Church and School

Candamir wrote: »

Can't you see the irony here? We all pay for education in our national schools, yet the vast majority of schools are Catholic, and that doesn’t reflect the real demographic.

How do you make out that it doesn't represent the real demographic when the census figures suggests that it actually does?

Many people don’t have a real choice regarding their child’s school. Therefore if you happen to be catholic, you are getting far better service for your taxes than your non catholic neighbour. That’s favouritism/discrimination on the basis of religion.

Are you though? You must surely be aware that most DEIS schools are Catholic patronage. You're basing your valuation on one single factor whereas there are actually multiple factors in reality which will influence a parents ability to choose a school for their child or children, socioeconomic status being a far more relevant factor for many than religion.

There's no discrimination on the part of the State that favours religion in providing for education. The patronage system is open to all organisations and applicants provided they meet the criteria.

Imagine you live in an area where all of the schools (or at least the ones that are a viable option for you) practice Scientology. Imagine these schools are state funded through your taxes. How comfortable does that make you feel? How comfortable do you feel when the school are attending a Scientology ‘service’ or workshop - not just as a cultural visit like the synagogue /mosque examples earlier - but to participate. Do you think it’s fair that you must either let your child attend, or take time off work (if that’s even possible - it’s not for many) to take your child home? There’s no equality there.

There's no reality in that hypothetical scenario either. But then there wouldn't be, because it's one you came up with which ignores many other factors which would generally be considered relevant, like socioeconomic factors for example and the potential for social mobility.

And that's even before we get to addressing the fact that if religious education were indeed so terrible, useless, and all the rest of it, that doesn't appear to have been an imposition on all these working parents employment prospects who were educated in the same way as their children!

School should be for school. Home and church should be for religion.

School is for school, and the ethos of most schools in Ireland is based upon religion, which is the raison d'etre for those schools. Home and Church are for religion, and school is for religion too for people who want their children to be educated according to their beliefs and values. If you want a different type of education for your children, I would support your efforts, but if you would try and deny my right to choose the type of education I want for my child, then I'm afraid it's only yourself who can't see the irony there.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

How do you make out that it doesn't represent the real demographic when the census figures suggests that it actually does?

95% catholic schools v 78% identifying as catholic on the census. And that doesn’t even take into account that many don’t actually practice. So, no. It doesn’t represent the actual demographic.

There's no reality in that hypothetical scenario either. But then there wouldn't be, because it's one you came up with which ignores many other factors which would generally be considered relevant, like socioeconomic factors for example and the potential for social mobility.

And that's even before we get to addressing the fact that if religious education were indeed so terrible, useless, and all the rest of it, that doesn't appear to have been an imposition on all these working parents employment prospects who were educated in the same way as their children!

Of course there’s no reality to it. But it reflects the way some non catholic/religious people might feel about sending their children to catholic schools, when in reality they have no choice. I was hoping it might help people who favour the status quo to see things from another’s prospective.

And nobody is saying that a religious education is terrible. Where did you get that idea? I would argue that the time could be better spent elsewhere.

School is for school, and the ethos of most schools in Ireland is based upon religion, which is the raison d'etre for those schools. Home and Church are for religion, and school is for religion too for people who want their children to be educated according to their beliefs and values. If you want a different type of education for your children, I would support your efforts, but if you would try and deny my right to choose the type of education I want for my child, then I'm afraid it's only yourself who can't see the irony there.

I’d be happy for my children to be educated in a non religious environment, where the time is spent on education and not faith formation. But you seem happy to de facto deny my right to choose that for my child.

Candamir wrote: »

I’d be happy for my children to be educated in a non religious environment, where the time is spent on education and not faith formation. But you seem happy to de facto deny my right to choose that for my child.

We could go back and forth on the rest of your post and still get nowhere, but as for the bit I've highlighted there, I don't know how you make that out as I'm not interfering with your rights as your child's parent with regard to your child's education, in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

(1) - does this include supporting a completely secular education in a state-sponsored school?

Not entirely. For example I would support the establishment of said schools, but I wouldn't send my child to one.

(2) - no one is - they're only interested in their own kids.

The eradication of the type of school I would want for my child would be an attempt to infringe on my right as my child's parent to enrol them in a school which is congruent with my beliefs, values and philosophy. Some posters are indeed understandably only like myself interested in their own children's welfare and education, but you can't ignore the fact that there are many posters who are attempting to argue what they imagine is more beneficial to all children, from their perspective. They don't appear to appreciate or even want to acknowledge that other people do not share their perspective.

