School patronage

expectationlost

recedite wrote: »

Indeed one could; that is also true.
At the heart of this is the issue of whether a majority have the right to impose a regime on everybody else that is based strictly on the religious values of one set of people, and which fails to respect the rights of the minority.
Its the same kind of thinking that historically allowed religion to control schools in Ireland. In philosophical terms its called the "tyranny of the majority".

i think you could make similar accusations about both sides, the heart of it is whether that guy should be in jail, but its not a discussion for this thread.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

At the heart of this is the issue of whether a majority have the right to impose a regime on everybody else that is based strictly on the religious values of one set of people, and which fails to respect the rights of the minority [...] its called the "tyranny of the majority".

But, if memory serves, you're happy that Moscow invaded and seized Crimea?

But what about the Tatars who disappeared, and the ones who were intimidated, the mosques which were fire-bombed, and what about the Ukrainian Orthodox church which has had much of its property in Crimea confiscated by the Moscow-controlled civil authorities there - all documented in restrained language in this report to the Council of Europe. And that's to say nothing of the forced nationalization/confiscation of much of the peninsula's industry and natural resources?

I don't quite see how, on the one hand, you seem unhappy with the "tyranny of the majority", but on the other hand, when it's enacted, you seem unconcerned.

recedite

The deportations of Tatars occurred a long time ago, during Stalin's time.
If a guy of Tatar descent arrives back in Crimea now, and tries to claim back his grandfathers house, he is going to get a cold reception. The same kind of reception that an American jew arriving back in Hungary might get, or a Lebanese Palestinian arriving in Israel with the key of his grandgfather's house that has since been demolished and replaced with a jewish settlement.

Going back even further in time, to when Tatars controlled Crimea as a Khanate, they staged annual slave raiding trips to the north into Ukraine and Russia. Millions of slaves were exported south to the Ottoman empire. The best looking girls ended up in harems and the strongest boys were "re-educated" and trained up to form the elite Janissary units of the Ottoman army. But all that is in the past, we cannot fix it now.

In the most recent referendum held in Crimea, people voted overwhelmingly to join Russia. It turned out to be a smart move, because Russian wages are much higher than the equivalent Ukrainian wage rates, and they have managed to avoid being embroiled in the civil war raging nearby.
I'm not aware of any modern Russian law that disadvantages Tatars, or makes their Muslim religion illegal, or tries to convert them to Russian Orthodox. So yes, I'm largely unconcerned about them.

Hotblack Desiato

There's already a thread for that.

Hotblack Desiato

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/segregation-and-schools-1.2130802

Segregation and schools

A chara, – The recent statistics published in the article “We have allowed segregation to happen” (February 24th) underestimate the reality of ethnic school segregation in primary schools in certain areas of Dublin.

The data, taken from the School Annual Census, known as the October returns, are based on demographic information provided by principals to the Department of Education and Skills.

Questions arise about the validity of the data, as individual principals interpret the question of pupil nationality differently.

Some principals categorise all children born in Ireland (irrespective of the nationality of their parents) as Irish, while others document these children according to their parents’ country of origin.

In the Lucan situation, for example, only two of the five schools which have very high proportions of pupils backgrounds (over 80 per cent) from immigrant backgrounds, featured in the published list of “schools with over two thirds of pupils of a non-Irish background”. The true picture of segregation is more pronounced than is suggested by the article.

The five newest schools in Lucan have migrant populations of between 80 per cent and 95 per cent.

This has occurred as a result of the very unusual (by international standards) patronage system of governance which allows public schools to prioritise children for admission on religious or language-based (Gaeilge) criteria.

The use of “first come, first served” policies favoured by Educate Together and Community National Schools has led to waiting lists which can also militate against newcomer families. When established schools in an area are full, newcomer children enrol in new schools, leading to situations where schools for Irish children and schools for immigrant children co-exist side by side in local communities.

In spite of this new reality, there seems to be little appetite in official circles for the introduction of a state system of primary education, to which all children would have equality of access.

It appears that the proposed Education (Admission to Schools) Bill will tackle the issue of waiting lists, but the right of religious schools and Gaelscoileanna to prioritise children according to their faith or commitment to the Irish language will persist, increasing the likelihood of further segregation in future years.

