Secular schools/Church Involvement in Education

Beruthiel

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions Eric.

Eric DoyleHiggins wrote:

As to a secular charter, I will not. Schools – with very few exceptions are privately-owned institutions. It is for the owners to make their own rules. In many cases schools are the property of parishes, religious trusts and so on. It is for the parents whose children attend such schools to press for changes through the management boards.
This is not altogether a satisfactory state of affairs and I believe we must change but the huge difficulty is that we simply do not have the resources to build a parallel secular system.

Not for some time, will we have the funds to build new schools, of that I am aware.
But for the RC Church to have such a monopoly is abhorrent to a lot of people.
Yes, parents can complain but it is my belief that our State has basically left the education of our citizens to the RC Church, which means religious instruction, and that is a sorry state of affairs in 2011.

LeixlipRed

Beruthiel wrote: »

Eric,

A list of questions for you if you have the time to answer:

Would you push for reforming, modernizing, and downsizing the public sector, including abolishing the public-sector wage premium and ending the culture of state pensions?
Public servants would invest privately for retirement like everyone else.

Will you push for a secular charter in our schools and for teachers to be private sector workers?

Would you push for privatizing state and semi-state bodies whenever feasible?

Why do you want him to push for half of that would be a better question? Privatising teachers :eek: How can private profit-orientated companies be allowed anywhere near education?

LeixlipRed

Beruthiel wrote: »

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions Eric.



Not for some time, will we have the funds to build new schools, of that I am aware.
But for the RC Church to have such a monopoly is abhorrent to a lot of people.
Yes, parents can complain but it is my belief that our State has basically left the education of our citizens to the RC Church, which means religious instruction, and that is a sorry state of affairs in 2011.

So, you want the RC Church out to be replaced by private companies? Replacing Jesus with capitalism? How about leaving it as is yet forcing the Church to renegotiate the reparation payments deal to include the transfer of all schools into state-ownership?

Eric DoyleHiggins

Beruthiel wrote: »

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions Eric.



Not for some time, will we have the funds to build new schools, of that I am aware.
But for the RC Church to have such a monopoly is abhorrent to a lot of people.
Yes, parents can complain but it is my belief that our State has basically left the education of our citizens to the RC Church, which means religious instruction, and that is a sorry state of affairs in 2011.

I can understand how this gives you cause for concern. The RC Church certainly has very considerable influence. This derives from hard cash donations invested in education, very often during periods when the State did darn all for education. Yes, I know, the State latterly made thumping big grant contributions and so on. This is why I say that negotiation is the way forward. We have an intermingling of rights here and we simply cannot ride roughshod over them.

E.

Eric DoyleHiggins

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Why do you want him to push for half of that would be a better question? Privatising teachers :eek: How can private profit-orientated companies be allowed anywhere near education?

Good Afternoon Leixlip Red,

It's good to talk again. Privatise can mean many things. It could, I suppose, mean a conglomerate employing loads of teachers and running schools for profit. But actually what I mean in this connection is, for example, let us say that you, me and B combine to found a school. We decide it will be run along the lines of codology. We need some teachers. We want them all to be stand-up comics because we believe that will be more conducive to our children's learning than any other disposition.

We find we have a difficult with one teacher. His jokes are both blue and not funny. We decide he is not for us. We pull him to one side and tell him to pull his socks up, clean up his act and make it funny.

There is no subtlety at our disposal in trying to encourage better jokes. We may either put up with him or fire him, that is, return him to sender. Very likely the next thing we hear will be from his union. No. We need closer control. We need employment, salaries, management and ethos, if there is to be one, to come from the same controlling source.

As to questions being worthwhile and so forth, if somebody feels it necessary to ask them, then they are worthwhile.

Anyway, how are you keeping ? Alright ?

With every good wish to all,

Sincerely,

Eric.

LeixlipRed

So you propose installing private corporations that won't recognise unions to run our schools?

Beruthiel

Educate Together do a great job and I'd be more than happy for all our schools to be run on the same principles.

Eric DoyleHiggins

LeixlipRed wrote: »

So you propose installing private corporations that won't recognise unions to run our schools?

Most by far of our schools are private corporations.

Eric DoyleHiggins

Beruthiel wrote: »

Educate Together do a great job and I'd be more than happy for all our schools to be run on the same principles.

