Proposal to limit Catholic Church’s role in primary schools.

Dyr

KeithAFC wrote: »

WIt is no wonder to me why the census results recently still had a high percentage saying yes to Catholicism

Thats more because the mammy/daddy fill out the census form.

I'd bet my old man filled out that all his kids are still at home just so he could stick us all down as catholics :pac:

If you stuck a church levy on religious people I bet you'd see some fairly sweeping secularisation happening be the new time.

Seachmall

Bambi wrote: »

Thats more because the mammy/daddy fill out the census form.

Aye, during the census night I gave the form a look over after the mother filled it out.

Still a Catholic in her eyes apparently, although I corrected it on the form.

COYW

Bambi wrote: »

If you stuck a church levy on religious people I bet you'd see some fairly sweeping secularisation happening be the new time.

Agree to a point. Nothing like money to focus the Irish mind. A tax on our individual incomes towards the running of the church would sort out an awful lot of the messing. Personally, I don't think you would see 'sweeping secularisation' but a certain percentage of the population would avoiding selecting RC on the form. An awful lot of people will still tick the box so they can go to the church for the big events. (wedding, funeral, baptism, confirmation)

Biggins

Freddie59 wrote: »

...Have they fcuked up? Yes, regularly. And still do. But I still think this country owes them an awful lot Despite the hateful rantings of some.

A lot of people do owe them much - however I am disappointed at the speed, utter dragging out period of time which they are implementing this process.

They might just start in a year!
Daftness.

Ghost Buster

Bambi wrote: »

I'm all for kicking the religious orders out of the education system on two conditions:

1) This state actually starts picking up the tab for educating its citizens

2) We don't go replacing religious indoctrination with social indoctrination, which is what Ruairí and the other social engineers are gunning for

1) You do know that the state and not the church funds catholic schools?
2) Not sure what the heck you mean here but seeing ass everyone lives in society what is wrong with social indoctrination (what ever that is!)

Ghost Buster

Freddie59 wrote: »

But people will bury their heads in the sand and ignore it Conor. As they always do. I wonder if the education system in Islamic countries is being adjusted to allow Christian teaching? I doubt it somehow.

Implying that ireland is a Catholic Country in the same way which it isnt . Would you like it to be thus?

Ghost Buster

Seachmall wrote: »

It really boggles the mind as to why this idea is controversial for so many.

Well personally Im prepared to put in the time after school with Speech and Drama, Gaelic, Soccar, Guitar lessons, Irish dancing, karate and pony riding but I draw the line at saving their immortal souls and guaranteeing them their eternal rewards with The Lord in Paradise. Im a busy man.

Einhard

Seachmall wrote: »

It really boggles the mind as to why this idea is controversial for so many.

I don't think that's the controversial proposal, so much as the idea that the Catholic Church did absolutely nothing of value in this country, that they didn't educate a single person, or that they were involved in slavery. I mean, I'm an atheist and a teacher, and the sooner we have religious instruction (as opposed to religious education) out of schools the better, but some of the statements in this thread are hyperbolic BS.

Freddie59

Einhard wrote: »

I don't think that's the controversial proposal, so much as the idea that the Catholic Church did absolutely nothing of value in this country, that they didn't educate a single person, or that they were involved in slavery. I mean, I'm an atheist and a teacher, and the sooner we have religious instruction (as opposed to religious education) out of schools the better, but some of the statements in this thread are hyperbolic BS.

Oh the irony.............:D

Knight who says Meh

Doc wrote: »

I can’t see anything wrong with any of these reforms. It may be difficult to implement them though given the number of religious orders, priests, nuns and brothers involved in education. In my opinion there should be a separation between religion and sate and that should translate into education.

(I am agnostic but if asked what religion I am I would probably still answer Roman Catholic as it is how I was raised)[/QUOTE]
The single most head wrecking attitude around. Makes me want to pour hot water in my ears!!!!!!!
Did you also tick 'Catholic' on the census? Surmising that you did then i must say that you are a hypocrite to be looking for separation of church and state whilst falsely inflating the stats on the census by answering a question posed as "What are you now" as a "What were you told you are as a child" question.

I Heart Internet

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

you are a hypocrite to be looking for separation of church and state whilst falsely inflating the stats on the census

You're wrong. Regardless of how Doc described himself on the census, it is not hypocritical to want "seperation of church and state" and at the same time profess to be a religious believer. So if he did tick the RC box it has no bearing on his views on church and state.