The disadvantageous effects of large concentrations of ethnic minority pupils on educational achievement, and on newcomer pupils’ acquisition of the host language have been documented in international research as well as the damaging effects of segregation on integration and social cohesion. Unless urgent measures are taken, Irish schools will continue to sleepwalk into segregation, a process that may be impossible to reverse. – Yours, etc,

COLETTE KAVANAGH,

Bray,

Co Wicklow.

Dades

Just looking at that Education (Admission to Schools) Bill.

It really is the same crap again. "Thou shalt not discriminate (except against non-catholics. That's a-okay)."

Ensure, subject to subsection (iii), that the admission policy of the
school includes a statement affirming that the school will not
discriminate against an applicant for admission on the grounds of -
(I) the student having a disability or special educational
need;
(II) the student’s sexual orientation;
(III) the student’s family status;
(IV) the student being a member of the Traveller community;
(V) the student’s race;
(VI) the student’s civil status;
(VII) the student’s gender;
(VIII) the student’s faith or religious tradition or;
(IX) the student having no faith.


(iii) In the case of ...

(II) a school to which the provisions of Section 7(3) (c) of the
Equal Status Act, 2000 apply, the statement referred to in
(ii) shall also state that the school, in accordance with
Section 7(3) (c) of the Equal Status Act, 2000, does not
discriminate where it admits a person of a particular
religious denomination in preference to others or where
it refuses to admit a person who is not of that
denomination, where it is proved that refusal is essential
to maintain the ethos of the school.

robindch

The catholic bishops release a new document on inclusivity in church-controlled schools:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0312/686510-church-school-guidelines/

The document is here:

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/catholic-primary-schools-in-a-changing-ireland.pdf

Pherekydes

That document doesn't address the admission issue: how do you get your kid into a local school without a baptismal cert?

So their spiel about inclusivity is empty rhetoric, as usual.

lazygal

The admissions thing depends on the school and area. Where I live people don't really baptize for schools enrollment, but because of the 'left out of things'/'what about the grannies'/usual guff reasons. It is completely laughable that so-called equality legislation means schools have the right to discriminate and this is protected and dressed up as ethos. I'm sure the usual suspects will be along to tell me if it wasn't for religious people decades ago I'd never have done any booklearning at all - I was told the same hogwash in school.

My main concern with Catholic schools dressing up their perceived right to state funding as them being welcoming and inclusive while being anything but is the constant low level inescapable indoctrination. Like the religious pictures and statues and images of a man dying on a torture device around the place, and school uniforms that are compulsory and have a whacking great cross on them, and prayers at lunchtimes, and trips to churches that your child might have to go on, and the priest popping in for a meet and greet, and after easter in second class being a write-off because of the communion prep.

TheChizler

Pherekydes wrote: »

That document doesn't address the admission issue: how do you get your kid into a local school without a baptismal cert?

So their spiel about inclusivity is empty rhetoric, as usual.

'We'll include you as long as you fit this exact criteria.'

lazygal

TheChizler wrote: »

'We'll include you as long as you fit this exact criteria.'

"We'll include you, but we'll also violate your constitutional rights and impose our doctrine on you, all on the state's dime. And if you're really lucky, Ben who's Pure In Heart will be along to tell you about not having sexy times."

Hotblack Desiato

Still there are some positives in it (if schools actually implement it, and I think the schools which currently cause the most problems will be the slowest to do so, if they do at all)

They're pretty transparently trying to head off the government's plan to ban religious discrimination in enrolment.

Hotblack Desiato

Rev Burke gets his spake in yet again

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/fairy-tales-in-the-classroom-1.2138943

A chara, – Brendan Butler (March 13th), responding to Jennifer O’Connell’s article “Fairy tales have no place in the classroom” (Life & Style, March 9th), thinks it wrong that children be taught the faith of their parents.

It is an odd view; parents quite naturally wish to pass on their values to their children.[1] Indeed, it is their right to do so, both God-given and under the law of the land.

And those values include, whether some like it or not, their religious beliefs.

