena.ryan wrote: »

I would have assumed that a religious person would do it? I could be wrong, but I went to a convent school, and even there, the lay teachers did not teach us religion, the nuns did. Maybe that is not standard, but I can't imagine a teacher being forced to teach a subject they know nothing about.

I don't know, I didn't go to a convent school for most of my education and it was the class teacher who did the instruction. I don't think there's much of a choice there. I think the issue is that if a parent sees that the school isn't doing the instruction (in whatever way) they won't bother signing the child up to classes outside the school. It's so much easier if all of that is taught in schools, which is wrong I think. You just accept that a person who tells you 2 + 2 = 4 and corrects your grammar and spelling is correct when you are 7 or 8 years old. When that same person tells you religious stuff why would you question it?

Charlie3dan

helena.ryan wrote: »

I would much prefer to see religion taught in a cultural context, absolutely. I just don't see the problem in A parent wanting a religious aspect in their childs education.

Neither do I if that's their belief, but if a system is going to be put into the schools I think it should be a cultural and social study rather than facilitating the parents to teach their kids only one thing in an unbalanced way.

helena.ryan wrote: »

School is not just about a text book education, it's a social education as well. I've been thinking about the comment about children learning that they are different. I initially agreed with it, but the more I think about it, I'm beginning to sway in the direction of this not being such a bad thing. We are all different, it's a good thing that children learn this.
.

Again, teaching religion as a cultural study would allow children to respect other cultures, rather than to harbour a belief that those people are going to hell because they follow the wrong religion.

helena.ryan wrote: »

I agree with the problem being religiong presented as fact, but if the childs parents are that way inclined, to want their child to have these religious classes, then it is going to be presented as fact by the parents anyway in te childs everyday life. As for the comment about a school facilitating a certain system, if I have kids, I intend to bring them up vegetarian until they are old enough to know different. I would absolutely expect the school to allow for this (in the case of school dinners, tours etc). I believe this is similar? I have certain opinions on something that are not shared by everyone, but it is my right to have this facilitated in a way that does not effect other children.

Again, the parents representing something as fact can be adequately countered simply by letting kids know in schools it's ok to question things and that even though your mammy believes x there are loads of people that believe y, and then there's the z's who thinks it's all false . Taking the objective approach rather than advocating blind faith.

The vegetarian thing, I see what you are saying, but similarly I would expect the school to offer the vegetarian option along with all the other options. Rather than giving them a separate canteen with only vegetarian meals and people wearing black telling the kids that beef is evil.

Nevyn

Zillah wrote: »

I just had a horrifying image. A school room full of children, their teacher infront of them, shortly after maths class, history is later. She explains the whole Jesus zombie story and expresses it as fact.

*shudder*

It would be hysterical if it weren't so awful.

This is what happens in all catholic patron primary schools which is just over 90% of all primary schools.

flogen wrote: »

Well I would have thought the main problem was how exclusionary it can be - you have a situation where the class is split up or perhaps even a small amount of children are isolated because they're not going out of class to do the above.

What if there was one or two atheist or Jewish or Muslim children in the room and the rest were Catholic?

Besides the potential for isolation it only encourages a perception amongst the children that they're different from each other and should be treated differently.

This is what happens in all catholic patron primary schools which is just over 90% of all primary schools.

helena.ryan wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest, and a bit OT. If it was announced that schools were going to teach kids about all of the major world religions. But that the lessons would be presented as a lesson in culture and NOT as fact. Would people have problems with that?

This is what happens in E.T schools as they have to have R.E. classes of some type.


http://www.humanism.ie/contact.html

8kvscdpglqnyr4

getz wrote: »

as long as the schools are run by the churches,and the teachers are nuns brothers or any other religious teachers ,you cannot expect them not to teach there religion -the only answer is to have non religious schools run by the goverment [ireland cannot afford this] as yet

This is exactly my point. These are new schools that are not run by the Catholic Church.

8kvscdpglqnyr4

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Join the humanist society or the educate together movement or shut up.

I've have signed the educate together petition and I've been to a meeting to see how feasable it is to get an educate together school in our area.

I have considered joining the HAI but so far, I have decided not to do so.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That's the way politics works. Government look to see whose hasseling them most, how much support they have and then act - when they have to and only when they have to. They don't care what's fair or what's right.

This I unserstand. That is why >90% of the primary schools are Catholic. What I'm disappointed about it the fact that the government is allowing the preparation for communion during school time in these 2 new schools. All we're talking about is 2 schools here!

8kvscdpglqnyr4

helena.ryan wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest, and a bit OT. If it was announced that schools were going to teach kids about all of the major world religions. But that the lessons would be presented as a lesson in culture and NOT as fact. Would people have problems with that?

