Secularist Education Advocating Banning Religion?

Delirium

J C wrote: »

I have no problem with the beliefs of people of all faiths and none being taught.
However, giving the general impression (and sometimes stating it outright) that the Christian God is a myth, is the 'stock in trade' of the 'secularists' on this thread ... so why will people of the same general beliefs behave any differently in schools, if they gain control over them?

This is silly reasoning. Most adults like to consume alcohol at the weekend, yet all the teachers don't show up to school drunk.

How people discuss a topic here does not indicate what way the school will be run. And as stated repeatedly, secular schools do not allow religious faiths be mocked. All beliefs are respected equally.

The answer seems pretty clear to me that they won't ... and the mere teaching of all subjects from a hard secular point of view is sufficient to transmit secular beliefs to children ... and to suppress the formation of theistic belief (which seem to be the objective of Secularising schools and society, in the first place).

The only subject that can be taught in a secular manner is religion. Secular schools do not suppress the formation of theistic beliefs, that's just scaremongering on your behalf. No school staff will follow a child home and bar their parents/religious leaders from raising the child as a theist.

You want to explain who maths is taught in a theistic manner?

The fact that many Secularists want all schools to be secular, while over 90% of the population are Christian smacks of 'social engineering' and 're-education' not practiced on a similar scale since Atheistic Communism tried to do this in Russia.

You broke the Irony-Meter with that one considering we have an almost exclusively Christian school system. You're complaining of social engineering yet defending a system that is exactly the type you're railing against!

Equally, the claimed 'liberalism' of Secularism on religious matters, is denied by its ban on religious expression in any schools it controls.

Which isn't what is happening as frequently pointed out on this thread. If you're going to make specious claims, at least get some that haven't been debunked already.

Delirium

J C wrote: »

What is the big deal about this? ... nobody is making you do anything ... surely you told your child that they don't need to genuflect.
... and your child learned something about the beliefs of 84% of your neighbours in the process.
This intolerance of the expression of religious belief smacks of secarianism ... yet ye guys claim that secularism is 'liberal' when it comes to faith (or the lack of it).
I'd wonder what you consider intolerance to actually be, if you break out in a cold sweat, when a child says a prayer or wears religious aparrel in the presence of your child.

Considering that you're defending a school system that's 95%+ Christian schools, it's laughable that you're accusing others of sectarianism.

J C

koth wrote: »

Considering that you're defending a school system that's 95%+ Christian schools, it's laughable that you're accusing others of sectarianism.

90% Christian Schools for a population that is 90% Christian is a pro-rata system of education reflecting the faith position of the population.
1% trying to have all schools made in 'their image and likeness', whilst shouting intolerant sectarian remarks about the 90% plus theists who are their neighhbours, smacks of religious intolerance and social re-engineering.
It's certainly not 'liberal' in any meanigful sense of the word 'liberal'.

Kiwi in IE

J C wrote: »

What is the big deal about this? ... nobody is making you do anything ... surely you told your child that they don't need to genuflect.
... and your child learned something about the beliefs of 84% of your neighbours in the process.
This intolerance of the expression of religious belief smacks of secarianism ... yet ye guys claim that secularism is 'liberal' when it comes to faith (or the lack of it).
I'd wonder what you consider intolerance to actually be, if you break out in a cold sweat, when a child says a prayer or wears religious aparrel in the presence of your child.

Put it this way JC, if your child went to school and was told that God does not exist and the bible is fiction, how would you react? And all the schools in your area taught the same. Would it be intolerant of you to think this is a big deal? I think not. You would most certainly have grounds for serious complaint. Now reverse that. I don't know if any god exists, but if one does, I am 100% certain that it is not any that are worshipped by existing organised religions. I think the bible is fictional, loosely based on the lives of real people. My child is being taught in school something entirely contrary to my beliefs as fact. As part of his 'education'. On top of that he is expected to make subservient gestures to creatures I do not believe exist! Now do you see my problem?

I have no issue whatever with him learning about the Catholic religion, the beliefs and practices, along with every other religion. But I do not want any of them taught to him as fact because none of them are fact. And I particularly do not want it taught to him in an official, educational setting.

J C

koth wrote: »

This is silly reasoning. Most adults like to consume alcohol at the weekend, yet all the teachers don't show up to school drunk.