In any case, even if parents for some reason chose not to take up this right and allow instead a “one size fits all” secularist school system to be introduced, the result would not be that children would grow to adulthood as so many blank canvases, free to seek out their own system of values from some vast smorgasbord of available ideas; they would instead be indoctrinated into the orthodoxies of secularism[2], a way of looking at the world whose advocates like to portray as being some kind of neutral option even as they act to promote its very particular and far from neutral beliefs and values.

Quite why anyone would expect parents to be so monumentally foolish as to agree to the philosophy of strangers forced upon their children[3] and think it better and fairer than their being taught the tenets of their own faith is beyond me. I can only imagine that those who keep bringing up this idea again and again must equate faith with stupidity. – Is mise,

Rev PATRICK G BURKE,

Castlecomer,

Co Kilkenny.

The usual brainless fallacies

[1] Values and doctrine are not the same thing. It is quite possible to have values without doctrine.

[2] Rabble rabble atheism is like a religion rabble rabble :rolleyes: Must study up on the orthodoxies of secularism some more, I failed the exam the last time :rolleyes: I'll never get the doctorate in nontheology at this rate

[3] Yet it's perfectly fine according to the Rev to force HIS sort of philosophy on the children of strangers, and against the will of their parents, because they have no option but to send their children to a religious school.

PopePalpatine

He reminds me of a particularly pompous wannabe historian (who ignores any bit of history that makes his precious church look bad) from t'udder forum.

lazygal

How does he have the time to write so many letters when he's also reverending?

Hotblack Desiato

lazygal wrote: »

How does he have the time to write so many letters when he's also reverending?

Rhymes that keep their secrets
Will unfold behind the clouds
And there upon the rainbow
Is the answer to the reverending story

fisgon

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Rev Burke gets his spake in yet again

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/fairy-tales-in-the-classroom-1.2138943

The usual brainless fallacies

[1] Values and doctrine are not the same thing. It is quite possible to have values without doctrine.

[2] Rabble rabble atheism is like a religion rabble rabble :rolleyes: Must study up on the orthodoxies of secularism some more, I failed the exam the last time :rolleyes: I'll never get the doctorate in nontheology at this rate

[3] Yet it's perfectly fine according to the Rev to force HIS sort of philosophy on the children of strangers, and against the will of their parents, because they have no option but to send their children to a religious school.

Yeah, but it's more than that. The main point that he is missing, is that in a secular system of education, parents are not prevented in any way from passing on their values or their beliefs to their children. Kids are only in school for six or seven hours a day, and not at all at weekends. Parents have lots of opportunity to transmit their beliefs to their children. It just means that they have to do it themselves, or get their particular religious provider to do it.

But then that seems like a lot of work, doesn't it? That's the problem, the religious want the state to continue doing their work for them.

Hotblack Desiato

A counterblast to the Rev today:

Irish Times Letters Page wrote:

Sir, – Rev Patrick G Burke wonders “why anyone would expect parents to be so monumentally foolish as to agree to the philosophy of strangers forced upon their children”. For once, it seems we all agree. – Yours, etc,

SIMON STROUGHAIR,

Dún Laoghaire,

Co Dublin.

expectationlost

Atheist Ireland

Second level schools in Ireland combine the state Religious Education course which is supposed to be for all religions and none with the Guidelines for the Faith Formation and Development of Catholic students https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153082531179017 see pics

https://www.facebook.com/AtheistIreland/photos/a.10152017876464017.1073741825.67573689016/10153084142404017/?type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-xtf1%2Fv%2Ft1.0-9%2F11053282_10153084142404017_2200157244479178726_n.jpg%3Foh%3D7b564aad8a86105e0a8cdb962dfbb8db%26oe%3D55758DDD%26__gda__%3D1434585593_c0496ae3d956ff0b0b5a29f44d1594b8&size=960%2C688&fbid=10153084142404017

Catholic Guidelines on the Faith Formation of Catholic students are combined with the State Religious Education Course at second level. It is an state exam course and many schools make it compulsory. Parents are not informed that Catholic religious formation is integrated into the state religious education course.

