John Waters v Atheist Ireland

robindch

CDfm wrote: »

I have quite a low opinion teachers at the best of times and a group of them will be lower in my estimation particularly school principals. I am not a fan of surveys and would like to see details of the survey methodology sample size etc and how they arrived at their conclusions. You can stack a survey to get the answers you want.

CDfm wrote: »

For a person who believes in factual information you sure have no problem rejecting the facts you dont like

<cough> :rolleyes:

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

That's not a fact

the stastics say between 85 and 88% of people claim catholic affiliation.

Teach them ethics without saying they can't be good without the threat of hell
I'm lost again

Well they dont teach it like that in primary schools nowdays and I barely recognised what was being taught to my kids as Christianity at all.

no thanks. There's a public school around the corner, religious discrimination is illegal and your religion has no special place in this country

I dont agree with everything but you have to accept that movements such as educate together have a point and have found a way of working within the system and being attractive to parents to want to educate their parents.

The discrimination is that your religion and only your religion is taught in 98% of state schools. Also the fact that my child can be refused from a public amenity because of my religious (lack of) beliefs

but your suggestion is that society has to change to accomadate your beliefs rather than you and your family adjusting to it. You cant bend the world to your will.

Coriolanus

CDfm wrote: »

the stastics say between 85 and 88% of people claim catholic affiliation.

The statistics say that 85 and 88% of individually countable census returns had a box adjacent to the word Catholic ticked with a black pen. No more and no less.

CDfm

Nevore wrote: »

The statistics say that 85 and 88% of individually countable census returns had a box adjacent to the word Catholic ticked with a black pen. No more and no less.

You are questioning the accuracy of the Census now

Here is an interesting bit of balanced reporting from the Irish Times.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0617/1224248982529.html
Wednesday, June 17, 2009Catholic control of schooling not tenable, says archbishop

GENEVIEVE CARBERYTHE CATHOLIC near monopoly over schooling is “not tenable” and does not reflect current realities, Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin said last night.
Catholic education had a place in society today, but that did not mean things should not change, he said in a speech to members of the Irish Primary Principals Network in Dublin. He emphasised that Catholic schools could only carry out their role if there were viable alternatives for parents. “It is clear that a system in which 92 per cent of all primary schools are managed by the Roman Catholic Church in a country where the Catholic population is 87 per cent is certainly not tenable,” Archbishop Martin said.
“The current almost monopoly is a historical hangover that doesn’t reflect the realities of the times and is, in addition, in many ways detrimental to the possibility of maintaining a true Catholic identity in Catholic schools.”
The constitutional rights of parents and religious denominations could not be brushed aside by those who say schools should “simply be handed over to the State and the church should return to its sacristies”, he said,
While Catholic schools should be open to all, they should have a “real Catholic ethos,” as in Church of Ireland or Islamic schools. Possible models for the future were also set out by the archbishop, including one which would give parents choice. This model would involve one Catholic school among a wide variety of schools in a catchment area.
The archbishop warned of moving to a new educational situation by “single-issue plebiscite, a panic reaction or a managed strategic action by one grouping”. The process of changing education should be over a period of years, he said. The archbishop suggested that a widely consulting national forum on the future of education should be set up.
Decisions based on the “polemics of the moment” are less likely to be successful, he said. “Education is too important an issue for it to be left just to teachers, or just to the Department of Education, or just to one or other political or religious grouping.”
When setting out his vision for the Catholic school as based on “the belief that God is love”, the archbishop spoke of the Ryan report into abuse. “Sadly, the Ryan report documents systemic failure in that commitment of love,” he said. The archbishop also defended the ability of present day Catholic schools to protect children.
“The impression is at times being given that religiously run schools are somehow or other deficient in the matter of child protection structures and that children in such schools may be at risk.
“The State guidelines Children First operate in schools, in all schools,” he said.

So it shows that there is a will for change.

Coriolanus

CDfm wrote: »

You are questioning the accuracy of the Census now

Yes, I am. On this and a host of other issues. It's a human system prone to human errors. The aforementioned mother entering her son in as Catholic despite him being atheist for example.
It's not a problem unique to Ireland of course. It was interesting to read about the census in one of the American States where gay couple were routinely "heterosexualised" in their census returns because it "must have been a mistake".

