What to tell kids when they ask?

One eyed Jack

kylith wrote: »

Polls show that 40% are in favour of secular schools. I'd hardly call that a tiny minority. Add in the 'don't care's and I think it'd go over 50%.

I'd say you could push it up to 84% of parents in favour of secular schools if you wanted, but it still wouldn't be a reflection of reality (a bit like the census figures regarding the number of people who identify as RC), that when push comes to shove and parents realise they might somehow be inconvenienced (Sunday school? They don't even attend mass ffs! :pac:), they suddenly get very defensive about maintaining the status quo.

They'll answer aurvey questions whatever way you want them to, but when it comes to taking action - that's someone else's responsibility.

They're happy with the status quo because they get to have the big days out for communion and confirmation without having to lift a finger except to buy a new outfit for he child. If the sacraments are important to them surely they'd have no problem with bringing the child to a church run system outside of school hours.

I can't really disagree with you there, and that's the reason why parents want the teachers to do all the preparation and so on, because they don't have the time and they don't want to take the time and they have no interest in a church run system outside school hours. Why would they when the school is prepared to do it for them?

RainyDay

Swanner wrote: »

And then you have people like me who are not religious but also want to send their kids to a faith school. We make significant sacrifices so both of ours can attend a CoI secondary outside of the local area. Both made their communion, confirmation and confessions. (My wife is a lapsed Roman Catholic so they had an RC influence too.) One just went through the motions and one of them has had a faith for as long as she's been able to speak. Bottom line is they make their own choices on religion without any interference from me or my wife and I have no issue whatsoever supporting them in their choices even when they conflict with my own beliefs.

How did she get a faith as a toddler without 'any interference' from parents? Did she lick it off the stones?

Of course she got the faith from her parents.

Just curious - do you avail of the state subsidy to help COI families with school fees?

The Bishop Basher

looksee wrote: »

It has already been said a number of times that non-religious people (well, several of the people posting here) have no objection to children being taught about religions, in fact it is an essential part of understanding the society we live in. What we do not want is the indoctrination that is being given at the moment, two very different things.

Understood and agreed although I don't think we should deny other parents the right to indoctrinate their kids should they wish to do so.

My comment was directed at those who specifically and deliberately ensure their children are not given all the information available before allowing them decide for themselves.

The Bishop Basher

looksee wrote: »

It has already been said a number of times that non-religious people (well, several of the people posting here) have no objection to children being taught about religions, in fact it is an essential part of understanding the society we live in. What we do not want is the indoctrination that is being given at the moment, two very different things.

Understood and agreed although I don't think we should deny other parents the right to indoctrinate their kids should they wish to do so.

My comment was directed at those, like the OP, who specifically and deliberately ensure their children are not given all the information available before "allowing them decide for themselves."

Shrap

Swanner wrote: »

Understood and agreed although I don't think we should deny other parents the right to indoctrinate their kids should they wish to do so.

Nobody would object to that, if they did it in their own time and not at the expense of hours upon hours of my kids' education.

eviltwin

Swanner wrote: »

Understood and agreed although I don't think we should deny other parents the right to indoctrinate their kids should they wish to do so.

My comment was directed at those, like the OP, who specifically and deliberately ensure their children are not given all the information available before allowing them decide for themselves.

She doesn't need to know, she's only in junior infants. I think children should be educated about different belief systems but they don't need anything other than the most basic of information at that age.

lazygal

Swanner wrote: »

Understood and agreed although I don't think we should deny other parents the right to indoctrinate their kids should they wish to do so.

My comment was directed at those, like the OP, who specifically and deliberately ensure their children are not given all the information available before "allowing them decide for themselves."

Is there any belief or set of beliefs parents shouldn't be allowed to indoctrinate their children in?

kylith

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'd say you could push it up to 84% of parents in favour of secular schools if you wanted, but it still wouldn't be a reflection of reality (a bit like the census figures regarding the number of people who identify as RC), that when push comes to shove and parents realise they might somehow be inconvenienced (Sunday school? They don't even attend mass ffs! :pac:), they suddenly get very defensive about maintaining the status quo.

They'll answer aurvey questions whatever way you want them to, but when it comes to taking action - that's someone else's responsibility.





I can't really disagree with you there, and that's the reason why parents want the teachers to do all the preparation and so on, because they don't have the time and they don't want to take the time and they have no interest in a church run system outside school hours. Why would they when the school is prepared to do it for them?

So the schools should remain sectarian and discriminatory because parents don't care enough to put in the effort to do it themselves? And they don't have time, but somehow non-religious/non-Christian parents are supposed to have the time to drive children hours out of their way on a daily basis to go to a secular school?