Most adults consume alcohol responsibly at weekends and as a result they don't turn up drunk to work. However, the secularists on this forum don't behave tolerantly towards faith and especially Christian Faith ... and indeed they call for the banning of religious expression from school ... so why should we expect them to allow religious expression in school that they may control, when they have expressly stated that they won't?

koth wrote: »

How people discuss a topic here does not indicate what way the school will be run. And as stated repeatedly, secular schools do not allow religious faiths be mocked. All beliefs are respected equally.

They give a fair idea of how many Secularists think ... and it certainly isn't 'liberal' in any sense of word, when it comes to faith beliefs and their expression and formation.

koth wrote: »

Which isn't what is happening as frequently pointed out on this thread. If you're going to make specious claims, at least get some that haven't been debunked already.

... so are you saying that Secular schools are going to guarantee respect for religious expression and formation within their schools?
If you're not ... its you who is making the specious claims ... that they are.

Kiwi in IE

J C wrote: »

This intolerance of the expression of religious belief smacks of secarianism ...

I am not intolerant of expression of religious belief when the expressions are made by a person of that belief.

I am intolerant of myself or my child being asked to express religious beliefs that we do not hold.

I will tell you what 'smacks of sectarianism' (you might need to look that word up judging by your use of it), children being educated separately in state funded schools based on the beliefs of their parents!

Delirium

J C wrote: »

90% Christian Schools for a population that is 90% Christian is a pro-rata system of education reflecting the faith position of the population.
1% trying to have all schools made in their image and likeness, whilst shouting intolerant sectarian remarks about the 90% plus theists who are their neighhbours smacks of religious intolerance and social re-engineering.
It's certainly not 'liberal' in any meanigful sense of the word 'liberal'.

You're arguing against something no-one is suggesting. You're also making the error by presuming that all Christians object to secular schools. Latest surveys show that the majority of people want a system that reflects the diversity of beliefs in society. A liberal pluralist learning environment that is more inclusive than the current system monopolised by the RCC.

The criticisms that you have incorrectly aimed at secular schools are much more applicable to a Christian school system.

Secular schools will not diminish any childs faith but it will give them a better appreciation of the diversity of beliefs in society. This can only be a good thing.

J C

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Put it this way JC, if your child went to school and was told that God does not exist and the bible is fiction, how would you react? And all the schools in your area taught the same. Would it be intolerant of you to think this is a big deal? I think not. You would most certainly have grounds for serious complaint. Now reverse that. I don't know if any god exists, but if one does, I am 100% certain that it is not any that are worshipped by existing organised religions. I think the bible is fictional, loosely based on the lives of real people. My child is being taught in school something entirely contrary to my beliefs as fact. As part of his 'education'. On top of that he is expected to make subservient gestures to creatures I do not believe exist! Now do you see my problem?

I have no issue whatever with him learning about the Catholic religion, the beliefs and practices, along with every other religion. But I do not want any of them taught to him as fact because none of them are fact. And I particularly do not want it taught to him in an official, educational setting.

Your beliefs are 100% the reverse of my beliefs. There are two ways to reasonably resove this ... your children go to schools that reasonably co-incide with your beliefs, if you can find any ... and mine go to schools that reasonably co-incide with my beliefs, if I can find any.
This will probably mean that both of us will need to make compromises, as it is unlikely that we will get a school that perfectly reflects our beliefs.
Alternatively, if all of our children must go to the one school then robust effective policies that respect the expression of both sets of beliefs need to be accepted and implemented.

The idea 100% of schools should be secular and shouldn't respect the faith expression and formation of 90% plus of the population would seem to be a non-runner.

Delirium

J C wrote: »

Most adults consume alcohol responsibly at weekends and as a result they don't turn up drunk to work. However, the secularists on this forum don't behave tolerantly towards faith and especially Christian Faith ... and indeed they call for the banning of religious expression from school ... so why should we expect them to allow religious expression in school that they may control, when they have expressly stated that they won't?

You missed the point of the analogy. Adults get drunk at the weekend yet teachers don't show up to school drunk. According to your line of argument, all classes are currently being taught by drunks.