I read that article at the time, the Archbishop is to be applauded for the stance of course.

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

the stastics say between 85 and 88% of people claim catholic affiliation.

You and I both know the statistics are vastly inaccurate. Are you seriously suggesting that every single person who ticked the box is a practicing catholic who would support the exclusion of all other ideologies from public schools?

CDfm wrote: »

Well they dont teach it like that in primary schools nowdays and I barely recognised what was being taught to my kids as Christianity at all.

Well one thing it wasn't was all the religions that have a constitutional right to be taught

CDfm wrote: »

I dont agree with everything but you have to accept that movements such as educate together have a point and have found a way of working within the system and being attractive to parents to want to educate their parents.

Yeah they found a way around the fact that they're being discriminated against. The fact that these schools exist shows there's a demand for change. Can you give me a legal (not xenophobic) reason why your ideology and only yours should be taught in schools that are funded from taxes from people of dozens of ideologies?

CDfm wrote: »

but your suggestion is that society has to change to accomadate your beliefs rather than you and your family adjusting to it. You cant bend the world to your will.

Yeah exactly like society had to change to allow women and blacks to have equal rights and how society had to change to decriminalise homosexuality etc etc etc. All I want is equal rights just like everyone else is allowed in the 21st century.

I know you don't want to give up your privileged position but the white slave owners had to because it was immoral and so do you

CDfm

Nevore wrote: »

. It was interesting to read about the census in one of the American States where gay couple were routinely "heterosexualised" in their census returns because it "must have been a mistake".

LOL that must be confusing for everybody.

I read that article at the time, the Archbishop is to be applauded for the stance of course.

But those who do engage and involve themselves are those who will get some of what they want.

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You and I both know the statistics are vastly inaccurate. Are you seriously suggesting that every single person who ticked the box is a practicing catholic who would support the exclusion of all other ideologies from public schools?

I am sure they did. Thats not my point however -my point is that these statistics are those used in formulating public policy. Thats why I used them.

Well one thing it wasn't was all the religions that have a constitutional right to be taught

Which ones dont have that right

Yeah they found a way around the fact that they're being discriminated against. The fact that these schools exist shows there's a demand for change. Can you give me a legal (not xenophobic) reason why your ideology and only yours should be taught in schools that are funded from taxes from people of dozens of ideologies?

I am not being xenophobic and I am for change. Legally the government has an obligation to provide education. It didnt have the means to. You might say it went to bed with the church to achieve this but its the reality.

Rewriting history by conspiracy theorists about the famine years and aftermath doesnt really cut it.

Yeah exactly like society had to change to allow women and blacks to have equal rights and how society had to change to decriminalise homosexuality etc etc etc. All I want is equal rights just like everyone else is allowed in the 21st century.

You should have equal rights but to get them you dont need to trample the rights of others. Why is it so important that people who want there kids to recieve education with a catholic ethos get deprived of that.

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

I am sure they did. Thats not my point however -my point is that these statistics are those used in formulating public policy. Thats why I used them.

so your point is that you used statistics even though you knew they were wrong. Right so

CDfm wrote: »

Which ones dont have that right

Every one except yours

CDfm wrote: »

I am not being xenophobic and I am for change. Legally the government has an obligation to provide education. It didnt have the means to. You might say it went to bed with the church to achieve this but its the reality.

Slavery was reality too

CDfm wrote: »

Rewriting history by conspiracy theorists about the famine years and aftermath doesnt really cut it.

Eh?

CDfm wrote: »

You should have equal rights but to get them you dont need to trample the rights of others. Why is it so important that people who want there kids to recieve education with a catholic ethos get deprived of that.