You have a "them against us" atitude and a mistaken belief that religious belief has to have a numerical disadvantage to lose the "seperation of church and state" argument.

Knight who says Meh

I Heart Internet wrote: »

You're wrong. Regardless of how Doc described himself on the census, it is not hypocritical to want "seperation of church and state" and at the same time profess to be a religious believer. So if he did tick the RC box it has no bearing on his views on church and state.

You have a "them against us" atitude and a mistaken belief that religious belief has to have a numerical disadvantage to lose the "seperation of church and state" argument.

Youre wrong and have mis represented what I wrote. The Op stated that he is agnostic but claims to be catholic because he was raised as one. This is stupid, plain and simple. You are catholic if you believe in the catholic god and follow all of the teachings of the Catholic church. If his parents had dressed him up as a girl and told him he was one up until the day he discovered his penis whould he still be a girl?

I Heart Internet

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

Youre wrong and have mis represented what I wrote.

This is what you wrote:

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

i must say that you are a hypocrite to be looking for separation of church and state whilst falsely inflating the stats on the census

I can't see how you feel I misrepresented what you said i.e. that he was a hypocrite for wanting seperation of chuch and state whilst describing himself as a catholic.

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

The Op stated that he is agnostic but claims to be catholic because he was raised as one. This is stupid, plain and simple. You are catholic if you believe in the catholic god and follow all of the teachings of the Catholic church. If his parents had dressed him up as a girl and told him he was one up until the day he discovered his penis whould he still be a girl?

This is an entirely different argument to the one above - where you call the poster a hypocrite for advocating seperation of church and state whilst declaring in the census that he is a roman catholic.

For what it's worth here is my contribution to that particular (different) census issue.

Capt'n Midnight

Any update on the statistic that 90% of primary schools here are managed by the Catholic church ?

The root of the problem is that the state hasn't much resources into setting up primary schools. The golden rule is - as always - the person with the gold makes the rules. Most research shows that you get more value for money in investing in primary than trying to catchup in secondary.

If we value education as a society we need to seriously invest in primary schools and not leave it up to self-interested groups who can then choose their ethos.

marty1985

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

Youre wrong and have mis represented what I wrote. The Op stated that he is agnostic but claims to be catholic because he was raised as one. This is stupid, plain and simple. You are catholic if you believe in the catholic god and follow all of the teachings of the Catholic church. If his parents had dressed him up as a girl and told him he was one up until the day he discovered his penis whould he still be a girl?

I really agree that we need another thread to discuss this. :rolleyes:

His agnosticism is an intellectual position. He could be a lapsed Catholic, in the sense that he doesn't require a formal act or baptism to re-enter the faith, he just has to resume attending mass and accept certain teachings. Intellectual positions are open to change. He has freedom to identify with whichever religious denomination he wishes. He is not considered an ex-Catholic by either himself or his church AFAIK. His own opinion is the only one that matters.

Not exactly the same as gender identity disorder.

Run_to_da_hills

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Any update on the statistic that 90% of primary schools here are managed by the Catholic church ?

The root of the problem is that the state hasn't much resources into setting up primary schools. The golden rule is - as always - the person with the gold makes the rules. Most research shows that you get more value for money in investing in primary than trying to catchup in secondary.

If we value education as a society we need to seriously invest in primary schools and not leave it up to self-interested groups who can then choose their ethos.

They owe this country all the gold they got for the misery that they caused through child abuse all in the name of Christianity.

Let them hand over all the assets of what schools they control to the state and call it quits.

I Heart Internet

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Any update on the statistic that 90% of primary schools here are managed by the Catholic church ?

The report published this morning puts it at 89.65% (2,841 out of 3,169 primary schools).

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

If we value education as a society we need to seriously invest in primary schools and not leave it up to self-interested groups who can then choose their ethos.

But when we have an minister for education who actually blames the teaching of religion and the irish language for falling numeracy and literacy you really have to wonder how serious he is about improving primary school quality (as opposed to furthering his and his party's secularist wet-dreams).

Ghost Buster

I Heart Internet wrote: »

This is what you wrote:



I can't see how you feel I misrepresented what you said i.e. that he was a hypocrite for wanting seperation of chuch and state whilst describing himself as a catholic.





This is an entirely different argument to the one above - where you call the poster a hypocrite for advocating seperation of church and state whilst declaring in the census that he is a roman catholic.

For what it's worth here is my contribution to that particular (different) census issue.