Secularism doesn't allow for the banning of religious expression. Secular schools have religious classes so that's evidence that you're wrong about the claim that religion is banned in secular schools.

They give a fair idea of how many Secularists think ... and it certainly isn't 'liberal' in any sense of word, when it comes to faith beliefs and their expression and formation.

Yes. They want to end the religious monopoly that Christianity has in the classroom. Open it up to other points of view also. Such a tragedy that kids will learn about more than just Christianity.

... so are you saying that Secular schools are going to guarantee respect for religious expression and formation within their schools?
If you're not ... its you who is making the specious claims ... that they are.

Yes to religious expression, not to religious formation (that's the responsibility of parents and the relevant religious leaders).

J C

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I am not intolerant of expression of religious belief when the expressions are made by a person of that belief.

So you should have no problem with the expression and formation of religion in school then.

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I am intolerant of myself or my child being asked to express religious beliefs that we do not hold.

We can be asked to do anything ... forcing somebody to do something against their conscience is where liberalism ceases ... and nobody was forcing you or your child to genuflect.

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I will tell you what 'smacks of sectarianism' (you might need to look that word up judging by your use of it), children being educated separately in state funded schools based on the beliefs of their parents!

Attending schools (or indeed churches) that you prefer is the ultimate in liberalism. Expressing intolerance of other peoples beliefs and churches is sectarianism.

Turtwig

This is going nowhere. JC, how about you try to argue for what you think is the position of Koth and others? Yourself and Koth swap roles.

Delirium

I'd be willing to give it a go if JC is up for it

Kiwi in IE

J C wrote: »

Your beliefs are 100% the reverse of my beliefs. There are two ways to reasonably resove this ... your children go to schools that reasonably co-incide with your beliefs, if you can find any ... and mine go to schools that reasonably co-incide with my beliefs.
Alternatively, if all of our children must go to the one school then robust effective policies that respect the expression of both sets of beliefs need to be accepted and implemented.

The idea 100% of schools should be secular and shouldn't respect the faith expression and formation of 90% plus of the population would seem to be a non-runner.

Oh dear JC after all the posts clearly explaining to you what secular means, do you actually still not get it?

A school that could adequately cater for both your beliefs and my beliefs and be respectful to both, despite that they are the polar opposite of each other, IS A SECULAR SCHOOL!!!!

Days 298

J C wrote: »

Your beliefs are 100% the reverse of my beliefs. There are two ways to reasonably resove this ... your children go to schools that reasonably co-incide with your beliefs, if you can find any ... and mine go to schools that reasonably co-incide with my beliefs.
Alternatively, if all of our children must go to the one school then robust effective policies that respect the expression of both sets of beliefs need to be accepted and implemented.

The idea 100% of schools should be secular and shouldn't respect the faith expression and formation of 90% plus of the population would seem to be a non-runner.

Why must beliefs be taught in school as fact? Why cant parents indoctrinate their children at home. God doesn't exist. My future children should never be told that God exists by a state paid teacher. In the same way a teacher should never say God doesn't exist. They should be neutral, at present they are not even close. The simplest way to do this is remove religious bias from the classroom (the pupils still wear their own religious items). That is not banning religion, its keeping schools neutral. And if neutral means God isnt mentioned as often as some Christians want they should fund their own schools and pay for their own Christian biased teachers. The current status quo is a joke.

90% of the population would not see it as unacceptable this isn't Saudi Arabia, and churches are awful quiet. If 90% of Ireland are Catholic we must have the worst Catholics ever. Seeing as the majority are in favour of abortion and gay marriage. Census figures are rubbish basis to an argument to impose and give favouritism to a religion. I don't see many workplaces with crosses up by the office clock.

Also why do you bold everything? Are your points not strong enough without putting emphasis on words?

J C

koth wrote: »

Secularism doesn't allow for the banning of religious expression. Secular schools have religious classes so that's evidence that you're wrong about the claim that religion is banned in secular schools.

Religious expression is the key issue ... not some exclusively Secular view of religion being taught in school.

koth wrote: »

Yes. They want to end the religious monopoly that Christianity has in the classroom. Open it up to other points of view also. Such a tragedy that kids will learn about more than just Christianity.