Giving women and blacks the vote "trampled the rights" of white men to keep the vote to themselves. As I keep saying, your kids religion class will be the same if not more focussed towards catholicism. The only difference is other religions will have classes too. The only right you're losing is the right to deny my rights

If you're so terrified of other religions that you don't want them in the same building then start your own school and pay for it yourself. Everyone pays for public schools so they have a constitutional right to have their religions taught there

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Also, why does whether it's good for your life matter? Surely the only thing that matters is if it's true? You could spend your whole life as a christian and have a great life but still be doomed if you're wrong

It's not the only thing that matters particularly. The truth is indeed a very important part of Christianity, but Christianity also deals with ethics, and general lifestyle philosophy. It's a path to be followed instead of just merely to be believed. I think anyone can see that from looking through Christian texts.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And be honest Jakkass, you not objecting to this has at least a little to do with the fact that you went to a private school and it wouldn't effect you? I ask because you asked that question before saying you didn't object

I don't see why going to a private secondary school would change your mindset completely about this. I wouldn't have really minded if I went to a public school.

As for not affecting me, I'm not sure if I would bring any child of mine to a private school.

I think my viewpoint differs to CDfms for the following reason, please correct me if I am wrong in my understanding of the situation CDfm:

Catholicism has had the great impact in this country for several years. Other forms of Christianity including Anglicanism, my current denomination have not. CDfm wants to protect the Catholic heritage in our school system, and protect Ireland's Catholic character. Whereas other forms of Christianity haven't formed the character of Ireland in a way that Catholicism has. Therefore I don't feel there is much to lose if the educational system was changed to accommodate people of different faiths to be educated in the same school.

People don't realise that Edward Stanley's official plan for an educational system in Ireland was a multidenominational educational system in the 1830's for national schools. The history concerning how Ireland's educational system became the way it is is really interesting. I personally feel a balance between faith based education and secular based education is best, and I think your idea does that fairly well.

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

so your point is that you used statistics even though you knew they were wrong. Right so

I have no reason to believe they are wrong but they are used to formulate public policy and will be accepted as true by the government and public service.

Every one except yours

your view at best is that non catholics are maginalised yet you have Educate Together, and all those other religions even the Jewish community with a population of 4000 have their own school. The Atheist population with a population of between 80,000 and 160,000 dont have any schools and its been suggested its because of apathy.

Slavery was reality too

i havent said it wasn't but this isnt slavery or anything like it - you have as a group the right to self determination and the same opportunities as all the other groups to have your own schools and recieve the same funding.

Giving women and blacks the vote "trampled the rights" of white men to keep the vote to themselves. As I keep saying, your kids religion class will be the same if not more focussed towards catholicism. The only difference is other religions will have classes too. The only right you're losing is the right to deny my rights

Whoah there Sam. I am not the enemy I do feel the school system is a bit messed up too.

I just doubt you have the demand for what you are looking for. I know one small C of I school where religion classes are given by a local businessman who is of that faith as the teachers are not C of I and the clergy are stretched. So I question whether the resourses are there for your suggestion and wonder if its a practical proposal.

You have Educate Together movement and its schools.Whats wrong with them. That model has acceptance and there is a demand for it.

If you're so terrified of other religions that you don't want them in the same building then start your own school and pay for it yourself. Everyone pays for public schools so they have a constitutional right to have their religions taught there

Not at all - Catholics are a huge part of Ireland and a huge voting block and we have every right to have our own schools. I do not agree with discrimination in entry to schools and I do not know how to fix the system but I do not agree with your proposal.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

It's not the only thing that matters particularly. The truth is indeed a very important part of Christianity, but Christianity also deals with ethics, and general lifestyle philosophy. It's a path to be followed instead of just merely to be believed. I think anyone can see that from looking through Christian texts.

But why live the lifestyle if you're going to burn in hell for it?

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't see why going to a private secondary school would change your mindset completely about this. I wouldn't have really minded if I went to a public school.

As for not affecting me, I'm not sure if I would bring any child of mine to a private school.

I think my viewpoint differs to CDfms for the following reason, please correct me if I am wrong in my understanding of the situation CDfm:

Catholicism has had the great impact in this country for several years. Other forms of Christianity including Anglicanism, my current denomination have not. CDfm wants to protect the Catholic heritage in our school system, and protect Ireland's Catholic character. Whereas other forms of Christianity haven't formed the character of Ireland in a way that Catholicism has. Therefore I don't feel there is much to lose if the educational system was changed to accommodate people of different faiths to be educated in the same school.

People don't realise that Edward Stanley's official plan for an educational system in Ireland was a multidenominational educational system in the 1830's for national schools. The history concerning how Ireland's educational system became the way it is is really interesting. I personally feel a balance between faith based education and secular based education is best, and I think your idea does that fairly well.