https://www.facebook.com/AtheistIreland/photos/a.10152017876464017.1073741825.67573689016/10153080953919017/?type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-
ak-xpf1%2Fv%2Ft1.0-9%2F11009404_10153080953919017_5017648624472644354_n.jpg%3Foh%3D583edae374d7a117e73989e4428abef9%26oe%3D5585F37E%26__gda__%3D1434010113_a550c4e2975091a1e044c015ffa99ad4&size=960%2C771&fbid=10153080953919017

god is responsible forthe creation of the world

https://www.facebook.com/AtheistIreland/photos/a.10152017876464017.1073741825.67573689016/10153080895084017/?type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Fscontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-xpa1%2Fv%2Ft1.0-9%2F11051959_10153080895084017_8375068047058008639_n.jpg%3Foh%3Dc8d3eda9711ba6e5accce6209beb38a2%26oe%3D557A6C33&size=960%2C572&fbid=10153080895084017

atheists are mentioned in a section called Challenges to Faith alongside materialism and fundamentalism

recedite

It seems strange that "Christology" (in the second link) would be something studied in a State exam. Like Alchemy or Unicornology it does not quite seem appropriate.
On the other hand, if "Theology" is being offered at 3rd level, I suppose there should be a 2nd level precursor?

Hotblack Desiato

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/we-need-secular-primary-schools-to-reflect-changes-in-religious-practice-1.2147029

(excerpted for copyright reasons, full article is behind the very easily defeated paywall, emphasis is mine)

We need secular primary schools to reflect changes in religious practice

Brian Whiteside

...
Ireland has changed. There was a time when it could be assumed that most people were religious or at least put up some pretence at being religious. But this is no longer the case. Rather than quoting census figures or church attendance trends let’s look at how couples are choosing to get married. Last year one third of couples getting married had non-religious ceremonies. I think it’s reasonable to ask: what sort of schools do these parents want for their children?

Many such couples would opt for Educate Together schools but there just aren’t enough of them. And it’s not an option to simply allow things to change slowly – there are parents trying to get places for their children now and being told “no, not unless you produce a baptismal certificate”.

...
The Humanist Association of Ireland is launching a campaign to highlight what we see as a great injustice in Irish society. From March 23rd billboards will feature posters stating: “Most State-funded schools discriminate against children who are not baptised” and seeking a texted response.

...
What are the churches afraid of? Is their belief system so fragile that they need to have a special education model to ensure its survival? And how has it fared? Have our largely religious run schools produced citizens who have displayed great integrity and, in a real sense, “done their country some service”? Looking back over the quite recent past I think this is a fair question to ask.

...
Brian Whiteside, Director, Humanist Association of Ireland

Edit: wasn't there some sort of bogus distinction made a few years back to allow HAI to conduct weddings but not AI as they were 'too political' ? Will sticking their heads above the parapet risk HAI being punished by having their civil wedding income stream removed - I wouldn't put it past certain people to try to do this.

shruikan2553

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Edit: wasn't there some sort of bogus distinction made a few years back to allow HAI to conduct weddings but not AI as they were 'too political' ? Will sticking their heads above the parapet risk HAI being punished by having their civil wedding income stream removed - I wouldn't put it past certain people to try to do this.

I think so. AI is seen as a political group. Its not like the RCC is always poking its nose into civil matters.

Hotblack Desiato

Oh don't we know. You couldn't make it up. But this is Ireland where the deranged is normal.


Edit: relevant legislation is Section 3 of the Civil Registration (Amendment) Act 2012 and it appears that any body permitted to solemnise marriages must be registered as a charitable body

Which raises the question again - why on earth is promotion of religion seen in itself as a charitable purpose?? Every business advertises to win new customers.

Peregrinus

AI could register as a charity if they wished to; the HAI is already so registered. Presumably - though of course others can speak on this with more authority than I - the reason AI is not already registered as a charity is because the scale of its activities is sufficiently small that any financial advantage accruiing from registration would not justify the costs of obtaining and maintaining registration.

I suspect the real obstacle to AI being approved to celebrate weddings is s. 45A(1)(b). The principle objects of AI are secular and ethical, but I don't think they are humanist.

recedite

Solemnising marriages could be quite lucrative, which would also make it desirable for AI to claim the charitable status if they went down that road.
Maybe they don't want to get involved with all that. Competing against spiritualists and the like.