What you appear to want to do (and what has happened in Public Schools in Ameriaca) is to eliminate the expression of all faith in the classroom ... and replace it with a Secular monopoly.

koth wrote: »

Yes to religious expression, not to religious formation (that's the responsibility of parents and the relevant religious leaders).

They're both 'flip sides of the one coin' ... faith formation is facilitated by faith expression and faith expression forms faith.

Kiwi in IE

I don't think many A&As would particularly want their child in an athiest school either. Which is what you are clearly confusing for a secular school. I have no interest in any school telling my child what they should believe, even if it is in line with my beliefs. I believe that a school should educate a child not indoctrinate them with any belief or non belief. That is a parents business, not a schools. I would think many of the A&A regulars would share this outlook.

Kiwi in IE

Jernal wrote: »

This is going nowhere. JC, how about you try to argue for what you think is the position of Koth and others? Yourself and Koth swap roles.

I tried that! Resulted in JC continuing to confuse secular education for atheist education.

Delirium

J C wrote: »

Religious expression is the key issue ... not some exclusively Secular view of religion being taught in school.

So you want a classroom where Muslims can be told that they follow a false prophet and will burn in hell unless they accept Christ as saviour? Because that's what you're advocating by arguing against secular schools.

What you appear to want to do (and what has happened in Public Schools in Ameriaca) is to eliminate the expression of all faith in the classroom ... and replace it with a Secular monopoly.

You're quite wrong about my opinions on schools.

secular monopoly is an oxymoron. How can it be monopoly if every faith is present in the religion class?

They're both 'flip sides of the one coin' ... faith formation is facilitated by faith expression and faith expression forms faith.

Maybe for you but I can express views about Christianity without engaging in faith formation. You can express views about Islam without becoming a Muslim. etc. etc.

Delirium

@JC: do you want to give the role reversal a try as Jernal suggested?

J C

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Oh dear JC after all the posts clearly explaining to you what secular means, do you actually still not get it?

A school that could adequately cater for both your beliefs and my beliefs and be respectful to both, despite that they are the polar opposite of each other, IS A SECULAR SCHOOL!!!!

... but you guys keep saying that secular schools should (and do) ban the expression and formation of faith ... which certainly doesn't adequately cater for my beliefs.

J C

koth wrote: »

@JC: do you want to give the role reversal a try as Jernal suggested?

I think it will only create even more confusion than is already on this thread (if that is possible!!!)
... and it would be technically trolling, if we both start expressing opinions that we don't actually believe.

Delirium

J C wrote: »

I think it will only create even more confusion than is already on this thread (if that is possible!!!)
... and it would be technically trolling, if we both start expressing opinions that we don't actually believe.

But that's some of the purpose of the exercise. To see how well we each understand of the others views. As long as it's done sincerely and we each accept any corrections from the other, I don't see the problem.

J C

koth wrote: »

So you want a classroom where Muslims can be told that they follow a false prophet and will burn in hell unless they accept Christ as saviour? Because that's what you're advocating by arguing against secular schools.

Christian Schools respect the Muslim religion and would not say such a thing.

koth wrote: »

secular monopoly is an oxymoron. How can it be monopoly if every faith is present in the religion class?

The monopoly I was referring to was a monopoly of control ... and not a monopoly on attendance.

koth wrote: »

Maybe for you but I can express views about Christianity without engaging in faith formation.

Of course you can!!
... but I want faith formation and not just a Secular-biased view of Christianity for my children in school.

Kiwi in IE

J C wrote: »

... but you guys keep saying that secular schools ban the expression and formation of faith ... which certainly doesn't adequately cater for my beliefs.

A secular school has no position on personal beliefs. All beliefs and none are respected but no belief system is promoted over others as the 'right one'. An child from an atheist family will not be told their parents beliefs are right nor wrong. Same with a child from a Christian, Muslim or Hindu family. All children will learn about all religions in a respectful way without any being reinforced as fact. It will be left for the parents to do that within the home and the church. Difference is respected and celebrated. The opposite of sectarian!

All schools with 100% state funding in NZ are secular. I have never heard of any complaint from religious families that their beliefs have been disrespected. And families of a huge variety of beliefs attend these schools, because NZ is more multi denominational than Ireland.

Turtwig

J C wrote: »

I think it will only create even more confusion than is already on this thread (if that is possible!!!)
... and it would be technically trolling, if we both start expressing opinions that we don't actually believe.

