Dirty Forehead Day

Uriel. wrote: »

Good story and all, but again it doesn't change the fact that you might have to live by the particular rules of the school you have chosen. Similarly if you choose a particular school, you don't usually have a choice on the type or colour of the uniform etc...

You weigh up your options and the pros and cons of each and make a decision but if you send a child to a RC school, whether the child is raised as a practicing catholic or not, the child may have to receive ashes and or partake in other catholic practices like prayers etc... Them's the choices. No point in complaining about it - btw I am not saying you specifically are complaining about it.

I have a right to complain about whatever the hell I like because the school is funded by my taxes.

However, I'm a pragmatist and I respect that other parents might feel differently and you can't please everyone.

I do think that since RC schools effectively have a duty to educate kids of various (and no) denominations that they should make an effort to make each child feel that their beliefs (or those of their parents) are respected, and not just marginalise them. For instance, doing something fun with the Muslims, atheists etc around first communion time so that people do not feel pressured into hypocrisy.

El Siglo

fryup wrote: »

Yes but some parents have no choice but to send their kids to the local RC school (financial, location reasons etc).

That's not my problem, if someone is so ardently opposed to any religious affiliation of a school then that's their perogative to send their child to a non-denominational school. The state provides the teachers, not the land or the school building.

And anyway it should be up to the parents themselves to bring their own kids to the local chapel on ash wednesday.

Yes, and I've been in a situation where the parents have requested their son and/or daughter to not go to mass etc... for various reasons (usually Protestant/Jehovah's Witnesses).

my bottom line.. is all state funded schools should be secular as it is in France, religion should be taught outside school hours

Ever read the constitution?

These are the first lines from Bunreacht na hÉireann;

CONSTITUTION OF IRELAND

In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred,

We, the people of Éire,

Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial,

Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation,

And seeking to promote the common good, with due observance of Prudence, Justice and Charity, so that the dignity and freedom of the individual may be assured, true social order attained, the unity of our country restored, and concord established with other nations,

Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution.

We're not a secular state in the same sense as France, there is religious tolerance and one should be very lucky because up until 1973 the RC still had that "special place" in said document. It can be one of two ways, deny all funding to schools run by religious orders and put it into the educate together schools or buy up the land owned by the church. Either way, everyone gets fucked because people get bent out of shape because of their new found atheism. And for the record, Religion in school is taught like History or Geography; it's a subject. Not a fucking brainwashing exercise.

I'm not religious in any way, but this is the reality and if it ain't broken, don't fix it. Especially when we're going to see more austerity come down the line, the quality of the education counts not whether their is a specific RC ethos. The time to secularise primary education was during the boom years, when land the land was available and prior to Michael Woods' deal with the Church (i.e. limiting Church liabilities to €128 million), the church would have offloaded a tonne of land on the cheap to the state.

El Siglo wrote: »

The state provides the teachers, not the land or the school building.

How did the Church come to own those assets?

Uriel.

Lumen wrote: »

I have a right to complain about whatever the hell I like because the school is funded by my taxes.

However, I'm a pragmatist and I respect that other parents might feel differently and you can't please everyone.

I do think that since RC schools effectively have a duty to educate kids of various (and no) denominations that they should make an effort to make each child feel that their beliefs (or those of their parents) are respected, and not just marginalise them. For instance, doing something fun with the Muslims, atheists etc around first communion time so that people do not feel pressured into hypocrisy.

That's fair enough, you may not have seen my additional edit before you posted. I think most RC schools these days do leave it as a choice rather than compulsory

Kiera

I don’t have a religion but I’m not gonna blast others for practising theirs. Makes people like you look very childish and ignorant.

stovelid

I'm an atheist and as far as belief in secular things go, I'm involved locally with Educate Together. I'm also old enough to have been involved in the pro-choice campaigns of the 90s. While I disllike the Catholic church as an organisation, disrespecting people's faith (a lot of which goes on here) is smug and intolerant. As long as they don't interfere with other people or justify abhorrent actions, the beef should be with the organisation and actual culprits, not the ordinary believers.

I know somebody who wouldn't go to the church wedding of a friend in order to assert their atheist principles and thought they should grow up, to be honest.

fryup

fryup wrote: »

my bottom line.. is all state funded schools should be secular as it is in France, religion should be taught outside school hours

El Siglo wrote: »

Ever read the constitution?

well its high time it was changed

and also who wrote the constitution > a conservative catholic :cool:

El Siglo wrote: »

We're not a secular state in the same sense as France, there is religious tolerance .

really

El Siglo wrote: »

And for the record, Religion in school is taught like History or Geography; it's a subject. Not a fucking brainwashing exercise.

well in the early days of the state it was

Dr. Greenthumb

Lumen wrote: »

I have a right to complain about whatever the hell I like because the school is funded by my taxes.