Humanists probably do it better. If people want a little bit of theatre and ceremony, but don't want the religious part.

I find it hard to see the difference between the ideals of AI and HAI sometimes, but if anything HAI seems to mimic religious bodies slightly, whereas AI seems slightly more akin to organised political activists.

expectationlost

Atheist Ireland recently registered as a "third party" for purposes of political campaigning during elections and for receiving donations to do so http://www.sipo.gov.ie/Website/en/Reports/Register-of-Third-Parties/

of course Atheist Ireland are humanist, they just not, bow and scrape to Bacik and Burton, Humanists


meanwhile
Psychic medium jailed for stealing €320,000 can legally solemnise marriages, but atheists can not http://www.michaelnugent.com/2015/03/17/psychic-medium-jailed-solemnise-marriages/

expectationlost

Sunday Times: Humanists to start poster campaign against state funded schools requiring baptismal certificates

Peregrinus

expectationlost wrote: »

of course Atheist Ireland are humanist, they just not, bow and scrape to Bacik and Burton, Humanists.

There's no "of course" about it. Nothing on the Atheist Ireland website suggests that the promote humanism, advocate humanism, favour humanism, expect members to be humanists or regard themselves as a humanist organisation. In their account of themselves, they say that they advocate atheism and reason, they oppose superstition and supernaturalism and they favour an ethical, secular society. They make no mention of humanism, and I expect they welcome participation from all atheists, rationalists and secularists, whether they are humanist or not.

SpaceTime

To be perfectly honest, I think they should just open the market.

Why should it be limited to charitable bodies? It could be a huge boost to tourism and the Irish hotels industry if they could make it more hotel friendly.

Marriage is a contract between a couple. I can't really see why that can't be facilitated by anyone or any organisation that meets certain educational standards about the whole solminising process.

I can't really see any reason why you couldn't have people doing this as a commercial venture. We do all other legal services that way : solicitors certainly aren't charitable bodies !

The alternative would be to give the role to local authorities. It seems like a logical thing for city and town halls to do as is the case in France

Why it's a role that the HSE were given is beyond me! I can't think of anything less romantic or stranger than being married by the HSE!
It's about as logical as giving it to An Post and frankly that might even make more sense as they've a vast office network and an ability to post the invitations !

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

and they favour an ethical, secular society. They make no mention of humanism, and I expect they welcome participation from all atheists, rationalists and secularists, whether they are humanist or not.

Well if they favour an ethical society, they are excluding sadists and perhaps the advocates of Nietzche, who might also be atheists. In other words, once you move into "ethical atheist" or "Atheist +" territory you are into the same territory as Humanists, albeit with less of the religious mannerisms.

I'd have thought that registering as a "third party" with the public standards authority was to facilitate AI to conduct political campaigns and receive political donations. At the same time, this political aspect is what excludes them from acting as marriage solemnisers. Religions are allowed to be political, but secular bodies are not (if they want to be marriage solemnisers)

All of which makes it slightly bizarre that HAI are the ones embarking on the schools baptismal cert campaign. A public policy campaign would surely fall under category 4 below, from the explanatory notes pdf on the "third parties" register... ie a political campaign

Political purposes means any of the following purposes, namely:
1. to promote or oppose, directly or indirectly, the interests of a political party, a political group, a member of either House of the Oireachtas or a representative in the European Parliament, or

2. to present, directly or indirectly, the policies or a particular policy of a political party, a political group, a member of either House of the Oireachtas, a representative in the European Parliament or a third party, or

3. to present, directly or indirectly, the comments of a political party, a political group, a member of either House of the Oireachtas, a representative in the European Parliament or a third party with regard to the policy or policies of another political party, political group, member of either House of the Oireachtas, representative in the European Parliament, third party or candidate at an election or referendum or otherwise, or

4. to promote or oppose, directly or indirectly, the interests of a third party in connection with the conduct or management of any campaign conducted with a view to promoting or procuring a particular outcome in relation to a policy or policies or functions of the Government or any public authority;