Yes, B, you will. But neither you nor I have a monopoly on wisdom. We live in a world of wonderfully varying human beings and we have to try to find some basis for everybody to be accommodated.

Beruthiel

Eric DoyleHiggins wrote: »

We live in a world of wonderfully varying human beings and we have to try to find some basis for everybody to be accommodated.

Are you talking about accommodating religion?
Because that should be kept to the home.

Eric DoyleHiggins

Beruthiel wrote: »

Are you talking about accommodating religion?
Because that should be kept to the home.

Good Afternoon Again B,

It takes all sorts to make a world. Just because you believe this or that should be the case, does not make it obligatory on the rest of us. Have you ever heard of the Spucers, the Placers, the league of church goers and holy water sprinklers ? They too seem to think their way is the only way permissible for all of us. We are all big boys and girls and we are all perfectly competent to make up our own mind in matters of mores or ethos. And we are entitled to act in accordance with our own conclusions subject only to public order.

That, dear B, describes pretty well the closest we can ever come to personal freedom in any ordered society.

I prescribe one virtue for universal consomption. Tolerance. For everybody and towards everybody.

Ah, I did not answer your question. Of course we must tolerate religion ! 96% of Irish people described themselves in the 2006 Census as having some religion or other. We must tolerate all religion subject only to public order aforementioned.

You run your home as you will. I will run my home as I will.

But if you think I am going to get all ventilated because some person crosses themselves as they pass a chapel, or because they wish me God Bless or because they remind me that God is Great or because they wish me Shalom, they you are mistaken.

It is not always easy by any means but we must do our best to make room for all.

I hope I have made my position absolutely clear.

With every good wish to all,

Sincerely,

Eric.

BuffyBot

Guys, this is veering off into a Politics forum topic, not a Kildare based one..

Eric DoyleHiggins

BuffyBot wrote: »

Guys, this is veering off into a Politics forum topic, not a Kildare based one..

Well, if you say so. Anyone wishing to pursue matters further with me may of course and will be most welcome to do so on my blog. I understand people may wish to remain anonymous and will protect the same if they choose to make their observations by eMail.

All the best to all,

e.

LeixlipRed

Beruthiel wrote: »

Educate Together do a great job and I'd be more than happy for all our schools to be run on the same principles.

Yes, I totally agree with that but we shouldn't need Educate Together to do it for us. The Catholic Church has failed to pay the money and property owed after the Ryan report recommendations. The state should be suing and demanding the handing over of every RC owned school in the state. Then and only then will we have a secular, state-run primary education system like we should have.

Eric DoyleHiggins

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Yes, I totally agree with that but we shouldn't need Educate Together to do it for us. The Catholic Church has failed to pay the money and property owed after the Ryan report recommendations. The state should be suing and demanding the handing over of every RC owned school in the state. Then and only then will we have a secular, state-run primary education system like we should have.

Like I said, negotiations.

It is always nice to be nice.

e/

Beruthiel

Eric DoyleHiggins wrote: »

It takes all sorts to make a world. Just because you believe this or that should be the case, does not make it obligatory on the rest of us. Have you ever heard of the Spucers, the Placers, the league of church goers and holy water sprinklers ? They too seem to think their way is the only way permissible for all of us.

Sorry, but that's a trite comment and doesn't actually say anything.
I want a secular state. Totally secular.
Religious people doing whatever they want, BUT out side of the school system.
That is certainly a much fairer and more inclusive than anything else.
All our schools should be inclusive for every citizen, regardless whither they follow a particular religion or not.

Of course we must tolerate religion !

I never said otherwise. But not in our schools.

But if you think I am going to get all ventilated because some person crosses themselves as they pass a chapel, or because they wish me God Bless or because they remind me that God is Great or because they wish me Shalom, they you are mistaken.

Again, what people do outside the realms of our education system, in the comfort of their own homes, is their own business.
However, when it impacts on others, regardless of whither they believe in something or not, that's not on.

I hope I have made my position absolutely clear.

Not really. It was very much a fence sitting answer.


Apologies Buffy,
feel free to move this to the Politics forum.