This would be a super idea.

8kvscdpglqnyr4

Folex wrote: »

Maybe I'm missing the point a bit here, but I don't really see what the issue is. Not all children in the school(s) are being "force-taught" Catholicism; just the children who's parents request it.

I'm not worried about everyone getting force fed catholicism. I think it's a waste of teachers time and class to be prepairing some of the kids in a class for communion.

Folex wrote: »

Well then you'll have to work with those in charge of FSM (i.e. the equivalent of the bishops / Catholic Church) to get them involved in the school system. That's not an issue for O'Keeffe, at least not until the other religious bodies get involved and request that they would like their views to be taught in the school.

Here's the quote from the Independent:
Minister O'Keeffe gave an assurance that the commitment to provide religious instruction and faith formation during the school day on a denominational basis for the pupils whose parents request it stands.
So if a class contained some Catholics, Jews, Musilms, Hinuds ... then at the request of the parents, these is a "commitment to provide religious instruction and faith formation during the school day on a denominational basis".
To me, that seems like something that it totally unsustainable. Can you see that?

Nevyn

Raylee Scarce Right-hand wrote: »

This is exactly my point. These are new schools that are not run by the Catholic Church.

This hasn't happened yet, there was to be the first V.E.C patronised primary school out here in D15, but the dept of education changed it's mind and begged the catholic archdiocese to take on the patronage of it for short amount of time.

This school was to cater for children who were not getting into existing primary schools into the area based on the cirtea laid down in the enrollment policy and a certain amount of them were children that were not catholic and so did not get a place. So the school was to enforce this segregation of children.

Given who the school was being set up to cater for once the V.E.C patronage fell through the then minister hanifin never approached E.T to act as the school patron, but then again her lack of regard for E.T is well know in all her time as Minister for Education she did attend many primary school opening but never of an E.T school despite always being invited.

Tim Robbins

Raylee Scarce Right-hand wrote: »

I've have signed the educate together petition and I've been to a meeting to see how feasable it is to get an educate together school in our area.

Good for you.

I have considered joining the HAI but so far, I have decided not to do so.

Well there is no other society which is trying to push for equal rights for the non - religious. So if you think the non - religious deserve equal rights, well then you should join. 20 blips a year.

This I unserstand. That is why >90% of the primary schools are Catholic. What I'm disappointed about it the fact that the government is allowing the preparation for communion during school time in these 2 new schools. All we're talking about is 2 schools here!

There are actually Catholic Schools who can legally refuse kids who are not Catholic. So if you leave in an area where every school is Catholic you could find yourself in an horrible situation.

Who cares what they are preparing for. The admission issue is a much bigger issue. Could you imagine not being able to find a school for your kids?

I have a lot of mates who are unreligious, atheist, agnostic etc. None of them could be *rsed joining the HAI and few of them interested in what educate together are trying to do. But they'll burn the ears off you giving out about religion.

If you judge the ratio of Dawkins book sales and the number of atheists who visit just this forum, to members of the humanist society, it's quite clear the majority of atheists will love to rant and moan but when it comes to actually doing something simple and constructive for equal rights, they don't.

It does my head in.

My sister, God believer but not religious signed the educate together petition and my fiance who is a church goer also signed it.

So if they can sign so can any friggin atheist.

Some people just love ranting.

Zillah

helena.ryan wrote: »

Another slightly OT question, do most athiests tell their kids about santa?

I have received some really nasty backlashes in the past for saying that I have no intention of telling my children Santa is real. I don't want to encourage them to think like that and I feel it would be hypocritical of me.

I also firmly believe that the reason children regard Christmas as so special is because they get presents, not because a fat magical man supposedly broke into their home.

JC 2K3

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Some people just love ranting.

Such as yourself?

Stercus Accidit

Zillah wrote: »

I have received some really nasty backlashes in the past for saying that I have no intention of telling my children Santa is real. I don't want to encourage them to think like that and I feel it would be hypocritical of me.

I also firmly believe that the reason children regard Christmas as so special is because they get presents, not because a fat magical man supposedly broke into their home.

Have wondered how I would handle this myself, thread worthy maybe?
Would be more light hearted than most of the stuff in here, and with my hangover would be far more appealing!

Maybe an elaborate lie about the order of santa, a cult that have passed down the title and robes of saint nick through the centuries, and deliver presents.

Maybe I'll tell the truth, bah! Why do I an atheist now have a moral dilemma involving lies for kids, this should be a no brainer!