Schools should remain in religious control because "[parents] don't want to take the time and they have no interest in a church run system outside school hours"? Parents couldn't give a sht about their child's religious upbringing if they have to put any effort in, but it's SOOOO important to them that they get all pissy if secular education is mentioned? Tough noogies to them so. If they can't be bothered to put the effort in themselves then it's obviously not that important to them, after all, they make time for piano lessons and ballet classes and football clubs and none of those are supplied by the schools.

looksee

Swanner wrote: »

Understood and agreed although I don't think we should deny other parents the right to indoctrinate their kids should they wish to do so.

My comment was directed at those, like the OP, who specifically and deliberately ensure their children are not given all the information available before "allowing them decide for themselves."

So we are agreed that indoctrination is necessary to produce a religious child?

If children were 'given all the information' rather than being indoctrinated, how many of them would choose one of the religions discussed and become a follower of that religion?

One eyed Jack

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

There is no need whatsoever to set up any additional schools or spend any more money to solve this problem.

There is, because schools with a religious ethos aren't going anywhere any time soon, and so the State needs to build new schools to accommodate parents who do not wish to avail of education provided in schools which do not meet their needs for their children.

Excuse me, but the state is obliged to provide for primary education for every child. They currently don't do this on an equal basis, as schools the state funds are permitted to discriminate on the basis of religion.
Sure, every child finds a place somewhere, eventually but it's the children of non-catholics who are routinely inconvenienced - at best.
If you've been reading and understanding my posts you'd know that the last thing I want is a non-denom school set up for a handful of pupils. I don't want kids to be segregated on the basis of religion or non-religion at all.

They do provide funding on a proportionate basis to all schools, through the patronage system. There's no point in giving a school with 600 pupils the same funding as a school with 50 pupils. I know you don't want children segregated, but the vast majority of parents do! That's why not only do they examine the ethos of the school, but they examine the schools academic record, and they examine the demographics of the school. There are a lot of parents who feel that their children's education is not best served in a school where half the children their first language is not english for example.

Exactly, it abdicates responsibility for delivery of the services it (or rather we) pays for. It has effectively gifted state funds and lands over to unaccountable, unelected religious bodies to use for their own benefit.

But most parents are ok with this. They are perfectly willing to pay for it. They have no interest in paying more taxes to pay for more schools.

It's not about shares of funding. It's about a system that provides for everyone and excludes no-one.

Not sure how many times this needs to be reiterated, but the vast majority of parents disagree with you.

No it's not. It's not a 'choice' when parents enrol their kids in the default option, or perhaps the only option. It's a historical legacy and one which is discriminatory and damaging.

It's like you don't want to accept that parents make choices for their own children and they don't particularly care whether you find it damaging, they prefer one school over another because they want to discriminate in their own children's best interests. They don't want their children mixing with "foreigners", in the same way as you don't want your children influenced by religion.

That's like saying I'm not sick, why am I paying for hospitals.
Society as a whole benefits from having children educated to a good standard.
Society does not benefit however from pandering to religions' desires to segregate children on sectarian grounds and indoctrinate them at taxpayers' expense and discriminate against everyone not in the 'big 2' religions.

It's not religions' desires to segregate children. It's parents desires to segregate their children, on whatever grounds they like. We've already been over the "I pay my taxes" argument - I pay my taxes too, it doesn't mean I get to decide where my individual taxes are spent. I can campaign for more funding to be diverted into homeless services for example, but I don't get to say "I don't want my taxes paying for social welfare!".

It's no more defensible to have hospitals operating on catholics first than it is to have schools enrolling catholics first.

If I break my leg, there's not much use in sending me to a maternity hospital! Hospitals discriminate all the time on who they will and won't admit for treatment.

The Bishop Basher

Shrap wrote: »

Nobody would object to that, if they did it in their own time and not at the expense of hours upon hours of my kids' education.

Agreed. Your children should not be inconvenienced so other can get a religious education. How we achieve that is the problem but I agree with the theory.

lazygal wrote: »

Is there any belief or set of beliefs parents shouldn't be allowed to indoctrinate their children in?

Interesting question. There are obvious things that we don't want to see children indoctrinated with such as intolerance, hate or violence but how do you control it. Northern Ireland springs to mind as an example but we only ever see the end result when it results in murder or rioting. It's done in the privacy of people homes and it's done subconciously most of the time. I don't believe it's something we can ever influence effectively.

One eyed Jack

kylith wrote: »

So the schools should remain sectarian and discriminatory because parents don't care enough to put in the effort to do it themselves? And they don't have time, but somehow non-religious/non-Christian parents are supposed to have the time to drive children hours out of their way on a daily basis to go to a secular school?