Eric DoyleHiggins

Good Afternoon Beruthiel,

You are simply going to have to accept that you do not have the right to tell other people what to do, just because you think it is the right thing. We had too many people in the recent past, coming from the other end of the spectrum, acting like the Taliban and telling us what to do. It may come as an unpleasant shock to you to realise that there are many people who like our schools and our hospitals just the way they are. I have my own view on such things and I think it can probably be inferred from what I have said here and elsewhere. But it is not my view which is important. What is important is how we are to settle such matters amongst ourselves. We have to do our best to make room for everyone. Tolerance ! I repeat because it is the best answer of all: It takes all sorts to make a world.

Now, we have been given a polite 'give over lads' by our Moderator. I am grateful to have had this opportunity to make what will be my final contribution on this forum on this question. I repeat my offer to accommodate all such discussion on my own blog and I will do the best I can to facilitate the discussion.

All the best to all,

Eric.

Beruthiel

Eric DoyleHiggins wrote: »

We had too many people in the recent past, coming from the other end of the spectrum, acting like the Taliban and telling us what to do.

LOL What are you talking about?

It may come as an unpleasant shock to you to realise that there are many people who like our schools and our hospitals just the way they are.

You're right. Being dominated by a religious church is just fantastic for all those Irish citizens who don't believe or follow a different path.
Lets just stick with that, it's worked so well in the past.

But it is not my view which is important.

Actually it is.
I want to vote for someone with a strong point of view who will do whatever it takes to get that across when s/he gets in.

Now, we have been given a polite 'give over lads' by our Moderator. I am grateful to have had this opportunity to make what will be my final contribution on this forum on this question.

No problem.
If you change your mind, let myself or Buffy know and one of us will move it over to the Politics forum for you.

BuffyBot

This thread is a spin off of http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056150873

rokossovsky

Eric DoyleHiggins wrote: »

Good Afternoon Again B,

It takes all sorts to make a world. Just because you believe this or that should be the case, does not make it obligatory on the rest of us. Have you ever heard of the Spucers, the Placers, the league of church goers and holy water sprinklers ? They too seem to think their way is the only way permissible for all of us. We are all big boys and girls and we are all perfectly competent to make up our own mind in matters of mores or ethos. And we are entitled to act in accordance with our own conclusions subject only to public order.

That, dear B, describes pretty well the closest we can ever come to personal freedom in any ordered society.

I prescribe one virtue for universal consomption. Tolerance. For everybody and towards everybody.

Ah, I did not answer your question. Of course we must tolerate religion ! 96% of Irish people described themselves in the 2006 Census as having some religion or other. We must tolerate all religion subject only to public order aforementioned.

You run your home as you will. I will run my home as I will.

But if you think I am going to get all ventilated because some person crosses themselves as they pass a chapel, or because they wish me God Bless or because they remind me that God is Great or because they wish me Shalom, they you are mistaken.

It is not always easy by any means but we must do our best to make room for all.

I hope I have made my position absolutely clear.

With every good wish to all,

Sincerely,

Eric.

That was the great experience I had with my two in Educate Together school (NDNSP), namely, there was room in that school for all both religious and non religious. Religious education was done in school time but outside of the class room and usually by the parents who wanted to maintain their religious ethos but at the same time exposing the kids to all comers. The Educate Together schools are also democratically run and dont have to run to a bishop for his permission to do anything. What we really need now are Second Level Educate Together schools.

prinz

I think people are mistaking schools run by a branch/under the auspices of a certain religion and a forcing of religion onto students. It simply isn't the case in many schools, particularly at second level.

I have posted on this before. I attended a secondary school (in the North Kildare constituency) which was founded by and still belonged to and carried the ethos of a Catholic order. There were no prayers. Students were invited to a mass once a year which in which attendance was optional. There was a school chaplain who met students in a 'spiritual room' not given over to any one religion. There were Catholic, a variety of Protestant, Jewish and Muslim as well as students of other/no religious affiliations whatsoever. Not once in my time at this school was religion ever an issue. Religious classes were offered but these were (a) optional and (b) multi-denominational, going through all the major world religions, background, beliefs, customs, geography, including guest speakers of different faiths and again a guest speaker of no faith at all. Some members of the Catholic order were teachers in the school, and excellent teachers at that.

I find it repulsive that someone would seek to have this school repossessed and/or remove the monks from their teaching posts. A school with a Catholic or Protestant or whatever history does not mean that the students are sitting around all day being brainwashed into a particular faith.