Whilst also claiming to be agnostic...ummmmmmmmmmmm Oh I getcha!!! Culturally catholic!!!!!!!;)

mackerski

mikemac1 wrote: »

Do ordinary people get a say at all?
If there is a proposal for the school in your parish how about letting the people in the parish decide what to do.

It's their school too

Isn't what you suggest more or less where we are today? So let's suppose we have a village with a school that today is run by the Roman Catholics. Let's even suppose that 60% of the village population thinks that's fine and dandy and is dead set against any dilution of the religious ethos of what is "their school too".

Seems to be very much the same bummer for the non-religous parents and children. How is that progress? How is it compromise?

I Heart Internet

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Whilst also claiming to be agnostic...ummmmmmmmmmmm Oh I getcha!!! Culturally catholic!!!!!!!;)

Call him whatever you like (and be as smug as you want about it). It doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the validity of his views on the seperation of church and state as The Knights Who Say Meh claims.

It never ceases to amaze me that secularists seem abnormally interested in the integrity of the faith of individual catholics. They are like the stereotypical 'holy mary' with faux shock that individuals are only half practicing their faith - "sure, they're only cultural catholics". Yep, it's all or nothing with these guys.

marty1985

I Heart Internet, some people think they are at war and no middle ground is acceptable. You're either with them or against them.

Freddie59

Freddie59 wrote: »

Oh the irony.............:D

what irony?

Freddie59

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Implying that ireland is a Catholic Country in the same way which it isnt . Would you like it to be thus?

84% Catholic would indicate otherwise. And are Islamic countries returning the favour? I thought not.

Knasher

Freddie59 wrote: »

84% Catholic would indicate otherwise. And are Islamic countries returning the favour? I thought not.

I really don't see what point you are trying to make here. Some countries are discriminating against your beliefs, so you're going to get payback by discriminating against people who don't hold your beliefs? And on top of that, the people who you want to discriminate against, aren't the ones discriminating against you because they are living in this country and not the Islamic countries you are talking about.

Ghost Buster

Freddie59 wrote: »

84% Catholic would indicate otherwise. And are Islamic countries returning the favour? I thought not.

Ireland is a secular (Supposedly) country with a majority of Catholics. This is not the same as being a catholic country in the way that Iran is a Muslim Country with a State religion.
Oh and that 84% includes agnostics who bizzarely call them selves catholics and young adults who's Mammys tick them as catholic even though they are no longer so.

StudentDad

About time. As far as I'm concerned all religious indoctrination should occur outside of school hours. If parents want their children indoctrinated they can do so at Sunday School etc etc.

SD

byhookorbycrook

This report is only that, a report. It is like the much vaunted literacy and numeracy strategy, big on PR but little to follow it up.

Feeona

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

This report is only that, a report. It is like the much vaunted literacy and numeracy strategy, big on PR but little to follow it up.

I agree. I can't see anything major happening anytime soon.

Biggins

I'm surprised here that rule 68 and 69 of the "Rules for National Schools", first published in 1965's is not being debate more!

Rule 68:

"...of all the parts of a school curriculum Religious Instruction is by far the most important"

Rule 69:

... which also deals with religion, calls for the denomination of each pupil to be ascertained from the parent, "the father, if possible", it adds. (We all know how unreliable mothers can be in such matters!)

News item: http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0315/schools.html

=============================================

One is just outdated daftness and the other is just blatant sexism by a religious organisation!

mloc

Freddie59 wrote: »

84% Catholic would indicate otherwise.

If you are using the census figure to define Ireland as having a population that is 84% Catholic, I would suggest that is an inaccurate and misleading statement.

The census figure itself is inaccurate. The phrasing of the question regarding religious beliefs, the lack of definition of what "catholic" actually means and the fact that census collectors themselves encouraged people to select catholic even if they were only baptised catholic and are no longer practising (this happened to my parents) makes the census statistics regarding religion in the population invalid.

No doubt the Church will ignore this and use it repeatedly to claim the vast majority of Irish people are practising Catholics, which is, of course, untrue.

Capt'n Midnight

Rules for National Schools Under the Department of Education


P class= Rules for National School - Published January, 1965 br
br Part 1 -  a href= www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/rules_for_national_schools_1_7.pdf View File /a
br Part 2 -  a href= www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/rules_for_national_schools_7_13.pdf View File /a
br Part 3 -  a href= www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/rules_for_national_schools_13_21.pdf View File /a
br
br Schedule -  a href= www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/rules_for_national_schools_schedule.pdf View File /a

Run_to_da_hills

Another consideration for Government should be the request for the removal of all abominable graven images, statues and shrines from school properties if they are to become secular.

grindle

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Call him whatever you like (and be as smug as you want about it). It doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the validity of his views on the seperation of church and state as The Knights Who Say Meh claims.