People lose all sense of reason once religion is thrown into the mix.

The whole school is taking part in activity off site. You don't want your child to take part. Your child cannot stay in the school alone and they do not provide a child minding service. What are you expecting?

The school isn't excluding your child, the school has not refused to educate your child and they have not refused to take care of your child during school times.

MadDog76 wrote: »

I was born, and raised, Catholic ......... I was Baptised, attended a Christian Brothers school, made my Communion and Confirmation, got married in a Catholic Church and will be buried in a Catholic cemetery after a Catholic service.

I celebrate Christmas, St. Patrick's Day and Easter with/for my children ......... I put "Roman Catholic" on the census for myself, wife and children.

I'm not religious, I don't attend Mass regularly (Christenings, Weddings, Funerals etc.) and I don't believe in God any more than I believe in Santa Claus, Leprechauns or the Easter Bunny .......... so "indoctrination" didn't work in my case.
Yet I'm passionate about my children being raised Catholic with all the traditions that go with being Catholic, ie. attending a Catholic school, celebrating Christmas, Communion, Confirmation and so on because it's a tradition that I want my children to experience and enjoy as I did over the years.

Regards the Op, if there's an activity in school that I don't wish my children to take part in I simply keep them at home with either myself or my wife because it's our choice that they don't participate in said activity so it's our responsibility to make alternative arrangements.

If you don't believe in God how can you be Catholic?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Not entirely. For example I would support the establishment of said schools, but I wouldn't send my child to one.





The eradication of the type of school I would want for my child would be an attempt to infringe on my right as my child's parent to enrol them in a school which is congruent with my beliefs, values and philosophy. Some posters are indeed understandably only like myself interested in their own children's welfare and education, but you can't ignore the fact that there are many posters who are attempting to argue what they imagine is more beneficial to all children, from their perspective. They don't appear to appreciate or even want to acknowledge that other people do not share their perspective.

and then there are those of us who don't have children, who believe that an education system must be inclusive to all, regardless of religion. that 1 religion must not be favoured, or given a higher status then other religions.

MadDog76 wrote: »

I was born, and raised, Catholic ......... I was Baptised, attended a Christian Brothers school, made my Communion and Confirmation, got married in a Catholic Church and will be buried in a Catholic cemetery after a Catholic service.

I celebrate Christmas, St. Patrick's Day and Easter with/for my children ......... I put "Roman Catholic" on the census for myself, wife and children.

I'm not religious, I don't attend Mass regularly (Christenings, Weddings, Funerals etc.) and I don't believe in God any more than I believe in Santa Claus, Leprechauns or the Easter Bunny .......... so "indoctrination" didn't work in my case.
Yet I'm passionate about my children being raised Catholic with all the traditions that go with being Catholic, ie. attending a Catholic school, celebrating Christmas, Communion, Confirmation and so on because it's a tradition that I want my children to experience and enjoy as I did over the years.

Regards the Op, if there's an activity in school that I don't wish my children to take part in I simply keep them at home with either myself or my wife because it's our choice that they don't participate in said activity so it's our responsibility to make alternative arrangements.

catholicism is not a tradition. it's a religion. if you claim to raise your children "catholic" but all of you no more believe in it then a dog, then you are not catholic. you are using it for convenience reasons, or you are involved in it because you are afraid to break away from it. but you are not catholic.

MadDog76 wrote: »

I'm a Catholic by tradition, not by belief and I wish to continue that tradition with/for my children ............ you could say I "indentify" as being Catholic without having the Rosary Beads to hand.

you cannot be catholic by tradition. you cannot identify as catholic when you don't believe in the religion. you are either a catholic or your not, and you aren't.

MadDog76 wrote: »

Not exactly .......... I'm a non-religious Catholic!

I know you're upset because I don't fit into any of your categories ........ I'm not a bible-bashing Catholic fanatic, I'm not just going along with the Catholic ethos for convenience sake so none of your "arguments" work on me!

I'm not upset at all, it doesn't bother me what you do. I just don't see how you can call yourself religious when you don't believe in God. I get what you say about the traditional stuff but that doesn't make you religious. You are just going through the motions.

MadDog76 wrote: »

Being ridiculous and petty is standard form for the new non-religious it would seem ........ they're a funny ol' bunch if you ask me!

But you're non religious. You don't believe in God. You're following traditions, without any foundation of belief.