It's one thing for people or the State to establish a secular schooling system but it's quite another for the State to basically make land-grabs or to seek to put certain people outside of the classroom regardless of their teaching experience and skills etc.

Bottle_of_Smoke

prinz wrote: »

I think people are mistaking schools run by a branch/under the auspices of a certain religion and a forcing of religion onto students. It simply isn't the case in many schools, particularly at second level.

I have posted on this before. I attended a secondary school (in the North Kildare constituency) which was founded by and still belonged to and carried the ethos of a Catholic order. There were no prayers. Students were invited to a mass once a year which in which attendance was optional. There was a school chaplain who met students in a 'spiritual room' not given over to any one religion. There were Catholic, a variety of Protestant, Jewish and Muslim as well as students of other/no religious affiliations whatsoever. Not once in my time at this school was religion ever an issue. Religious classes were offered but these were (a) optional and (b) multi-denominational, going through all the major world religions, background, beliefs, customs, geography, including guest speakers of different faiths and again a guest speaker of no faith at all. Some members of the Catholic order were teachers in the school, and excellent teachers at that.

I find it repulsive that someone would seek to have this school repossessed and/or remove the monks from their teaching posts. A school with a Catholic or Protestant or whatever history does not mean that the students are sitting around all day being brainwashed into a particular faith.

It's one thing for people or the State to establish a secular schooling system but it's quite another for the State to basically make land-grabs or to seek to put certain people outside of the classroom regardless of their teaching experience and skills etc.

Prinz if schools were all like that there'd be no problems. Even though I'm an atheist I really couldn't care less if my kids take part in religious class. (cos I'll be at home to remind them its as valid as the story of cinderella)

What really really really bothers me however is that these schools are state funded but give preference to Catholics. That's just not on. They should not be allowed to do that.

robindch

prinz wrote: »

It's one thing for people or the State to establish a secular schooling system but it's quite another for the State to basically make land-grabs or to seek to put certain people outside of the classroom regardless of their teaching experience and skills etc.

Nobody is asking to fire teachers who are priests, at least, not the ones who've not been involved in the ongoing clerical abuse scandal.

And the state is not involved in a "land grab", since the church has failed to hand over (so far as I'm aware) so hand over so much as a single school to the state in payment for the residential abuse settlement. Not that handing them over is going to change much, since the state isn't going to sell the schools.

All that us lot want is to have access to the country's schools on the same terms that are enjoyed by members of the religious organizations who control the schools.

We all pay the same taxes, but when it comes to schools, the non-religious are second-class citizens.

#15

prinz wrote: »

I think people are mistaking schools run by a branch/under the auspices of a certain religion and a forcing of religion onto students. It simply isn't the case in many schools, particularly at second level.

However, it most definitely is the case at primary level.

PeterIanStaker

Beruthiel wrote: »

Are you talking about accommodating religion?
Because that should be kept to the home.

Well said. This religious domination is backward in this day and age.

Replace the silly amount of time wasted on religious indoctrination in our schools with extra literacy and numeracy, as well as ethics, physical fitness and encourage art and music.

byhookorbycrook

A private consortium to rule schools may not be a good idea. A friend is just back from UAE, teaching in a private school. They are TOTALLY under-resourced- she doesn't even have crayons-as the company seek to maximise profit.

bmaxi

I would have thought the RC church is the ultimate in private companies, it's stated aims may not include making a profit but that doesn't stop it from doing so. It has a CEO and a board of directors, millions of (non-voting) shareholders and an end product which it seeks to sell to the public.

kraggy

Eric DoyleHiggins wrote: »

Most by far of our schools are private corporations.

Excuse me?

prinz

robindch wrote: »

Nobody is asking to fire teachers who are priests, at least, not the ones who've not been involved in the ongoing clerical abuse scandal..

Well that may be your stance but when people fire out comments like 'religion should not be tolerated in schools' it makes me wonder. Are they going to tolerate a monk teaching languages or history for example? Or is someone going to have to sit in on his class to make sure he never mentions his faith? Is he going to be allowed wear his habit whilst teaching? Otherwise it would be a religious symbol surely that should be kept out?

robindch wrote: »

All that us lot want is to have access to the country's schools on the same terms that are enjoyed by members of the religious organizations who control the schools...