It never ceases to amaze me that secularists seem abnormally interested in the integrity of the faith of individual catholics. They are like the stereotypical 'holy mary' with faux shock that individuals are only half practicing their faith - "sure, they're only cultural catholics". Yep, it's all or nothing with these guys.

Firstly, if you don't follow the teachings of the Bible (impossible), you're not considered by the god in the Bible to be a sheep of his flock. Not at all. Which makes you an enemy to him. Fire and brimstone, genocides and mass-rape (maybe this is where they got the 'Mass' from?). Not a single Catholic in this country is a genuine Christian. Zero. Biblically factual.
Secondly, as a self-described agnostic, he is at the very least a hypocrite, and has invalidated the census. When someone invalidates their own opinion (agnostic=deity/no deity, unknown or unknowable either way, Christian (or RC) =Old Testament half true, New Testament completely true), their opinion holds no weight.
Thirdly, marty1985, agnosticism isn't an intellectual position to be used as a crutch to walk bandy-legged back to the "light" of thoughtless befeckery.
Even if he described himself as an agnostic theist, the fact that he would describe himself as that, means he is not a Catholic. Because that would be...?
Yes, very good... Against the rules.

That totally belonged in the other thread, as does much of this discussion. Sorry.

On-topic: insane to think that it's taken this long for any of our many government parties to walk down the only reasonable road. Resiliently stupid, it seems.

FouxDaFaFa

Preparation for the sacraments takes up so much class time. I came out of primary school knowing all my prayers and how to stand in church but I could barely multiply fractions.
It's time that could be better spent. It wouldn't take much for children to prepare outside of school with their parents or at their church.

Run_to_da_hills

FouxDaFaFa wrote: »

Preparation for the sacraments takes up so much class time. I came out of primary school knowing all my prayers and how to stand in church but I could barely multiply fractions.
It's time that could be better spent. It wouldn't take much for children to prepare outside of school with their parents or at their church.

We use to get a slap for not knowing them. Every so often the parish priest would come in and fire a few questions at us before the big day when the Bishop would come around. I still have some of the questions at the back of my mind.

TiGeR KiNgS

This is one major cock block for many a priest.

starbelgrade

marty1985 wrote: »

I'm not going to deny historical fact for the sake of aiming vitriol at the church. We weren't much more than a developing country for a long time with abject poverty and emigration on a mass scale, and to think that another institution would have stepped in to voluntarily run our education system is being very simplistic. Even in the new independent Ireland the country was strapped for a tax base and the priests and nuns and religious orders provided education voluntarily. The government didn't have the money or the infrastructure to take control, that would take time. The simple fact is that a lot of my ancestors were educated by religious men and women because they were the only ones who provided an education to poor people.

I don't think the church should have so much control over education, and Diarmuid Martin has said the church would welcome more diverse running of primary schools to reflect religious trends in society. They are the ones who can no longer afford it.

You're ignoring the fact that the Catholic church fought a long, hard battle to gain control over the teaching of Irish children - and children worldwide.

This was done for a reason - and it certainly wasn't out of the kindness of their hearts... and it definitely wasn't the case of an institution voluntarily stepping in to lend a hand - the Church used education as a means to an end and that end was to indoctrine people into their religion.. in essence, to gain control.

Sure, they taught a few people along the way, but that was more of a by product. The end result to them - to control the masses through their religion - was far more important than that.

I think your suggestion that they stepped in just to teach the poor little children is a hell of a lot more "simplistic" than you'd have us believe.

Johro

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Removing Communion and Confirmation preparation from the school day, and changes to laws that allow schools restrict places to children of their own faith, have been recommended in a blueprint for the primary education system.

No harm and about time.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/proposal-to-limit-churchs-role-in-schools-190009.html

It's definitely about time. My nieces go to a school where anything the teachers want to do has to be okayed by the parish priest, it's f#ckin archaic. Religion should be kept out if education altogether, it's nothing short of indoctrination. Let kids make up their own minds when they're old enough to understand religion, not hammer it into their heads so much they feel afraid or guilty to have an original thought.

