Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

NO NO NO Schools have to include religion classes, forum told

Options
1…1011131516…32

Comments

  • Options
    #362
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    gvn wrote: »
    So, philologos, you want a secular government that provides faith schools in addition to secular schools? Is that not a bit of a contradiction?

    What would be wrong with that? If practising Catholics and practising Protestants have to pay tax to educate the children of secularists, why should secularists not be required to pay tax to educate the children of practising Catholics and practising Protestants?


  • Options
    #363
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    crucamim wrote: »
    What would be wrong with that? If practising Catholics and practising Protestants have to pay tax to educate the children of secularists, why should secularists not be required to pay tax to educate the children of practising Catholics and practising Protestants?

    Because um Catholics and Protestants, might, just might, also be secularists ya know.;)


  • Options
    #364
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Where is the bloody irony there? You are segregating the kids from each other.

    Very true. I approve of segregation. I approve of choice. I respect diversity. I am a liberal.


  • Options
    #365
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    crucamim wrote: »
    Very true. I approve of segregation. I approve of choice. I respect diversity. I am a liberal.

    Segregation is the worst possible thing in ANY society.


  • Options
    #366
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    Knasher wrote: »
    I find it weird that anybody would think that segregating kids so that they don't interact with anybody who hold a different religious belief is anything more than religious segregation.

    It is religious segregation and I agree with it. It says in the bible "Come ye out from among them".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #367
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Segregation is the worst possible thing in ANY society.

    Some people think that. I do not. I think that tyranny is the worst possible thing in ANY society. But I might be wrong. We will just have to agree to differ.


  • Options
    #368
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    crucamim wrote: »
    It is religious segregation and I agree with it. It says in the bible "Come ye out from among them".

    How about sending black children to one school and white children to another?

    I can't see a distinction between a) sending children of different ethnicity to different schools, and b) sending children to different schools because of the beliefs of their parents.

    On what basis can you say that a) is right and b) is wrong?


  • Options
    #369
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Jakkass I attached two pdfs that were stored on my harddrive. Not exactly what you were looking for but it is a place to start and they are very interesting reads.. :)


  • Options
    #370
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,751 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    crucamim wrote: »

    Leave that to the authorities of each school to decide.
    why should the religious instruction be done during the school day?
    Some people think that. I disagree. I think that Muslims, Jews, Hindus etc have a right to their own schools.
    So every town and village gets every permutation of public schools? Who pays for all these schools?
    Why should Catholics lose their schools just because foreigners who are not Catholics have settled in Ireland?
    Who said anything about foreigners? The non-religious grouping is growing among native Irish people. Plus not every Irish person is Catholic.
    I find it ironic that a person who wants children to be able to cope with diversity wants to prevent diversity of choice in education.

    You find it ironic that I promote diversity and want kids of all religions/races educated together in a secular school?:confused:

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #371
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    gvn wrote: »
    How about sending black children to one school and white children to another?

    I can't see a distinction between a) sending children of different ethnicity to different schools, and b) sending children to different schools because of the beliefs of their parents.

    On what basis can you say that a) is right and b) is wrong?

    They would both be right.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #372
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    crucamim wrote: »
    They would both be right.

    So the seperation of children based on their ethnicity is, to you, right. Ok. How can you maintain that belief while also claiming to be a liberal? Is the cognitive dissonance not painful?


  • Options
    #373
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Jakkass
    :o
    Apologies I'll try not to let it happen again.
    crucamim wrote: »
    They would both be right.

    . . .


  • Options
    #374
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    koth wrote: »

    "why should the religious instruction be done during the school day?"

    Because the owners of the school want it.

    "So every town and village gets every permutation of public schools? Who pays for all these schools?"

    If they so wish. Who would pay? Same as with the current regime. The owners of the school pay part and the State pays the larger part. I would prefer that no school received public funds and that child benefit were increased to enable parents to pay fees to maintain the schools of their choice.

    "Who said anything about foreigners? The non-religious grouping is growing among native Irish people. Plus not every Irish person is Catholic."

    Very well then. Why should Catholics lose their schools because some people are not Catholic. Why should the GAA lose any of its property because some people want to play rugby or soccer?

    "You find it ironic that I promote diversity and want kids of all religions/races educated together in a secular school?:confused:"

    Indeed, I do.


  • Options
    #375
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    gvn wrote: »
    So the seperation of children based on their ethnicity is, to you, right. Ok. How can you maintain that belief while also claiming to be a liberal? Is the cognitive dissonance not painful?

    What is "cognitve dissonance"? Plain English please.