But I did enjoy the santa myth as a kid.

lostexpectation

you would have hoped and it may be the case that they would have come up with a new broader curriculum even if they were going to teach communion during schools hours.

the detail isn't there if they are teaching communion in class where will the other kids be?
its sounds impractical.

its melding of church and state again, that is problem.

lostexpectation

Tim Robbins wrote: »

This is something that really irritates me. I don't know what's more annoying:
1. Government policy
2. All the atheists / agnostics / secularists that moan and moan and moan and moan about it and do absolutely nothing about it. Join the humanist society or the educate together movement or shut up.

If the these movements had the hundreds of thousands of Irish people that feel this way, the government could not - repeat could not - ignore them.

They don't. And hence the government can treat them as irrelevant moaners while they listen to a well organised religious machine.

That's the way politics works. Government look to see whose hasseling them most, how much support they have and then act - when they have to and only when they have to. They don't care what's fair or what's right.

According to the last census there are alomst 200,000 people ticking the unreligious box. It's probably double that considering all the Mothers who tick the boxes. But, the humanist association only have 300 members. Educate Together put a public internet petition for its schools and had only 3,000 signatures.

So from Government perspective small organisations can be ignorned.
Because they are not politically powerful.

So get active or shut up moaning I say.

the meek shall inherit the earth huh?

but they have an advantage they get to teach their rubbish to most of the kids in the country.


you have no clue tim robbins just happy with the archaic status quo, you pretend its a level playing field, the government now not just the church itself have been actively hindering the setting up of news schools for decades, refusing to allow other group to be patrons, refusing to take on a public education system rather then leaving to private religious groups, refusing to set up a proper system for getting schools into new community groups, its not moaning its the government job to build a proper non-sectarian educational system on our behalf not to work in conjunction with church groups.

we shouldn't have to lobby for it.

lostexpectation

Folex wrote: »

Maybe I'm missing the point a bit here, but I don't really see what the issue is. Not all children in the school(s) are being "force-taught" Catholicism; just the children who's parents request it. Parents who choose to raise their children Catholic will, more than likely, avail of this. Parents who choose to raise their children with different / no religious views will not avail of this.

I really think the question of "forcing religion upon children" is an entirely different matter. Also, regarding the options of *other* religions / choices being taught in primary schools:



Well then you'll have to work with those in charge of FSM (i.e. the equivalent of the bishops / Catholic Church) to get them involved in the school system. That's not an issue for O'Keeffe, at least not until the other religious bodies get involved and request that they would like their views to be taught in the school.

I'm 27 and a Catholic. The primary school I went to taught us Catholicism and indeed we said the Angelous at noon. However, when I went home after lunch, at least half of the kids I went and played with were Protestant. The only difference we saw at that age was that we had to go to *different* schools; we would've loved to be in the same school!

There was never ever a feeling that some kids were "weird" because they had a different religion. We were all taught to have an inherent tolerance of others, and I think *that's* the most important factor when teaching children about religion. I know that Ireland is more of a multi-denominational country nowadays, but it still holds true.

that _is_ the problem folex.

Tim Robbins

lostexpectation wrote: »

you pretend its a level playing field, the government now not just the church itself have been actively hindering the setting up of news schools for decades, refusing to allow other group to be patrons, refusing to take on a public education system rather then leaving to private religious groups, refusing to set up a proper system for getting schools into new community groups, its not moaning its the government job to build a proper non-sectarian educational system on our behalf not to work in conjunction with church groups.

I know all that. That is why I support HAI and educate together.

we shouldn't have to lobby for it.

Of course we shouldn't. But if life was perfect we wouldn't even need a government. Everyone would magically get on, magically compromise or magically all want the exact same thing.

getz

i know that in the uk religious run schools have to have a percentage of pupils from other religious dominations before they can get a goverment grant-i noticed a strange thing last year in the local newspaper ,a girls catholic school was asking for protestant girls to fill there quota-i found out that that many muslim parents wanted to send there girl children to the catholic school[something to do with not mixing boy/ girl together] but they could not get children from other dominations--this school is i north manchester

ChocolateSauce

I attended a UCD debate last Wednesday entitled "This house would ban religious symbols in schools", and there were really two debates going on: The motion, and the direction of religion in schools.

The overwhelming opinion was that all religions should be accomodated by the school system and that they should be taught in a PC way which neither confirmed nor denied their factuality.

Myself, I'm in favour both of their (religion) total excision from public schools and also of the right of students to wear what they want.

lostexpectation

which nutcase did ucd invite this time?

ChocolateSauce

Conor Lenihan, Minister of Sate, and the Archbishop of Dublin/Primate of all Ireland were to two keynote speakers, but Mr. Lenihan was forced to cancel due to militant anti-government protests on the night.

lostexpectation

pity these debates often lack a government /state representative.

although who was arguing the secular side.