Not really it's a form of dialogue and reasoning. It's not trolling unless you're intentionally doing so to wind up others or derail a discussion. If anything this thread is at a roadblock so it's just an idea to try to clear that roadblock.

Delirium

J C wrote: »

Christian Schools respect the Muslim religion and would not say such a thing.

But yet secular schools can't???

The monopoly I was referring to was a monopoly of control ... and not a monopoly on attendance.

I was referring to how the school is run.

I'll bet you can!!
... but I want faith formation and not just a Secular-biased view of Christianity.

Then live up to your parental responsibility for your childrens faith formation rather than looking to hand it over to the state.

Clockwork Owl

Oh my life. -No one- has said that secular schools ban expressions or formations of faith. If a child wants to pray before class or wear a crucifix necklace or attend a Christian lunchtime or after school club, they CAN. They just don't HAVE TO. And at the moment, that's the situation many Irish children are finding themselves in, where they are either forced to participate in faith-formative indoctrination that is contrary to their parents' beliefs or risk social exclusion by opting out - which is, I fear, not always a possibility.

It's not as if you don't understand that generalisations can be frustrating, J C. You yourself said that the Christian fundamentalists preaching hatred against homosexuals in America and the extremists pushing the 'Kill The Gays' Bill in Uganda weren't 'proper' Christians in your eyes. Why then is it so hard to understand that, while SOME pro-secularist people may also choose to bash religion and encourage atheism, that is not what 'true' secularism is about.

If SOME Christians claim that homosexuality should be punishable by death and murder pro-choice doctors, that does not mean that the MAJORITY of Christians believe that.

If SOME secularists claim that all children must be told that there is factually no God whatsoever and want all expressions of religion banned everywhere, that does not mean that the MAJORITY of secularists believe that.

See where I'm going with this? It's a vocal minority that are attempting to hijack the name of a cause and divert it from its original purpose to meet their own ends and spread their own intolerance.

A 'true' secularist school would have no reason to rail against Religious Education, so long as it is just that - education about world religions. I believe that, when taught correctly, R.E. is an excellent tool to discourage racism and ignorance of other faiths and cultures. It gives children the chance to understand various faiths through interaction with various faith leaders, as well as opening the gates for critical thinking and debate on many current talking points: euthanasia, marriage and abortion, for example.

I'd also like to add that not believing a faith position doesn't make parents incapable of impartially teaching their children about it. My parents taught me about Ancient Greek and Egyptian religion, taking me to museums and exhibitions as a child. That doesn't mean they believed in the Pantheon or thought that the sky was made up of a naked lady. They simply explained that this is what people used to believe, and that was really interesting to me. I don't see why teaching about Islam or Christianity or Buddhism or any other religion needs to be that much different. The phrase 'Some people believe this' works absolute wonders.

J C

Clockwork Owl wrote: »

Oh my life. -No one- has said that secular schools ban expressions or formations of faith. If a child wants to pray before class or wear a crucifix necklace or attend a Christian lunchtime or after school club, they CAN. They just don't HAVE TO. And at the moment, that's the situation many Irish children are finding themselves in, where they are either forced to participate in faith-formative indoctrination that is contrary to their parents' beliefs or risk social exclusion by opting out - which is, I fear, not always a possibility.

Few, if any, will socially exclude anybody who opts out of relgion class.
... and if somebody does, then many more people will socially include them.

Clockwork Owl wrote: »

It's not as if you don't understand that generalisations can be frustrating, J C. You yourself said that the Christian fundamentalists preaching hatred against homosexuals in America and the extremists pushing the 'Kill The Gays' Bill in Uganda weren't 'proper' Christians in your eyes.

Why then is it so hard to understand that, while SOME pro-secularist people may also choose to bash religion and encourage atheism, that is not what 'true' secularism is about.

My general personal experience of Secular people is that they tend to be liberal, their children happily attend religion classes and diiferent social and faith occasions in various churches ... and they certainly don't bash religion and are quite respectful of it.
... but then I come onto the A & A and I find the opposite ... including strident calls to ban religious expression in all schools and many (if not most) threads making fun of or disrespecting religion.