    I claim to be a liberal because I am a liberal - a real liberal. I respect the right of parental choice. I respect the right of Catholics to be Catholics. I respect the right of Catholics to refuse to allow their children to be taught by people who believe that the Pope is an anti-Christ. I respect the right of Protestants to refuse to allow their children to be taught by anyone who believes that the Pope is the son of God. Protestants have a right to be Protestants. And Muslims have a right to be Muslims.

    Please try to be a liberal - like me.


  • Options
    #376
    Knasher
    Registered Users Posts: 2,370 ✭✭✭Knasher


    crucamim wrote: »
    They would both be right.
    Just wow.
    crucamim wrote: »
    What is "cognitve dissonance"? Plain English please.

    I claim to be a liberal because I am a liberal - a real liberal. I respect the right of parental choice. I respect the right of Catholics to be Catholics. I respect the right of Catholics to refuse to allow their children to be taught by people who believe that the Pope is an anti-Christ. I respect the right of Protestants to refuse to allow their children to be taught by anyone who believes that the Pope is the son of God. Protestants have a right to be Protestants. And Muslims have a right to be Muslims.

    Please try to be a liberal - like me.

    Your argument amounts so saying that racism is okay so long as the racists want to be racist. I'm glad most liberals aren't like you.


  • Options
    #377
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,751 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    crucamim wrote: »
    Because the owners of the school want it.
    Not good enough. What benefit does having religious instruction done during the school day have?
    If they so wish. Who would pay? Same as with the current regime. The owners of the school pay part and the State pays the larger part. I would prefer that no school received public funds and that child benefit were increased to enable parents to pay fees to maintain the schools of their choice.
    And why should this overly complicated education model be put in place just so Catholics can do a run through of the rosary during the school day (actually happened in my primary school)?
    Very well then. Why should Catholics lose their schools because some people are not Catholic. Why should the GAA lose any of its property because some people want to play rugby or soccer?
    why should parents be forced to join the catholic church just to ensure a place in the local school? Why should any school be allowed to reject an application based on religion?
    Indeed, I do.
    ah, I assumed you knew what irony was. My bad.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #378
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    crucamim wrote: »
    What is "cognitve dissonance"? Plain English please.

    Cognitive dissonance.
    I claim to be a liberal because I am a liberal - a real liberal. I respect the right of parental choice. I respect the right of Catholics to be Catholics. I respect the right of Catholics to refuse to allow their children to be taught by people who believe that the Pope is an anti-Christ. I respect the right of Protestants to refuse to allow their children to be taught by anyone who believes that the Pope is the son of God. Protestants have a right to be Protestants. And Muslims have a right to be Muslims.

    Please try to be a liberal - like me.

    And you also see no wrong with the idea of teaching black children in one school and white children in another. Such a view is anything but liberal.


  • Options
    #379
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    crucamim wrote: »
    What is "cognitve dissonance"? Plain English please.

    I claim to be a liberal because I am a liberal - a real liberal. I respect the right of parental choice. I respect the right of Catholics to be Catholics. I respect the right of Catholics to refuse to allow their children to be taught by people who believe that the Pope is an anti-Christ. I respect the right of Protestants to refuse to allow their children to be taught by anyone who believes that the Pope is the son of God. Protestants have a right to be Protestants. And Muslims have a right to be Muslims.

    Please try to be a liberal - like me.

    Well do you accept that Catholics have the right to be Catholics in a Protestant school or that Children of Iranian ethnicity can enter a school filled with Irish ethnicity?


  • Options
    #380
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Well do you accept that Catholics have the right to be Catholics in a Protestant school or that Children of Iranian ethnicity can enter a school filled with Irish ethnicity?

    What would make you think that they didn't Malty? Having gone to a CofI school a lot of the people I went to school with were from RC background, many of them other Protestant backgrounds such as Methodist, Presbyterian, non-denominational, Pentecostal and so on, and as I went to secondary school we had Jews, Muslims and Sikhs as well. Nothing suggests that this was really a negative thing for any of these people.


  • Options
    #381
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    philologos wrote: »
    What would make you think that they didn't Malty?

    Absolutely nothing made we think that. You just misunderstood me that's all.:)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #382
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    koth wrote: »

    "Not good enough. What benefit does having religious instruction done during the school day have?"

    Please leave that to the owners of the Faith school to decide. As for schools owned by the State, there should be no religious rituals or religious education.

    "And why should this overly complicated education model be put in place just so Catholics can do a run through of the rosary during the school day (actually happened in my primary school)?"

