My four year old has just been discriminated based on her religion!

Bob24

Dan_Solo wrote:

Why are my taxes paying for religious cults to brainwash children?

LeeMajors wrote: »

The same reason your taxes are being used to pay off odious debts, welfare and overpaid PS workers.
It's called democracy, we elect people to govern the country and that's what they do.
You don't pick and choose where your taxes are spent no more than I do.

You can rest assured the State is happy for everyone to pay our debt, regardless of religion, sex, colour of skin, sexual orientation, or whatever else.

I also seem to have noticed that access to social welfare isn't impacted be these either ... not are they taken into account for public service competitions.

hoodwinked

Dan_Solo wrote: »

But all those with baptismal certs did, meaning the non-baptised were inevitably discriminate against.
Not that complicated TBH.

that's not what the op said!

positron wrote: »

hoodwinked - the rest of the statement you highlighted states that's because of the sibling policy. They fell into the second priority. First one was catholic or not. Which then tells me that ALL catholic kids were offered places, and then siblings, and then at some stage they ran out of spaces.

Anyway, how can you justify prioritising four year old based on religion anyway? Isn't it stupid and cruel?

but my point in that post was even in a catholic school, even with a sibling in the case of this school even then this child didn't make it, some children in oversubscribed schools don't make the cut, she simply didn't get in. they were oversubscribed, cuts had to be made one way or another

your child was one of these. yes it sucks but thats how it fell, but look on the bright side, you can send your child to a school that won't force her to do prayers she won't know, or talk about a god she doesn't believe in, or be the only one not making her communion in her class, like i said in a way they stopped you making a bad descion to send her there because it's "easier" for you.

Dan_Solo

Bob24 wrote: »

You can rest assured the State is happy for everyone to pay our debt, regardless of religion, sex, colour of skin, sexual orientation, or whatever else.

I also seem to have noticed that access to social welfare isn't impacted be these either ... not are they taken into account for public service competitions.

Surely I can open a "race based" school just as easily as a "faith based" school? Whites only please! Exactly the same thing.

BQQ

positron wrote: »

Since everyone is asking, here is their enrollment policy:

http://smpps.ie/files/Enrolment-Policy.pdf



So the fact that a friend's non-catholic child was offered a place (despite a very late application) tells me that all catholic kids were catered for already. I hope this addresses some of the questions here.

Didn't you say that your friend had a child in the school already, so would get top priority based on the guidelines?

Dan_Solo

hoodwinked wrote: »

they were oversubscribed, cuts had to be made one way or another

So what? That doesn't alter the fact that the process was discriminatory at all!

positron

hoodwinked wrote: »

..but look on the bright side, you can send your child to a school that won't force her to do prayers she won't know, or talk about a god she doesn't believe in, or be the only one not making her communion in her class, like i said in a way they stopped you making a bad descion to send her there because it's "easier" for you.

+1. Spot on. That is indeed the bright side of this whole fiasco!

January

Dan_Solo wrote: »

But the OP had NO CHANCE AT ALL due to discriminatory selection procedures.

Well that's not true at all. The OP stated that he knows a child who was also not a Catholic that got into the school. So it wasn't the fact that his child wasn't a Catholic that made them deny his/her child a place.

I agree that religion should have nothing to do with schools, especially enrollment. But fact is, at the moment it does.

The OP's child was a denied a place in their first choice of school because it is over subscribed. Nothing more, nothing less.

positron

BQQ wrote: »

Didn't you say that your friend had a child in the school already, so would get top priority based on the guidelines?

Actually that could be the case, who knows how they interpret their priority within that first statement - it states Catholics first, comma, siblings of current students. So I am not sure if they were offered place as top priority, or after serving all baptised kids. I don't they got letters in the first round, they were offered a place in the second round (couple of weeks later), and on the third round (couple of more weeks later) we got our rejection.

BQQ

Dan_Solo wrote: »

"get into schools" can mean "get into a specific school".
Apologies if my use of English is beyond your ability to comprehend.

No it can't. smh

Maybe you should try getting yourself into a school.

positron

January wrote: »

Well that's not true at all. The OP stated that he knows a child who was also not a Catholic that got into the school. So it wasn't the fact that his child wasn't a Catholic that made them deny his/her child a place.

I agree that religion should have nothing to do with schools, especially enrollment. But fact is, at the moment it does.

The OP's child was a denied a place in their first choice of school because it is over subscribed. Nothing more, nothing less.

Not true. The other non-catholic child got a place offered (on the second round, going by how offers were being mailed out) because of the siblings policy (older one already a pupil of the school). They have policy to priorities kids by religion (I posted that earlier). So it's safe to assume they did that.

Dan_Solo

January wrote: »

Well that's not true at all. The OP stated that he knows a child who was also not a Catholic that got into the school. So it wasn't the fact that his child wasn't a Catholic that made them deny his/her child a place.

I agree that religion should have nothing to do with schools, especially enrollment. But fact is, at the moment it does.

The OP's child was a denied a place in their first choice of school because it is over subscribed. Nothing more, nothing less.

The OP might have got a spot if Catholics hadn't been automatically catered for, so simply an incorrect conclusion by you.

Gerry T

CarpeDiem85 wrote: »

Urgh, I don't even want to get involved in this discussion. Severe bug bear of mine as a teacher.

I'm guessing this school has a Catholic ethos which will be clearly defined on their website and on documents that can accessed through the secretary or principal in the school.