Fair enough

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

I have no reason to believe they are wrong but they are used to formulate public policy and will be accepted as true by the government and public service.

seriously? You have no reason to belive they're wrong? Do you see 88% of the population at mass on Sunday?

CDfm wrote: »

your view at best is that non catholics are maginalised yet you have Educate Together, and all those other religions even the Jewish community with a population of 4000 have their own school. The Atheist population with a population of between 80,000 and 160,000 dont have any schools and its been suggested its because of apathy.

It's because it's very difficult to get the government to build a school. It's not that they don't care, it's that it's too much of an uphill battle

And yeah, there are a few educate together schools in the country. In America black people had their own water fountains too. That didn't make it ok to exclude them from public services. You say "you have educate together" as if my taxes are not paying for public schools. I have them too but I'm discriminated against in them

CDfm wrote: »

i havent said it wasn't but this isnt slavery or anything like it - you have as a group the right to self determination and the same opportunities as all the other groups to have your own schools and recieve the same funding.

And travellers have the right to build their own pubs but landlords still get fined if they discriminate against travellers.

CDfm wrote: »

Whoah there Sam. I am not the enemy I do feel the school system is a bit messed up too.

I just doubt you have the demand for what you are looking for.

There's rarely a demand from the people on the good side of discrimination. The existence of educate together schools shows there's a demand

CDfm wrote: »

I know one small C of I school where religion classes are given by a local businessman who is of that faith as the teachers are not C of I and the clergy are stretched. So I question whether the resourses are there for your suggestion and wonder if its a practical proposal.

If a religion doesn't want to provide someone that's fine but that doesn't mean they should be denied the option. If the COI school didn't have to pay for an entire school and could just pay to provide a religion teacher they would have the resources

CDfm wrote: »

You have Educate Together movement and its schools.Whats wrong with them. That model has acceptance and there is a demand for it.

One thing that's wrong is that there's very few of them. And the other thing is that giving me my own water fountain doesn't make it ok to ban me from yours

CDfm wrote: »

Not at all - Catholics are a huge part of Ireland and a huge voting block and we have every right to have our own schools. I do not agree with discrimination in entry to schools and I do not know how to fix the system but I do not agree with your proposal.

You absolutely have the right to your own schools but everyone has the right to public schools. They're not your schools. If you want a school for your beliefs alone start your own school like everyone else has to

robindch

CDfm wrote: »

You have Educate Together movement and its schools. Whats wrong with them. That model has acceptance and there is a demand for it.

The ET model is excellent, and at the moment, the only thing stopping it from gaining control of more schools, or building new ones of its own is the Department of Education. FWIW, my brother's faintly involved with a nortsoide group which has collected thousands of supporting signatures, has an enrollment list which is oversubscribed for years to come, has secured funding, has a site and buildings, and still the DofE refuses to grant it permission to operate it because it says "there's no evidence of demand". Likewise, the ET movement has yet to secure permission to open its first secondary school.

But speculations about the inner machinations of the DofE aside, this problem with Irish schools is quite simple, and it has nothing to do with statistics -- it's a matter of principle.

It is appalling that a privately-run, unelected, unaccountable organization which has been shown, institutionally, to behave towards children with total contempt, believes that it should (a) retain the right to say who has access to education, (b) retain any influence over school policy and (b) retain the default right to teach its mythologies to naive and impressionable children.

The institutional church has no moral right whatsoever to receive central funds which are paid in, and then allocated, without regard to religious affiliation, and to distribute, according to religious affiliation, the resources acquired with these funds.

Húrin

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I hate to quote myself but I think I've made a good point

At least when the state is funding it, children should be taught objectively and not led towards the ideology of whoever happens to have told the government they'll teach their curriculum as long as they allowed instil their ideology. Simple as that

Education is not objective. It is a process that exists to be useful to society. That's why children learn to use computers rather than tilling and wood carving. I don't think that religious schools make sense in the kind of society we have, where we do not have religious work places. It doesn't matter much though. I went to a CoI school and most of the kids there came from "Catholic" families anyway.