There IS access but it seems access to the schools doesn't go far enough. Not only is access required, the school is expected to change to suit the student, and the student is not expected to accomodate the school.

Either way, I support secular state schools anyway, particular up to secondary level. It does nobody any favours to mix schooling and religion prior to that. The problem is IMO it's up to the State to provide this, not up to the religious organisations to do so. The focus on this thread and others seem to be an anti-religious rant rather than a focused effort on getting the politicians into place to make it happen.

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Replace the silly amount of time wasted on religious indoctrination in our schools with extra literacy and numeracy, as well as ethics, physical fitness and encourage art and music.

Or you know, just do them all?

bmaxi wrote: »

I would have thought the RC church is the ultimate in private companies, it's stated aims may not include making a profit but that doesn't stop it from doing so. It has a CEO and a board of directors, millions of (non-voting) shareholders and an end product which
it seeks to sell to the public.

:rolleyes:

sarumite

prinz wrote: »

I think people are mistaking schools run by a branch/under the auspices of a certain religion and a forcing of religion onto students. It simply isn't the case in many schools, particularly at second level.

I have posted on this before. I attended a secondary school (in the North Kildare constituency) which was founded by and still belonged to and carried the ethos of a Catholic order. There were no prayers. Students were invited to a mass once a year which in which attendance was optional. There was a school chaplain who met students in a 'spiritual room' not given over to any one religion. There were Catholic, a variety of Protestant, Jewish and Muslim as well as students of other/no religious affiliations whatsoever. Not once in my time at this school was religion ever an issue. Religious classes were offered but these were (a) optional and (b) multi-denominational, going through all the major world religions, background, beliefs, customs, geography, including guest speakers of different faiths and again a guest speaker of no faith at all. Some members of the Catholic order were teachers in the school, and excellent teachers at that.

I find it repulsive that someone would seek to have this school repossessed and/or remove the monks from their teaching posts. A school with a Catholic or Protestant or whatever history does not mean that the students are sitting around all day being brainwashed into a particular faith.

It's one thing for people or the State to establish a secular schooling system but it's quite another for the State to basically make land-grabs or to seek to put certain people outside of the classroom regardless of their teaching experience and skills etc.

I had a different experience at primary level. I went to a Catholic primary school in Fingal contry, Dublin. We did religious class, we went to mass at easter and learned about the Catholic religion (and only the Catholic religion). This teaching was paid for by taxpayers. I don't think the government should be able to make a land grab (it is the Church's property), though as long as the government is paying for the running of the school, they should be able to demand secular education.

JustinDee

As long as a school teaches subjects on the syllabus set out by the education authority, it should be allowed to do this under whichever ethos it wants to, within the law.
Unless this is not the case, how that school strives to get the best out of its students to prepare them for their cert exams is nobody else's business.

mgmt

I went to the local catholic primary school. The state paid teachers pushed catholic ****e everyday on us, prayers twice a day and religion class. We had to go to confessions every month and at lunch we threw stones at the protestants kids in the school beside ours :eek:

State funded religion and segregation is wrong.

Bottle_of_Smoke

How often to priests check for bugs in the coffession box?

Would be pretty easy for a schoolchild to aquire a basic one off the internet. If they did that at your place mgmt hilarity would soon ensue.

KeithAFC

mgmt wrote: »

I went to the local catholic primary school. The state paid teachers pushed catholic ****e everyday on us, prayers twice a day and religion class. We had to go to confessions every month and at lunch we threw stones at the protestants kids in the school beside ours :eek:

State funded religion and segregation is wrong.

I can't say it is a surprise. The power Rome has had on this Island has gone on for far too long now. They should keep religion out of schools imo in general.

Manach

I would take the contrary view to must, and state that Church education is has a long historical precedent, plus is of very high standards.

gurramok

I went to the local catholic primary school also. At age 4 in my first year and subsequent years, we were made to learn off by heart the Hail Mary and Our Father prayers which were said before the day began and when the day ended. Something like a Madrassa would have been proud of in the equivalent Muslim faith.

Also we were forced to go to confession and church regularly. This was in the 80's.

This did not happen in Secondary school though we did have compulsory attendance to the Religion class and only the Catholic religion was taught whether you liked it or not.