Clockwork Owl wrote: »

If SOME Christians claim that homosexuality should be punishable by death and murder pro-choice doctors, that does not mean that the MAJORITY of Christians believe that.

A Christian cannot claim any Christian authority for such actions. If they do them, they aren't behaving as Christians should.
... and crucially, nobody is advocating that the state should endorse or support such actions - the reverse, in fact.

Clockwork Owl wrote: »

If SOME secularists claim that all children must be told that there is factually no God whatsoever and want all expressions of religion banned everywhere, that does not mean that the MAJORITY of secularists believe that.

It is indeed possible that this may be true.
... but if it is, then Secular Schools shouldn't ban the expression of religion within their premises.

Clockwork Owl wrote: »

See where I'm going with this? It's a vocal minority that are attempting to hijack the name of a cause and divert it from its original purpose to meet their own ends and spread their own intolerance.

If this is true, then it is even more important that Secular Schools make a point of respecting the expression and formation of religion within their schools (whilst obviously also respecting the rights of Secularists as well).

Clockwork Owl wrote: »

A 'true' secularist school would have no reason to rail against Religious Education, so long as it is just that - education about world religions. I believe that, when taught correctly, R.E. is an excellent tool to discourage racism and ignorance of other faiths and cultures. It gives children the chance to understand various faiths through interaction with various faith leaders, as well as opening the gates for critical thinking and debate on many current talking points: euthanasia, marriage and abortion, for example.

I agree ... provided an Atheist or anti-theist 'spin' isn't put on the RE programme.

Clockwork Owl wrote: »

I'd also like to add that not believing a faith position doesn't make parents incapable of impartially teaching their children about it. My parents taught me about Ancient Greek and Egyptian religion, taking me to museums and exhibitions as a child. That doesn't mean they believed in the Pantheon or thought that the sky was made up of a naked lady. They simply explained that this is what people used to believe, and that was really interesting to me. I don't see why teaching about Islam or Christianity or Buddhism or any other religion needs to be that much different. The phrase 'Some people believe this' works absolute wonders.

... the phrase 'Some people believe this' will only work wonders, if what follows is an accurate and respectful account of what they actually believe.

... at last, if these are your actual beliefs, and if I'm understanding you correctly, we possibly have a liberal Secularist visiting us on the thread.

Kiwi in IE

JC did you purposely ignore my discription of how beliefs are managed within secular education so you can continue to pretend you don't know what secular education means?

J C

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

JC did you purposely ignore my discription of how beliefs are managed within secular education so you can continue to pretend you don't know what secular education means?

I didn't ignore it ... I have answered something similar several times already.
I addressed Clockwork Owls posting, as it appears to be bringing some fresh thinking to the thread ... that may turn out to be important.

Delirium

@JC are you opposed to the current religion classes in secondary schools? AFAIK, it's a secular lesson plan covering a variety of world religions.

Why can't primary schools use the same model?

Corkfeen

JC you should be effortlessly able to produce an example of a secular education system that tells children that the religious beliefs their parents are teaching them is bs. They educate students about major world religions and leave the parents to provide education on their faith outside of the classroom.

You may claim that they're forcing it out of them in the classroom but you have yet to provide a coherent argument that supports this statement. To be honest, it sounds like lazy parenting if the parents can't educate them on such an 'important' matter.

shruikan2553

J C, why do you want children to be separated from each other and taught that the other children they dont mix with are wrong? We have had issues with a them vs us attitude in religions. What if we taught them we are all the same and some people believe different thing but you can still be friends with them, talk to them about maths, be on the same school team? Or because 90% of the populations is "catholic" so we must tell them all that contraception is wrong, their god loves them so much that they are born bad unless they worship him and if you're going within 6 feet of a girl you better be married or you'll suffer for eternity? Oh and dont forget gays are abominations, johnie doesnt know his father? better stone the mother after she had pre marital sex, then theres the whole the uniforms they wear are sending them to hell.

Hotblack Desiato

J C wrote: »

Christian Schools respect the Muslim religion and would not say such a thing.

Yet - in the 80s in an RC school I was told that protestants were going to hell.

J C wrote: »

... at last, if these are your actual beliefs, and if I'm understanding you correctly, we possibly have a liberal Secularist visiting us on the thread.