Capt'n Midnight

perhaps some Sunday schools should be setup :P

Run_to_da_hills

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

perhaps some Sunday schools should be setup :P

Most independent churches have them and they would run concurrent with the Sunday service. Its also a good idea because it keeps kids occupied.

marty1985

Starbelgrade, if you read what I wrote, I never assigned them motives for volunteering their time, money and resources into educating children, you did, and I just feel that in doing so you're just pissing on your own history. Unsurprisingly, for you they had bad intentions. A fair minded person, in my view, would take a more nuanced approach and not deny historical facts for the sake of polemics, nor dismiss them as a by-product to fit some atheist narrative revision of Irish history. And any history that is so certain of secret motives is dubious history.

The Catholic population in Ireland largely wanted Catholic schools, for a number of reasons. They were an oppressed people under penal laws. There were Irish Charter Schools, which admitted only Catholics, but on the condition that they be educated as Protestants to rescue them from Popish superstition. Catholics never liked this, and inspections showed massive abuse within the system, with children being used as labourers and subject to squalid conditions, punishment and disease. These were financed by the British government. Perhaps this sowed the seed for Catholics to be suspicious of government funded secular schools, and historical animosity between denominations didn't help. In short, there were cultural and political and religious reasons for people to want their children to receive Catholic instruction. Sadly, nationalist opinion did not give much support to multidenominational education either.

And on the subject of Catholic instruction - indoctrination is exactly what it is, and I haven't said I support that, or that I would send my children to such a school. But I will say that religious people are not relativists. The idea that they would teach their children "this is true for some, that is true for others" is not realistic. They generally believe what they believe to be true and important, and they wish their children to receive that instruction.

Not being relativists, that they genuinely believe what they believe to be true, as ghastly as you might feel that is. Religious men and women provided a vitally important service - for whatever reasons. This continued into the new independent state - which was still impoverished. I feel they had too much a strangle hold over education, and in many ways still do, and it is unsustainable, and even undesirable. But even some level-headed Catholic bishops will admit to that.

My point that a huge number of my ancestors (and yours) would have remained illiterate peasants without the help of religious men and women is not going to be erased in a revisionist whitewash of Irish history (and yes, even if it offends you, I believe a vast number of those religious acted in a spirit of humanism and compassion).

Ghost Buster

Take a classic Coke bottle:
When full of coke it is a coke bottle.
When containing 84% coke it is a coke bottle.
Empty it is a coke bottle.
Full of wee it is a coke bottle.

Take my kids drinks bottle for school:
It is a non specific bottle.
Full of Jagermeister it is a school drinks bottle.
84% full of wee it is a school drinks bottle.
Empty it is a school drinks bottle.


Ireland is a school drinks bottle
Countries with a state religion are Coke bottles.

OR.....
If the entire Muslim population of a "Muslim Country" were suddenly wiped out by a strange virus caught from kissing unwashed prayer mats leaving just 2 catholics, a Scientologist, 3 Wiccans and a smart arse atheist who claims to be a pastafarian, the country would still be a Muslim country.

Whether Ireland has 84%, 100% or 1% catholics (Cultural, a la carte or actual) it is not a CATHOLIC country and so does not have any special pleading when it comes to education.

starbelgrade

marty1985 wrote: »

Starbelgrade, if you read what I wrote, I never assigned them motives for volunteering their time, money and resources into educating children, you did, and I just feel that in doing so you're just pissing on your own history. Unsurprisingly, for you they had bad intentions. A fair minded person, in my view, would take a more nuanced approach and not deny historical facts for the sake of polemics, nor dismiss them as a by-product to fit some atheist narrative revision of Irish history. And any history that is so certain of secret motives is dubious history.

The Catholic population in Ireland largely wanted Catholic schools, for a number of reasons. They were an oppressed people under penal laws. There were Irish Charter Schools, which admitted only Catholics, but on the condition that they be educated as Protestants to rescue them from Popish superstition. Catholics never liked this, and inspections showed massive abuse within the system, with children being used as labourers and subject to squalid conditions, punishment and disease. These were financed by the British government. Perhaps this sowed the seed for Catholics to be suspicious of government funded secular schools, and historical animosity between denominations didn't help. In short, there were cultural and political and religious reasons for people to want their children to receive Catholic instruction. Sadly, nationalist opinion did not give much support to multidenominational education either.

And on the subject of Catholic instruction - indoctrination is exactly what it is, and I haven't said I support that, or that I would send my children to such a school. But I will say that religious people are not relativists. The idea that they would teach their children "this is true for some, that is true for others" is not realistic. They generally believe what they believe to be true and important, and they wish their children to receive that instruction.