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Tell that to those people under the yoke of sharia law.

Care to point out the poor unfortunates in Ireland suffering under Sharia law due to our non-secular education system?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Are you seriously going to tell me that raising 98% of children with a single ethos will not have any effect on how the country is run?

Given Ireland's (especially Dublin) extremely secular culture, it seems to have had no effect whatsoever.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And do you think that teaching children that your religion is true, with all the moral, ethic and general life rules that entails, can have no effect whatsoever on governance?

More so than this mythical "objective" education, that teaches no values at all? Every aspect of education affects government because governance is determined by culture. A religious culture will therefore have religious governance. It is not a failing to reach some sort of perfect secular form of governance - there is no such thing.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

So you're saying that someone who goes to a school with a christian ethos is no more likely to end up believing in the christian God, with all that entails in terms of mindset, than someone who went to a school where there was no religious ethos?

Recent history seems to have taught us exactly that.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

The bottom line is that in a secular country, school is a placed to be objectively taught facts, it is not a place to teach children your ideology, regardless of the origin of that ideology be it political or religious.

The law itself relies on more than "objective" facts. So this value free education (would you want to exclude even those values that both you and Christians agree on?) is neither possible nor desirable.

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

seriously? You have no reason to belive they're wrong? Do you see 88% of the population at mass on Sunday?

Its a public policy measurement thing -the reason I pointed it out that the numbers are sizeable.

It's because it's very difficult to get the government to build a school. It's not that they don't care, it's that it's too much of an uphill battle

I didnt say it wasnt hard

And yeah, there are a few educate together schools in the country. In America black people had their own water fountains too. That didn't make it ok to exclude them from public services. You say "you have educate together" as if my taxes are not paying for public schools. I have them too but I'm discriminated against in them


And travellers have the right to build their own pubs but landlords still get fined if they discriminate against travellers.

For someone who is an atheist you jump from issue to issue. Its not the same and you are not being denied an eductation.You are straying close to Godwins Law here.

There's rarely a demand from the people on the good side of discrimination. The existence of educate together schools shows there's a demand

I support the principles of Educate Together and I would like to see it expand.

If a religion doesn't want to provide someone that's fine but that doesn't mean they should be denied the option. If the COI school didn't have to pay for an entire school and could just pay to provide a religion teacher they would have the resources

I am just saying its not as formal as you make out.

One thing that's wrong is that there's very few of them. And the other thing is that giving me my own water fountain doesn't make it ok to ban me from yours

You can use the same water fountain as me any time

You absolutely have the right to your own schools but everyone has the right to public schools. They're not your schools. If you want a school for your beliefs alone start your own school like everyone else has to

You are a bit of a conspiracy theorist. Unsophisticated peasant agrarian former colony evolved a system of public and church and community resourses thru necessity.

Unfortunately, organisations have to be in it for the long haul with educational aims. I suspect that simply being anti-theist or atheist does not demonstrate that commitment.

Húrin

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You can disagree with it when you're pretending that a religious ethos can have no effect on governance and that that somehow makes it ok to teach your unproven ideology as being true

The ideology that states that it's not OK to teach unproven ideologies, is itself an unproven ideology.

For education, it matters more that the ideology is proven useful than that it is "proven" true.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Bear in mind that I don't think no morality should be taught to kids but morality does not require religion

I thought you said that schools should only teach facts. Morality is a matter of opinion.

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

I didnt say it wasnt hard

Why should it be hard for me and easy for you? As I keep asking, why should you get preferential treatment in a public school that we both pay for?

CDfm wrote: »

For someone who is an atheist you jump from issue to issue. Its not the same and you are not being denied an eductation.You are straying close to Godwins Law here.

This is not Godwins law, it's calling a spade a spade. Every religion and non religion in the country except yours is being discriminated against and the fact that you can't see that shows just how backward this country is

CDfm wrote: »

I support the principles of Educate Together and I would like to see it expand.

As long as it doesn't effect your privileged position

CDfm wrote: »

I am just saying its not as formal as you make out.