How is it discrimination? They have stated their enrolment requirements. You don't fit the bill, it's not the schools fault.

The school doesn't suit your religious or non religious needs. Other schools do.

As a Christian, would I want to teach in a Muslim school. No I wouldn't as I don't share their beliefs.

This is a governmental issue too. They should have foreseen this coming wayyyy down the track 10-15 years ago and should have provided schools to cater for pupils with different beliefs, especially in developing areas at a more rapid rate.

All catholic schools received state funding and the money the church put in came from the people. Maybe the church could do the right thing and give 50% of their schools back to the state, to be run as non religious schools. I bet that would put a stop to the amount of people enrolling in church run schools. The sorry state we find our school system in is not just the responsibility of the state, the church has a a lot to answer for also.

Dan_Solo

Gerry T wrote: »

All catholic schools received state funding and the money the church put in came from the people. Maybe the church could do the right thing and give 50% of their schools back to the state, to be run as non religious schools. I bet that would put a stop to the amount of people enrolling in church run schools. The sorry state we find our school system in is not just the responsibility of the state, the church has a a lot to answer for also.

To anybody who thinks we should be grateful in some way for theists running our educational system, try asking them to stop religion classes and see if they're still interested.

meathstevie

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

The school has its standards, you can either comply with them or not, but if you decide not to do so you have no justification for whining about it. Just tell your daughter that you have decided to disassociate yourself from the local community.

That's fine but than don't accept government money to run the school. Non-Catholics pay taxes as well.

None of my children are christened or inducted in any faith and the local Meath diocese ran NS had no problem enrolling all three and excluding them from religious education.

The local priest who is an absolute pragmatical gentleman simply stated that the school is there for the education of all local children and that someone's religion or lack thereof should not force anyone to be excluded from the local school. By the way, it's not like the school is not struggling with cramped facilities and all either.

It appears it all stands and falls with how the local powers that be ( priest, BOM, etc etc ) approach the issue.

Moonbeam

Incase anyone is interested in the equal status act with regards to schools.

https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Education-Reports/ge_schools_and_equality.pdf

Can you please check your information before posting here ,there is so much incorrect information being stated as fact.

hoodwinked

Dan_Solo wrote: »

The OP might have got a spot if Catholics hadn't been automatically catered for, so simply an incorrect conclusion by you.

the op might have got a spot in a non catholic school too, he might not,

at the end of the day he applied to the wrong school for his child, he now can go rectify that by sending his child to the school better suited to him/her, likewise the school can continue to teach prayers and it's religious ethos to the children who want to learn it, or at least whose parents agreed to have them taught in that manner.

RustyNut

Gerry T wrote: »

All catholic schools received state funding and the money the church put in came from the people. Maybe the church could do the right thing and give 50% of their schools back to the state, to be run as non religious schools. I bet that would put a stop to the amount of people enrolling in church run schools. The sorry state we find our school system in is not just the responsibility of the state, the church has a a lot to answer for also.

The church wont give up their grip easily. If they cant indoctrinate them as kids then they are finished.

Imagine trying to convince an open minded well educated 18 year old that jesus is god because it says so in a book that was written thousands of years ago.

uck51js9zml2yt

Tasden wrote: »

The op already said they prioritise baptised kids, siblings, then locality. So if op's child was baptised they'd have a place regardless of the amount of kids with siblings in the school.

Eta: actually if all the siblings were baptised and op's child was baptised... would op's child have gotten a place if most children applying were a sibling?

For us wanting to send our son to ET (we're not RC) 5 years still placed us 50th on a waiting list of a full class.
Siblings was first , place in que on application was second.
The local Gael scoil didnt even put us on a waiting list. Siblings got priority over everyone according to the rejection letter we got.

If most applying were siblings in the ops case, I assume religion would be second but based on your number on the list so possibly the rejected some RC kids.
But since they've not told the op the reason , we're only guessing.

Gerry T

RustyNut wrote: »

The church wont give up their grip easily. If they cant indoctrinate them as kids then they are finished.

Imagine trying to convince an open minded well educated 18 year old that jesus is god because it says so in a book that was written thousands of years ago.

I think the church is more interested in south Africa and south america where it can work its voodoo on uneducated peoples. Western Europe is slowly moving away from religion, my viewpoint and I'm sure many disagree. BUt I can't see how anyone can think having a religious order in control of education makes any sense. It makes as much sense as them controlling the police force or army

RustyNut

Gerry T wrote: »

I think the church is more interested in south Africa and south america where it can work its voodoo on uneducated peoples. Western Europe is slowly moving away from religion, my viewpoint and I'm sure many disagree. BUt I can't see how anyone can think having a religious order in control of education makes any sense. It makes as much sense as them controlling the police force or army

Thats it. Education is the answer not indoctrination.

Dan_Solo

hoodwinked wrote: »

the op might have got a spot in a non catholic school too, he might not,

at the end of the day he applied to the wrong school for his child, he now can go rectify that by sending his child to the school better suited to him/her, likewise the school can continue to teach prayers and it's religious ethos to the children who want to learn it, or at least whose parents agreed to have them taught in that manner.

You know pretty much nothing about why parents pick the schools they do.

Moonbeam

ok,
We are closing this thread.
I can not keep up with it and very few people have adhered to the earlier warning.
After it is tidied up we will consider re-opening it.