You must have a massive tax bill!! I hope the other few hundred parents thank you!

Dr. Greenthumb wrote: »

You must have a massive tax bill!! I hope the other few hundred parents thank you!

When I told them I was an atheist they named a toilet block after me.

El Siglo

Lumen wrote: »

How did the Church come to own those assets?

They bought the land during the 19th and early 20th Century I'd imagine, you know after the whole Catholic Relief Act and Famine... Have you considered maybe reading a history book on the matter? They hardly stole the land now.

fryup wrote: »

well its high time it was changed

and also who wrote the constitution > a conservative catholic :cool:

And it's been changed a hell of a lot since then, so what's the problem? Even the Proclamation has a reference to God as well, which Connolly didn't seem to have a beef with since he signed it, and he wouldn't be what one might consider a practicing Catholic. Sure you can't be a King/Queen of England if you're in the RC, the US replaced "e pluribus unum" ("out of many, one") with "In God we trust". We're not alone on this and it doesn't make us some degenerate, backward country.

really

Yes? Do you see bible nut jobs here? If you think the South is bad, come up to Northern Ireland where our Environment Minister is a Young Earth Creationist.

well in the early days of the state it was

And in the early days of the state, England was to blame for all our troubles, Collins or deValera were God depending on who you spoke to. That was then, this is now. Religion is a school subject taught in the Leaving Cert, nothing more, nothing less.

PrincessLola

It sucks that the vast majority of schools are still catholic, but at least there is more of a choice nowadays with educate together and all.

Do i think the Op is off the mark?
Yup.
Does being a secular state mean folk wont or wont be able to get ash on their noggin?
No and neither should it.
But please stop trotting out the line about 'if you dont like it go to a secular school'.
There simply are not enough of them.
Catholic schools are state funded and supply of Rc schools outstrips demand and i dont just mean in relation to the number of catholics on the census. Many catholics see that taking up education time with faith in state run schools is wrong and would have no objection to removing religion from schools. Heck even the Bishops see this.
Faith in my opinion should be extra curricular.

mathie

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056202121

The ironing is delicious.

keano_afc

What we need on boards is a forum or fora to deal with religious issues.

keano_afc wrote: »

What we need on boards is a forum or fora to deal with religious issues.

We have a number of them. We also have forums for politics, news items and various other (almost or even all?) issues that are posted to After Hours.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's not brainwashing, it's education!:)

And as for being secular. Iwouldn't hold my breath if i was you, but at least we're heading in the righ direction.

Hard to believe but Ireland is officially secular. In the same way that George Michael was straight in the Wham days.

keano_afc

twinQuins wrote: »

We have a number of them. We also have forums for politics, news items and various other (almost or even all?) issues that are posted to After Hours.

sar·casm
/ˈsɑrkæzəm/ Show Spelled[sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1.
harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2.
a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.

fakearms123

I remember back in the school days on Ash Wednesday when they would take us out of class for a few minutes and keeping in mind I was in an all boys school, the lads would walk in one by one and we'd all assess who had the biggest blotch of ash on our foreheads and praise the lad who had the biggest, then turn to the lad who has the smallest and make fun of him...

things haven't really changed since then

/weeps uncontrollably

El Siglo wrote: »

They bought the land during the 19th and early 20th Century I'd imagine, you know after the whole Catholic Relief Act and Famine... Have you considered maybe reading a history book on the matter? They hardly stole the land now.

I looked for some history online but didn't find much. However, from here...

In 1831 primary education came to Ireland. This meant that children no longer had to attend fee paying schools or charity schools. Instead they could attend a local primary school. A National Board of Education was set up and a national system of primary schools began in Ireland. The government gave a grant which paid for almost all of the building costs of new national schools as well as the salaries of the teachers. Any area that wanted a school had to apply for a grant to build it.

So I don't think it's quite as simple as "the Church rightfully owns them", if that's what you were suggesting, and historically the Church and State have been so intertwined I'm not even sure it's possible to seperate one set of interests from the other.

And since even the Church now believes that it should hand over ownership, it's a bit of a moot point.

keano_afc wrote: »

sar·casm
/ˈsɑrkæzəm/ Show Spelled[sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1.
harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2.
a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.