And one wonders why so many who can make decisions by themselves when they grow up detested religion forced down their throats in their childhood.

bmaxi

Religion has no place in education. The church, through it's schools, takes our children at their most impressionable at feeds them their propaganda.
Some years ago I had to take issue with the principal of my daughter's school when my daughter came home and related the story of how the Titanic sank because the number of the ship, when viewed in a mirror, spelled "no Pope here" and that it was built by H&W in Belfast and that was why. No compassion for 1500 people of all persuasions who were lost, just venomous lies.This didn't come from another seven year old but from her teacher in religion class.
I was consumed with rage that this was the sort of drivel being taught to my child but I couldn't have her removed from the class and the principal wouldn't take it up with the teacher because it was hearsay, as if a seven year old would dream up such claptrap.
Is it any wonder we have sectarian problems in the country, no effort is made to teach about other faiths or why they differ from Catholicism, it's just a case of "this is the truth and you'd better believe it or suffer the consequences".
The sooner the country finally closes the door on this iniquity the better.

JustinDee

mgmt wrote: »

I went to the local catholic primary school. The state paid teachers pushed catholic ****e everyday on us, prayers twice a day and religion class. We had to go to confessions every month and at lunch we threw stones at the protestants kids in the school beside ours :eek:
State funded religion and segregation is wrong.

I went to a 'protestant' primary school myself and experienced none of the above. Nor at the 'protestant' secondary school I went to (and my secondary years started in the early 80s).

Just because some religious oonies spoil it for whoever comes their way, the rights of others, who might want to send their children to a particular type of school, don't have to be scuttled either.

mgmt

JustinDee wrote: »

Just because some religious oonies spoil it for whoever comes their way, the rights of others, who might want to send their children to a particular type of school, don't have to be scuttled either.

If you want to send your child to a religious school, fine. But it should be a private school. No public funds should be used to fund a non-scientific belief/faith.

JustinDee

mgmt wrote: »

If you want to send your child to a religious school, fine. But it should be a private school. No public funds should be used to fund a non-scientific belief/faith.

Any school teaching the national syllabus is quite rightly entitled to state funding. Not all schools receive same as each other.

prinz

bmaxi wrote: »

Religion has no place in education. The church, through it's schools, takes our children at their most impressionable at feeds them their propaganda. Some years ago I had to take issue with the principal of my daughter's school when my daughter came home and related the story of how the Titanic sank because the number of the ship, when viewed in a mirror, spelled "no Pope here" and that it was built by H&W in Belfast and that was why. No compassion for 1500 people of all persuasions who were lost, just venomous lies.This didn't come from another seven year old but from her teacher in religion class.

:pac: That has nothing to do with religion tbh. Any idea why they were discussing the reasons behind the Titanic sinking in religion class to begin with? I agree that having ill educated teachers teaching whatever the hell they want (especially ham-fisted attempts at Catholicism) is a waste of time.

bmaxi wrote: »

I was consumed with rage that this was the sort of drivel being taught to my child but I couldn't have her removed from the class and the principal wouldn't take it up with the teacher because it was hearsay, as if a seven year old would dream up such claptrap..

Is she still in the same school? I would have threatened to walk and contacted other parents asking them what their kids had to say. What did you do?

bmaxi wrote: »

Is it any wonder we have sectarian problems in the country, no effort is made to teach about other faiths or why they differ from Catholicism, it's just a case of "this is the truth and you'd better believe it or suffer the consequences". The sooner the country finally closes the door on this iniquity the better.

Except in many (I would guess the vast majority) efforts are made. But you got your thanks anyway because it's anti-religion. Notice the same people didn't thank posts by posters who had a different experience to the one you mentioned?

prinz

mgmt wrote: »

If you want to send your child to a religious school, fine. But it should be a private school. No public funds should be used to fund a non-scientific belief/faith.

Do we also ban schools from teaching philosophy?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

I have posted on this before. I attended a secondary school (in the North Kildare constituency) which was founded by and still belonged to and carried the ethos of a Catholic order. There were no prayers. Students were invited to a mass once a year which in which attendance was optional. There was a school chaplain who met students in a 'spiritual room' not given over to any one religion. There were Catholic, a variety of Protestant, Jewish and Muslim as well as students of other/no religious affiliations whatsoever. Not once in my time at this school was religion ever an issue. Religious classes were offered but these were (a) optional and (b) multi-denominational, going through all the major world religions, background, beliefs, customs, geography, including guest speakers of different faiths and again a guest speaker of no faith at all. Some members of the Catholic order were teachers in the school, and excellent teachers at that.