Only your religion is taught in the schools. That's formal

CDfm wrote: »

You can use the same water fountain as me any time

Oh yeah I can use your water fountain but I can't use the school that's as much mine as it is yours. You talk about the schools as if they're the sole responsibility of your church to do with as it wishes. They're public schools run by public money. They're not yours

CDfm wrote: »

You are a bit of a conspiracy theorist. Unsophisticated peasant agrarian former colony evolved a system of public and church and community resourses thru necessity.

Unfortunately, organisations have to be in it for the long haul with educational aims. I suspect that simply being anti-theist or atheist does not demonstrate that commitment.

I'm lost again. What does this have to do with legalised discrimination in public schools?

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Why should it be hard for me and easy for you? As I keep asking, why should you get preferential treatment in a public school that we both pay for?

Its hard for every community to start a school off. It always was.

This is not Godwins law, it's calling a spade a spade.

Agree to disagree

Every religion and non religion in the country except yours is being discriminated against and the fact that you can't see that shows just how backward this country is

As long as it doesn't effect your privileged position

Its how it evolved. If I want my kids in schools with a catholic ethos I am hardly going to be wildly enthusiastic about your proposal.

Only your religion is taught in the schools. That's formal

Oh yeah I can use your water fountain but I can't use the school that's as much mine as it is yours. You talk about the schools as if they're the sole responsibility of your church to do with as it wishes. They're public schools run by public money. They're not yours

Your ideal solution is not to have religion taught in schools. If I am happy with the status quo- why not say so?

Its relevance is that the state didnt have the funds to provide state schools.
I'm lost again. What does this have to do with legalised discrimination in public schools?

What discrimination give me facts of who was discriminated and when?

robindch

CDfm wrote: »

What discrimination give me facts of who was discriminated and when?

Quoting from above, the institutional church has no moral right whatsoever to receive central funds which are paid in, and allocated, without regard to religious affiliation, and to discriminate according to the membership rules of its own religious club. You haven't addressed this point, and it might be worth doing so, since it's the central point at argument here.

If there were non-sectarian, government-funded schools out there which pushed catholics to the end of the admission queue, there would be mighty screams of persecution, marches in the streets and a distinctly nasty atmosphere whipped up by preachers in tabernacles the length and breadth of the country.

However, the church appears to be happy to do this to other people, as happened in Diswellstown, Dublin two years back, when I believe that the kid(s) of most or all (non-catholic) immigrant parents were pushed to the back of the queue to make way for the kids of catholic parents who applied later than the immigrants. With the result that the incoming classes into the catholic-controlled schools were almost uniformly white and catholic, and the people pushed out of the way were from a variety of other religious traditions, as well as atheists, from eastern european, asian and african countries.

It was surprising, to say the very least, that Archbishop Dermot Martin who presided at the highest level over the discrimination at the first two schools, was then asked by the DofE to become patron of the new schools -- something, we are to believe, he did so "reluctantly".

Educate Together was not approached by the DofE in connection with anything related to the new schools in Diswellstown. More on this open, fully-legal discrimination are here.

Do you believe that the actions of the church are fully honorable in this?

And, more generally, do you also believe that the church has a moral right to receive funds from central government and to use them to provide education preferentially to the kids of its own members?

CDfm

Wait a minute - Catholic Schools will give priority to Catholic kids. Thats not rocket science.

I am not saying that the system as it has evolved is ideal.Its a government responsibility and not a church responsibility to provide school places.

The Church is not the public service and the system evolved thru lack of government capital to invest in schools. Ireland was a ridiculously poor country. We even had an Irish Hospital Sweepstake a lottery to help pay for Hospitals and Medical Facilities and which was sold in the UK and USA.

Whatever the merits of your argument the system as it evolved was a practical solution to a problem.

I dont think many people do realise the amount of fundraising etc was made by local Catholic communities to build the actual schools that peoplke now take for granted. The classrooms I was in originaly in secondary school were rotting prefabs. It was the local church the raised the money that bought the school site etc. It didnt come from the government because the government didnt have it.My first primary school did not have running water.

So yes I can see that you have a grevience of sorts but no I dont think its unrealistic to expect those who want non denominational schools to fundraise to capitalise them just like everyone else has.

So I have very little sympathy with those who think its someone elses responsibility to give them what they want. If they want it have as badly as they say they would get involved and be active and organise.