Are you also aware that tone isn't conveyed well through text?

123balltv

I dont need no ashes on my head to believe in God
God is my heart not forehead

Lumen wrote: »

I have a right to complain about whatever the hell I like because the school is funded by my taxes.

However, I'm a pragmatist and I respect that other parents might feel differently and you can't please everyone.

I do think that since RC schools effectively have a duty to educate kids of various (and no) denominations that they should make an effort to make each child feel that their beliefs (or those of their parents) are respected, and not just marginalise them. For instance, doing something fun with the Muslims, atheists etc around first communion time so that people do not feel pressured into hypocrisy.

You cant accomodate all religions and none in schools and I dont see why its expected. And 'not teaching one particular religion' is not the same as 'teaching atheism'
Whats wrong with parents doing the teaching them selves. Instilling and instructing a particular religion belongs in school how?
Do they instruct in astrology in schools? A huge number of people read their signs daily and believe it so why not?
Im not having a go or mocking but I genuinely dont see how faith in supernatural entitys belongs in education time.
Can anyone explain with out the old 'if you dont like it' bull cos that isnt an answer.
Thanks

El Siglo

Lumen wrote: »

I looked for some history online but didn't find much. However, from here...

So you're using Ask about Ireland to base your argument, not something like a history book. The whole principle behind the state (in the 19th Century the British government) support was that it was part of a whole raft of reform; tithe reform, police reform (RIC), electoral reform and indeed education reform. When you essentially impose austere measures on a population for several decades on the basis of who lost a war in the 17th Century, well its up to the state to start making amendments. Hence state support for RC schools.

So I don't think it's quite as simple as "the Church rightfully owns them", if that's what you were suggesting, and historically the Church and State have been so intertwined I'm not even sure it's possible to seperate one set of interests from the other.

Yes, the Church and the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (1801-1821) were so harmoniously linked... It's not as if an RC Cardinal came over to set up UCD or anything in direct response to the UK government setting up non-denominational universities... Or as one famous Irish ballad of 1820s put it prior to Catholic Emancipation taking place;

"Oh Wellington, sure you know it is true,
In blood we were drenched at famous Waterloo,
We fought for our king to uphold his crown,
Our only reward was - Papists lie down!"

And since even the Church now believes that it should hand over ownership, it's a bit of a moot point.

The Church is in debt, but so is the state - both equally in trouble.

Back to the old grind for me!

twinQuins wrote: »

Are you also aware that tone isn't conveyed well through text?

are you being sarcastic?:)

No, when you say something sarcastically it's usually possible to tell when it's done due to the tone used in saying it.

Text lacks the kind of nuance that speech does so it's not always possible to tell when someone is being sarcastic or sincere.

stimpson

twinQuins wrote: »

Text lacks the kind of nuance that speech does so it's not always possible to tell when someone is being sarcastic or sincere.

/looks at thread title.

<sarcasm>Riiiiiiiiiggggghhhttt</sarcasm>

Anyway, back on topic. Was I the only one walking around town today saying "Headshot!" to myself?

mathie

twinQuins wrote: »

No, when you say something sarcastically it's usually possible to tell when it's done due to the tone used in saying it.

Text lacks the kind of nuance that speech does so it's not always possible to tell when someone is being sarcastic or sincere.

No 5hit.

strobe

bluewolf wrote: »

Wait do they bring the kids during school hours?
I went to a catholic primary and we didnt, anyone who wanted it went themselves before or after school

Yeah we, everyone in my primary school, were all brought down at different times during the school day, a class at a time.

El Siglo wrote: »

So you're using Ask about Ireland to base your argument, not something like a history book.

I don't have a history book to hand, and this is the internet. Feel free to provide better sources.

El Siglo wrote: »

The whole principle behind the state (in the 19th Century the British government) support was that it was part of a whole raft of reform; tithe reform, police reform (RIC), electoral reform and indeed education reform. When you essentially impose austere measures on a population for several decades on the basis of who lost a war in the 17th Century, well its up to the state to start making amendments. Hence state support for RC schools.

OK, thanks for the history lesson, however I'm not sure whether you're agreeing or disagreeing with me. If the State has provided such support to RC schools (including such critical aspects as paying to build them) and other direct support to the Church (e.g. bailing them out on abuse compensation) then I don't really see the moral argument for letting the Church keep them. If it is constitutionally acceptable to nationalise private assets through NAMA it is surely possible to nationalise private assets of the Church supported in various ways by the State over centuries.