...........

And this is typical of how schools are run in this state, is it...?

Nodin

prinz wrote: »

Do we also ban schools from teaching philosophy?

You'll find that Philosophy as a subject doesn't confine itself to one particular school.

bmaxi

prinz wrote: »

:pac: That has nothing to do with religion tbh. Any idea why they were discussing the reasons behind the Titanic sinking in religion class to begin with? I agree that having ill educated teachers teaching whatever the hell they want (especially ham-fisted attempts at Catholicism) is a waste of time.



Is she still in the same school? I would have threatened to walk and contacted other parents asking them what their kids had to say. What did you do?



Except in many (I would guess the vast majority) efforts are made. But you got your thanks anyway because it's anti-religion. Notice the same people didn't thank posts by posters who had a different experience to the one you mentioned?

I have no idea why it was being discussed, it may have been to do with the film which was big at the time. The teacher was a nun so I would guess not ill educated, except in the meaning of religious tolerance, I would say she has retired by now or is dead.
I did consider moving my daughter from the school but decided it would be less detrimental to her just to monitor what she was being taught. I also spoke to other parents and was amazed to discover that some had also heard this story while at school and so weren't greatly surprised, which led me to believe that they had grown up believing it to be true.
You seem to confuse anti-religious with anti-Roman Catholic. I have no reason to be anti-Muslim or anti-Bhuddist because I know next to nothing about them and I'm not anti-Christian because there are so many Christian denominatons I wouldn't know where to begin, but I do know about Roman Catholicism, particularly the version of it peddled in this island and any resemblance between it and Christianity is purely coincidental. Preaching the Gospel does not make you a Christian.

sarumite

JustinDee wrote: »

As long as a school teaches subjects on the syllabus set out by the education authority, it should be allowed to do this under whichever ethos it wants to, within the law.
Unless this is not the case, how that school strives to get the best out of its students to prepare them for their cert exams is nobody else's business.

Surely it is the business of the person paying the wages of the teachers i.e. The tax payer?

prinz

Nodin wrote: »

And this is typical of how schools are run in this state, is it...?

I'd say just about as typical as a teacher blaming the sinking of the Titanic on some sort of anti-Protestant 'serves them right' nonsense, see how many thanks that post got? Did you ask that poster if that was typical? No. No. No. Whatever suits.

Nodin wrote: »

You'll find that Philosophy as a subject doesn't confine itself to one particular school.

Your point being? Is it science based or not? I was highlighting the ridiculousness of linking 'science based subjects' and public funding. You'll find that the vast majority of Relgious classes particularly second level these days aren't confined to one particular school either.

bmaxi wrote: »

You seem to confuse anti-religious with anti-Roman Catholic. I have no reason to be anti-Muslim or anti-Bhuddist because I know next to nothing about them and I'm not anti-Christian because there are so many Christian denominatons I wouldn't know where to begin, but I do know about Roman Catholicism, particularly the version of it peddled in this island and any resemblance between it and Christianity is purely coincidental. Preaching the Gospel does not make you a Christian.

So it's ok for the state to contribute to a school that carries a Muslim, or Jewish or Buddhist or Church of Ireland ethos but not a Roman Catholic one?

As for the nun, I'd have given her such a bollicking it would have put her in an early grave. Peddling that kind of crap she should have been relieved of teaching duties.

bmaxi

prinz wrote: »

s.




So it's ok for the state to contribute to a school that carries a Muslim, or Jewish or Buddhist or Church of Ireland ethos but not a Roman Catholic one?

You really should read the posts.
Because my experiences are with the RC church, I am anti RC. In my first post I said religion has no place in education, that means all religion.

prinz

bmaxi wrote: »

You really should read the posts.
Because my experiences are with the RC church, I am anti RC. In my first post I said religion has no place in education, that means all religion.

Fair enough, just curious. Not sure why you had to point that out.

bmaxi

prinz wrote: »

Fair enough, just curious. Not sure why you had to point that out.

The implication in your post was that it was only the RC church's position in education I was against, that is not the case.