Thats how everyone else got their schools by raising money and building them.

CerebralCortex

CDfm wrote: »

.....So I have very little sympathy with those who think its someone elses responsibility to give them what they want. If they want it have as badly as they say they would get involved and be active and organise.

Thats how everyone else got their schools by raising money and building them.

So the taxes we pay don't count?

CDfm

CerebralCortex wrote: »

So the taxes we pay don't count?

Yes they do - but so does what you give to the community- so no they are not the only thing.Its not all about a consumer society.Thats what I like about ET.

Rural communities are built around things like schools churches,GAA pitches, and marts and the social and eductional theories isnt always practical. The events built around those are very important.

The pace of change in Ireland has been fairly massive even in the past 10 years. So yes there is a catch up period and you should want to do it right.

dvpower

CDfm wrote: »

Wait a minute - Catholic Schools will give priority to Catholic kids. Thats not rocket science.

So do you accept that we have discrimination inbuilt in to the state funded education system?

CDfm wrote: »

I am not saying that the system as it has evolved is ideal.Its a government responsibility and not a church responsibility to provide school places.

I wonder what kind of system you think would be better? You agree that the current system isn't perfect, but you do seem happy with it. I'd be interested to know what shape would your ideal system take?

CDfm wrote: »

The Church is not the public service and the system evolved thru lack of government capital to invest in schools. Ireland was a ridiculously poor country. We even had an Irish Hospital Sweepstake a lottery to help pay for Hospitals and Medical Facilities and which was sold in the UK and USA.

Whatever the merits of your argument the system as it evolved was a practical solution to a problem.

The church needs to acknowledged for their past contribution. But we also need to build a system to meet today's needs, and church management of this certainly ought to be in the past.

CDfm wrote: »

I dont think many people do realise the amount of fundraising etc was made by local Catholic communities to build the actual schools that peoplke now take for granted. The classrooms I was in originaly in secondary school were rotting prefabs. It was the local church the raised the money that bought the school site etc. It didnt come from the government because the government didnt have it.My first primary school did not have running water.

This money came from the wider community. They would (and continue to) give it to any organisation who would provide educational facilities. The church should be thanked for their past contribution, but that shouldn't overly influence current requirements.

CDfm wrote: »

So yes I can see that you have a grevience of sorts but no I dont think its unrealistic to expect those who want non denominational schools to fundraise to capitalise them just like everyone else has.

Pretty much every other government service is non denominational. Why is it that you make an exception for education?

CDfm wrote: »

So I have very little sympathy with those who think its someone elses responsibility to give them what they want. If they want it have as badly as they say they would get involved and be active and organise.

Thats how everyone else got their schools by raising money and building them.

It is someone else's responsibility; we pay the government to provide the education service and the service we get for our money is a skewed one; skewed towards one section of the community.

CDfm

dvpower wrote: »

So do you accept that we have discrimination inbuilt in to the state funded education system?

There are lots of mechanisms used for access to local schools religion might be one. Some schools give priority to kids from the locality or who have a sibling in the school.

So yes if the schools were formed with Catholic ethos in mind then primarily the schools had a dual role one being education and the other being to support a religious ethos/ church membership.

Its like wanting to enter a cow in the Grand National when its a horse race.

I wonder what kind of system you think would be better? You agree that the current system isn't perfect, but you do seem happy with it. I'd be interested to know what shape would your ideal system take?

You believe the system and society should be religion free. I believe religious Communities should have the right to have schools with a religious ethos and thatrecent changes in society are not homogenous across the state and have wider community implications and dynamics which define a community.

The church needs to acknowledged for their past contribution. But we also need to build a system to meet today's needs, and church management of this certainly ought to be in the past.

One needs to be built and that has to be addressed as public policy for the future.

This money came from the wider community. They would (and continue to) give it to any organisation who would provide educational facilities. The church should be thanked for their past contribution, but that shouldn't overly influence current requirements.

Excuse me but the state recognises the right for people to be educated with reference to their religious ethos and has developed mechanisms of funding education like that.

You still gloss over the church communities bit as it it doesn't exist and is insignificant and I am saying to you that it isn't insignificant.I am saying they have real value.