Not being relativists, that they genuinely believe what they believe to be true, as ghastly as you might feel that is. Religious men and women provided a vitally important service - for whatever reasons. This continued into the new independent state - which was still impoverished. I feel they had too much a strangle hold over education, and in many ways still do, and it is unsustainable, and even undesirable. But even some level-headed Catholic bishops will admit to that.

My point that a huge number of my ancestors (and yours) would have remained illiterate peasants without the help of religious men and women is not going to be erased in a revisionist whitewash of Irish history (and yes, even if it offends you, I believe a vast number of those religious acted in a spirit of humanism and compassion).

Look - that's all very well & good, but that is your viewpoint. It's an opinion - nothing more & nothing less and it has as much validity as my own.

The fact that you try to dismiss it as "polemics" and a "revisionist whitewash of Irish history" doesn't make your argument any stronger.

Your dismissive approach and attitude towards other people's posts stinks of self-importance & is quite frankly, a touch pathetic. You're not related to David Norris by any chance?

I Heart Internet

grindle wrote: »

Firstly, if you don't follow the teachings of the Bible (impossible), you're not considered by the god in the Bible to be a sheep of his flock. Not at all. Which makes you an enemy to him. Fire and brimstone, genocides and mass-rape (maybe this is where they got the 'Mass' from?). Not a single Catholic in this country is a genuine Christian. Zero. Biblically factual.

I know sure, we're all failures. Sorry for letting you down grindle.

grindle wrote: »

Secondly, as a self-described agnostic, he is at the very least a hypocrite, and has invalidated the census. When someone invalidates their own opinion (agnostic=deity/no deity, unknown or unknowable either way, Christian (or RC) =Old Testament half true, New Testament completely true), their opinion holds no weight.

That's bull****. What he's done is given the answer to a complex question that best represents his views at this moment in time. He might change those views tomorrow. It's a statistical snapshot. Lots of people trying to poke holes in the census to support their own views....pretty desperate.

grindle wrote: »

On-topic: insane to think that it's taken this long for any of our many government parties to walk down the only reasonable road. Resiliently stupid, it seems.

Does the weight of being 100% sure of your correctness get you down at times?

marty1985

starbelgrade wrote: »

...

Your dismissive approach and attitude towards other people's posts ....

Your first post was to say mine was "complete bollocks". Your second dismissed the point on education as a "by product". Your third declared all opinions equally valid.

starbelgrade

marty1985 wrote: »

Your first post was to say mine was "complete bollocks". Your second dismissed the point on education as a "by product". Your third declared all opinions equally valid.

Are you saying that I lack consistency?

Jcarroll07

Sad day when aggressive atheism becomes the norm. If you don't want your child to get a catholic education in school don't send him to a catholic school. But people should not be allowed say that because a school is teaching religion it must stop. If it's a catholic school there should not be a problem. Catholics should be allowed go to catholic schools and be thought catholic values. Atheists should stop whining about it and stop trying to impose their rule of secularism on every body else. It nearly a bad thing to be catholic in ireland now.

DEFTLEFTHAND

When I went to a Catholic school 10 years ago very little emphasis was put on Catholicism. In our religion classes we studied other religions in depth and discussed our feelings on a broad range of topics, I enjoyed it immensely as it served as a release valve to the pressures of exams. Students not of the Catholic faith were included, there was no indoctrination..

Run_to_da_hills

Jcarroll07 wrote: »

Sad day when aggressive atheism becomes the norm. If you don't want your child to get a catholic education in school don't send him to a catholic school. But people should not be allowed say that because a school is teaching religion it must stop. If it's a catholic school there should not be a problem. Catholics should be allowed go to catholic schools and be thought catholic values. Atheists should stop whining about it and stop trying to impose their rule of secularism on every body else. It nearly a bad thing to be catholic in ireland now.

the problem is that Catholics have over 90% of the schools in the country.

There are some towns in Ireland where if you wanted to send your child to a Christian or Secular school you would have no choice in the matter because the only school in the area would be a Catholic run school.

gurramok

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

When I went to a Catholic school 10 years ago very little emphasis was put on Catholicism. In our religion classes we studied other religions in depth and discussed our feelings on a broad range of topics, I enjoyed it immensely as it served as a release valve to the pressures of exams. Students not of the Catholic faith were included, there was no indoctrination..

Not when I was in a Catholic school in the 80's. The Hail Mary was drummed into us literally every day and there was no study of other religions or no religions.