J C, I engaged with you over quite a number of posts, I have discussed the question of what secularism means, as have other posters. Whenever I've asked you a hard question you've just ignored it. Now you are being intellectually dishonest, engaging with other posters claiming that a viewpoint very close if not identical to the one I've previously expressed is 'a breath of fresh air' while still not addressing the points previously raised.

gaynorvader

Here J C, you are clearly having problems with your understanding of what secularism means. This page explains it very well albeit from a UK perspective. Have a read, it doesn't mean persecuting Christians, really.

SpaceTime

I think people need to stop deliberately and accidentally conflating secularism and atheism.

Secular state services are the norm in the modern world and they allow everyone to access public services on an equal basis.

They simply have nothing to do with religion.

Secularism isn't atheism. it is open systems that are not religiously based that can be accessed by all.

All I see in Ireland is people concluding that secularism = atheism and removing religion from life entirely. That is not what it is about.

It would remove it from schools or at least make it opt in rather than opt out.

The current system (especially at primary school) is just not fit for purpose as a public school system as one set of religious beliefs are mixed through the entire curriculum.

Its really not acceptable in any society to do that to public services.

Ireland is not and never has been 'a Catholic country'. Its a Republic in which there are a lot of Catholics but it has always had other religious groups and atheists and agnostics.

Sadly our ideals of republicanism were hijacked by right wing conservative Catholics in the early days of the state.

We need to re-think what we mean when we call ourselves a democratic republic. Fundamentally, we don't really seem to understand the concept. It means a lot more than being 'not Britain'.

We need to rediscover some of the idealism of having a truly fair, open, equal society and a genuine republic.

We have ended up with a nominal republic with vestiges of a theocracy instead.

You cannot claim to have equality in a system that still favours one or two religions in delivery of public services.

Cabaal

J C may the flying spaghetti monster bless you with his noodly appendages. He spreads his love around and forgives you for your belief that a false religion should be used to teach his children.

Sarky

J C still being dishonest and clueless? Must be a week day.

Bannasidhe

Sarky wrote: »

J C still being dishonest and clueless? Must be a week day.

Ah now, his (her?) position is clear: he/she believes that all religions or no religions should be taught in schools but would prefer the former. As he/she believes there is only one true religion - the one he/she follows- therefore when he/she says religion should be taught he/she means the religion he/she holds to be true as all the other religions are false and logically should not be taught to impressionable minds.:mad:

It is also demonstrably unfair to expect parents to find the time to teach religion to their own children because parents are busy and pay taxes and the X Factor/Soccer is back on the telly and this takes up a lot of adult time so how can parents be expected to devote some time to 'saving' their children's immortal souls?????

Brian Shanahan

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ah now, his (her?) position is clear: he/she believes that all religions or no religions should be taught in schools but would prefer the former. As he/she believes there is only one true religion - the one he/she follows- therefore when he/she says religion should be taught he/she means the religion he/she holds to be true as all the other religions are false and logically should not be taught to impressionable minds.:mad:

It is also demonstrably unfair to expect parents to find the time to teach religion to their own children because parents are busy and pay taxes and the X Factor/Soccer is back on the telly and this takes up a lot of adult time so how can parents be expected to devote some time to 'saving' their children's immortal souls?????

Wow, random bolding of worlds really does improve your message!

I never thought it would work.

Bannasidhe

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Wow, random bolding of worlds really does improve your message!

I never thought it would work.

It is totes amazeballs.

mohawk

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It is totes amazeballs.

Is there any chance this can be banned in the same way textspeak is banned. I will suck up to a moderator if needed to get this to happen.

It fills me with rage :mad:

swampgas

J C wrote: »

... but I want faith formation and not just a Secular-biased view of Christianity for my children in school.

If you want "faith formation" - i.e. indoctrination in school, then you are against secular education. There is no way "faith formation" can occur in a way that satisfies every parent, as it is inherently divisive.

On the other hand, if you do want state schools to serve the community without discrimination, then any specific faith formation (indoctrination) must be done outside of formal school classes - either by the parents, or the relevant church.

What's so hard to understand about that?

Piliger

France unveils 'secular charter' for all schools.

Morag

koth wrote: »

@JC are you opposed to the current religion classes in secondary schools? AFAIK, it's a secular lesson plan covering a variety of world religions.