Fundraising was done for a specific purpose how dare you question the intentions or beliefs of donors. It wasnt thru taxes. The Capital costs of the schools were significant and there were opportunity costs of deploying that capital and it tied up resourses that could have been used elsewhere.

Pretty much every other government service is non denominational. Why is it that you make an exception for education?

It is not purely a government service. Its a service by the government and the church or whatever religious denomination sponsored the building of the school.

So what about the other religious denominations C of I , Jewish etc that put a value on education and on their "communities" do you want to get rid of them too? The value of those services to society is intangible.

It is someone else's responsibility; we pay the government to provide the education service and the service we get for our money is a skewed one; skewed towards one section of the community.

You have the same rights as everyone else to raise capital and do the exact same things. Will supporters pledge money and give guarantees?

Property has just gotten cheaper with the recession so there has never been a better time to do it.

What you are saying is you want what you want but don't value it sufficiently to use your time and own money to achieve it.

Nodin

CDfm wrote: »

Wait a minute - Catholic Schools will give priority to Catholic kids. Thats not rocket science.

I am not saying that the system as it has evolved is ideal.Its a government responsibility and not a church responsibility to provide school places.

However, as the church has been receiving a subsidy and government funding for decades, not to mention the near on a billion Euro subsidy of some of its members 'escapades', I think its safe to say that its received more than its given.

CDfm

Nodin wrote: »

However, as the church has been receiving a subsidy and government funding for decades, not to mention the near on a billion Euro subsidy of some of its members 'escapades', I think its safe to say that its received more than its given.

Thats a completely seperate issue there was state involvement.

Húrin

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I'm not against diversity. But wanting diversity doesn't mean I should applaud people for believing nonsense.

I don't applaud people for believing different things to me. I just find it within myself, somehow, to accept it. You on the other hand, want enough diversity so that everyone can believe the same things as you.

I think you atheists are a little bit too certain that your beliefs are true, which is usually denied vigorously. Consistency please!

Reality is better than fantasy regardless of any perceived placebo effect that fantasy might have.

That's a dogmatic position with no supporting evidence. People who believe different things to you are not failing to embrace reality because if they did, they would be at a disadvantage. However, they get on just fine. Again I ask you:

Atheism offers no pretence of salvation, so what's the big deal? Is it an ego thing, to prove to yourself that you're right?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Also, why does whether it's good for your life matter? Surely the only thing that matters is if it's true? You could spend your whole life as a christian and have a great life but still be doomed if you're wrong

You think atheism offers salvation? Since we don't know which of the two worldviews is true, why not let people decide based on what is good for their life? Why are you so certain that "the truth" is in your hands?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I know you don't want to give up your privileged position but the white slave owners had to because it was immoral and so do you

I contend that you are in the privileged position; as an atheist you seem to be not only the arbiter of morality but also the authority on truth for us all!

(btw I'm with you on the schools... secularise the lot of them I say)

Húrin

CDfm wrote: »

You should have equal rights but to get them you dont need to trample the rights of others. Why is it so important that people who want there kids to recieve education with a catholic ethos get deprived of that.

There are many other avenues for a Catholic education to be done more effectively than in school. Church, youth groups and home are three good examples. I would even contend that outsourcing Catholic education to schools makes parents lazy about pursuing it at home, and lazy about attending mass.

Stabshauptmann

Dades wrote: »

As a matter of interest - has anyone else complained about the lack of respect, or patronising manner of Atheist Ireland, or is this idea just based on the rantings of a born-again *journalist*?

I am a secularist, and I personally find Atheist Ireland arrogant, rude, and insulting.

I think its childish to pretend that the FSM arguemnt isn't meant to be insulting. I'm not going to argue with you, I'm not going to prove something we all already know. Russel's tea pot was an intelligent non-offensive idea, but that wasn't enough, atheists needed something foolish and rediculous.

And the reason you are so arrogant, is that you fail to realise that we do not fully understand the universe - or even Earth for that matter. We do not have all the answers; but aethiests act as if they do.

If you want to challenge religious indoctrination, provide unbiased palatable information.

If you want to remove religious privilege provided reasonable arguements.

But if all you want to do is feel self important, work away. Here's a newsflash though, the people you browbeat don't feel foolish