    Such an "overly complicated education model" does not have to be put in place to suit practising Catholics. There already are enough Catholic schools. It is needed to accommodate the wishes of people who are not practising Catholrcs.

    "why should parents be forced to join the catholic church just to ensure a place in the local school?"

    They should not. That is why we need schools for the children of such people.

    "Why should any school be allowed to reject an application based on religion?"

    Catholic schools are for Catholics. Protestant schools are for Protestants. You have a right to refuse to pray alongside Catholics. While Catholics have an equal right to refuse to allow their children to sit in the same classroom as your children.


  • Options
    #383
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    gvn wrote: »
    Cognitive dissonance.



    And you also see no wrong with the idea of teaching black children in one school and white children in another. Such a view is anything but liberal.

    I disagree.


  • Options
    #384
    crucamim
    Registered Users Posts: 897 ✭✭✭crucamim


    Malty_T wrote: »

    Well do you accept that Catholics have the right to be Catholics in a Protestant school?

    Only if the owners of the Protestant school agree. Just as people have a right to play rugby in Croke Park only if the GAA agrees. Just as I have a right sleep overnight in your home only if you agree.


  • Options
    #385
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    crucamim wrote: »
    I disagree.

    I suppose having seperate seats on buses for black people is a liberal idea too, then? I can see no distinction between that and having different schools for different ethnicities.


  • Options
    #386
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,751 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Please leave that to the owners of the Faith school to decide. As for schools owned by the State, there should be no religious rituals or religious education.
    So if a faith school opts to have an hour of prayer every day, you're ok with that?

    Such an "overly complicated education model" does not have to be put in place to suit practising Catholics. There already are enough Catholic schools. It is needed to accommodate the wishes of people who are not practising Catholrcs.
    But the state shouldn't be providing schools to accommodate the various religious groups. Religious instruction should be the responsibility of the parents and their respective religious group, not the primary school teacher in the local school.
    They should not. That is why we need schools for the children of such people.
    It's not possible to provide every required school in every town and village.
    Catholic schools are for Catholics. Protestant schools are for Protestants. You have a right to refuse to pray alongside Catholics. While Catholics have an equal right to refuse to allow their children to sit in the same classroom as your children.

    That sectarian attitude doesn't belong in a primary school. We should be casting off such outdated thinking, not promoting it.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #387
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    crucamim wrote: »
    I approve of segregation. I approve of choice. I respect diversity. I am a liberal.
    You are very confused or a troll.

    Be serious, or be gone.


  • Options
    #388
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I still fail to see why it is the schools responsibility to teach children their faith. Why should the teachers spend even 30 minutes a week teaching children Christianity? If the parents wish for their children to be taught Christianity, why the **** don't they do it themselves?

    I'm sorry, but this whole argument annoys the hell out of me. I fail to see why, if they want religious teaching for their children, why does it need to be done by the school? Even after school? Why can't the parents do it if it's so important to them? Why can't the church organise (and pay for) religion classes outside of school?

    Seriously. Honest question. Why can't the parents do it themselves?


  • Options
    #389
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,406 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Barrington wrote: »
    Why can't the parents do it themselves?
    See that post:
    me wrote:
    It's important because parents won't do it reliably enough, so the church must step in so that it can guarantee a sufficient level of childhood indoctrination so that there will be enough people left in the next generation to populate the church. The tactic has evolved over time for no other reason than it works (like everything else in evolution)
    More generally, there are two modes of religious propagation -- vertical (from generation to generation) and horizontal (from peer to peer).

    Vertical propagation works best in state-controlled environments, so typically vertical and relatively static religions like catholicism require state support for indoctrination through schools, universities, licensing etc to propagate successfully. Horizontal propagation works best outside authoritarian structures, but at the expense of generational consistency -- which is why you get one catholism (but various unpublicized viewpoints), and thousands of protestantisms (with an infinite variety of viewpoints).


  • Options
    #390
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I agree absolutely. There's no doubt in my mind that that's pretty much the main reason the church doesn't want to give it up.

    My point was the parents (and to a lesser extent, some other followers of the church). If they are so concerned about their children getting a religious education, teach them about their religion at home. The parents themselves would have less of an interest in indoctrination in general and would only be focusing on their own children. Then the church could aid this by organising after school classes run by the church too.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #391
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    You're making a mistake that's very frequently made on boards.ie.

    There are many churches in Ireland, there are many religions in Ireland also. As such it isn't about a single church, but it's about faith schools in general. Most religious groups would like to provide parents with the choice not just one. Also churches provide education through many schools, so claiming that they can't organise / do it themselves is a little absurd in retrospect since churches also run many of the schools.


Advertisement