Why can't primary schools use the same model?

Have you read any of the secondary school RE books?
They cover other religions with in the context of Christianity:mad:

http://www.gillmacmillan.ie/secondary-religious-education/secondary-religious-education/pathways-to-god-1

http://www.gillmacmillan.ie/secondary-religious-education/secondary-religious-education/pathways-to-god-2

J C

swampgas wrote: »

If you want "faith formation" - i.e. indoctrination in school, then you are against secular education. There is no way "faith formation" can occur in a way that satisfies every parent, as it is inherently divisive.

... and 'anti-faith formation' would be even more divisive.
Schools do not perform secular state roles, like issuing Drivers Licences, tax collection, policing, etc ... where the religion of the recipients and the functionaries is completely irrelevant.
Schools are centres of education and opinion formation ... and that is why anti-theists want to remove Theistic control over schools in order to replace it with their own values and beliefs.
... and the idea that anti-theists have no beliefs is denied by their virulent opposition to Theistic ideas and beliefs.
Just like Theists have deeply held beliefs and worldviews ... so also do anti-theists.

... and accommodating both sets of belief is the issue and the challenge.

Its very easy for anti-theists to tell theist parents to teach their children religion at home while teaching exclusively secular principles at school ... but its just as easy for theistic parents to tell anti-theistic parents to do the same and teach their children irreligion at home, while teaching exclusively religious principles at school.

Delirium

Morag wrote: »

Have you read any of the secondary school RE books?
They cover other religions with in the context of Christianity:mad:

http://www.gillmacmillan.ie/secondary-religious-education/secondary-religious-education/pathways-to-god-1

http://www.gillmacmillan.ie/secondary-religious-education/secondary-religious-education/pathways-to-god-2

No. I wasn't able to find much info about RE in secondary schools but anything I did find suggested a more secular course. Silly me for daring to hope it would actually be true.

swampgas

J C wrote: »

... and 'anti-faith formation' would be even more divisive.
Schools do not perform secular state roles, like issuing Drivers Licences, tax collection, policing, etc ... where the religion of the recipients or the functionaries is completely irrelevant.
Schools are centres of education and opinion formation ... and that is why anti-theists want to remove Theistic control over schools in order to replace it with their own values and beliefs.
... and the idea that anti-theists have no beliefs is denied by their virulent opposition to Theistic ideas and beliefs.
Theists have deeply held beliefs and worldviews ... and so also do anti-theists.

You keep banging that drum. It's very tedious.

There is no "anti-faith" formation in a secular school. You seem to be convinced that if teachers aren't constantly reinforcing some particular set of religious beliefs all through Maths, English, Irish, History, Science, etc., that despite the efforts of the parents at home and the church at Sunday school/whatever, somehow the poor kids will end up as godless atheist secularist monsters.

To be honest it doesn't say much for the Christian "message" that the only way to make it stick is to constantly beat children over the head with it all through primary school.

Delirium

J C wrote: »

... and 'anti-faith formation' would be even more divisive.

What exactly is 'anti-faith formation'?

Schools do not perform secular state roles, like issuing Drivers Licences, tax collection, policing, etc ... where the religion of the recipients or the functionaries is completely irrelevant.

And that's the problem. Why must a school be Christian run to teach about maths, English, geography, history, art, PE, religion etc.?

Schools are centres of education and opinion formation ... and that is why anti-theists want to remove Theistic control over schools in order to replace it with their own values and beliefs.

Actually, the reality is that theists don't want an opinion discussion around religion. Keep all other voices but Christianity out of the school. Stop any possibility of students having an informed opinion.

Schools are places of learning. The students should arrive at their opinions freely after receiving the information, rather than just present Christianity and think that's a fair approach in a secular democracy.

... and the idea that anti-theists have no beliefs is denied by their virulent opposition to Theistic ideas and beliefs.
Theists have deeply held beliefs and worldviews ... and so also do anti-theists.

Yes, every has opinions. But some of us are willing to allow multiple opinions be expressed rather than just Christian opinion.

Gordon

J C wrote: »

Schools are centres of education and opinion formation

Do you think that schools should imbue opinions upon the students, or provide them the facts necessary for the students to form their own opinions?