Schools should remain in religious control because "[parents] don't want to take the time and they have no interest in a church run system outside school hours"? Parents couldn't give a sht about their child's religious upbringing if they have to put any effort in, but it's SOOOO important to them that they get all pissy if secular education is mentioned? Tough noogies to them so. If they can't be bothered to put the effort in themselves then it's obviously not that important to them, after all, they make time for piano lessons and ballet classes and football clubs and none of those are supplied by the schools.

I think it's more a case of those parents who have everything their own way saying tough noogies to everyone else tbh.

It's unfair on those parents who are in a minority of course, but parents aren't likely to compromise their own children's education for the benefit of other parent's children.

lazygal

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If I break my leg, there's not much use in sending me to a maternity hospital! Hospitals discriminate all the time on who they will and won't admit for treatment.

Really? This is discrimination? :rolleyes::eek::D

This is nearly as hilarious as OEJ's attempts on a thread in AH to tell women how to breastfeed properly, which mainly involved not breastfeeding in front of anyone because you don't need to breastfeed in public and it's selfish to do so, and did we not know breastpumps could be used instead if we absolutely had to feed our babies in public.

The Bishop Basher

RainyDay wrote: »

How did she get a faith as a toddler without 'any interference' from parents? Did she lick it off the stones?

Of course she got the faith from her parents.

Just curious - do you avail of the state subsidy to help COI families with school fees?

You're incorrect.

She didn't get from me or her mother. She may have had some influence from other family members and school but not enough for it to be a major factor.

We noticed early on that she loved asking probing questions about the nature of things. Same way all kids ask questions but she just always seemed to gravitate towards some kind of spirituality. Obviously age appropriate. We responded and gave her all the facts we had to give her. Again age appropriate. As she got a bit older it became clear she was forming a faith and that has continued to strengthen over the years. I've never encouraged nor discouraged it. I've just been there to provide information as she's requested it. She's 17 now and appears to have a strong faith of her own. That may change, it may not. She's not tied to any particular religion and she doesn't go to church or mass but she has a definite faith that neither I nor her mother have.

Important to note however it doesn't phase us in the slightest. She's her own person, forging her own path. We've given her all the tools we can and what she does with them is up to her. I respect her faith and she respects my lack of it. We have great chats and interesting debates but neither of us is ever trying to convince the other that they're wrong. We each just accept each other as we are and i'm immensely proud of the independent young woman she has become.

And no i don't avail of any state subsidies with regard to education or anything else for that matter, not that i'd say no to one. But for now, I pay my own way like the majority of us.

lazygal

Swanner wrote: »

You're incorrect.

She didn't get from me or her mother. She may have had some influence from other family members and school but not enough for it to be a major factor.

We noticed early on that she loved asking probing questions about the nature of things. Same way all kids ask questions but she just always seemed to gravitate towards some kind of spirituality. Obviously age appropriate. We responded and gave her all the facts we had to give her. Again age appropriate. As she got a bit older it became clear she was forming a faith and that has continued to strengthen over the years. She's 17 now and appears to have a strong faith of her own. That may change, it may not. She's not tied to any particular religion and she doesn't go to church or mass but she has a definite faith that neither I nor her mother have.

Was this a specifically Christian spirituality? What faith did she end up forming? Was it a Christian faith or did she end up gravitating towards Scientology or Buddism or something else?

Roselm

Op I haven't read the whole thread but it seems to have gone away from your original question.
This might have already been said but...
I was the equivalent of your daughter when I was at school. My parents were atheist and sent me to a Catholic school. Religion was no part of my life outside of school. Despite this I believed everything I heard in school about God until I was 13 or so. It's presented as fact. My parents told me nothing about why I wasn't making my communion etc and so I was confused and just felt left out. Don't be so sure that just because religion isn't a part of home life that she won't absorb it nonetheless. I had "something " coming at me from school vs "nothing " at home. I think if my parents had kept an open dialogue with me and given me information about religions, the religion I was hearing in school, atheism and actively compared this to what we know from science I ACTUALLY could have made up my mind.
I'm sure my parents were waiting for me to ask? I wasn't about to-I knew they didn't LIKE religion and so it became the elephant in the room...

looksee

OEJ you are not really contributing to the discussion by telling us 'what most parents want' even though you don't really have any basis for this knowledge. If you were to discuss what you want, and what actual evidence shows, we could make a bit of progress.

xband

I've some odd memories of Irish primary school. We had this teacher who used to make us sing:
"bless the hands that made the food, bless us o! lord amen" every lunch.

I assumed she was referring to cool robot hands that made the food and for years assumed "Lord" referred to something to do with StarWars.

One eyed Jack

lazygal wrote: »

Really? This is discrimination? :rolleyes::eek::D

It's about as discriminatory as claims that children are being discriminated against in schools with a religious ethos, because their parents who choose to enrol their children in the school, don't support it's ethos.

This is nearly as hilarious as OEJ's attempts on a thread in AH to tell women how to breastfeed properly, which mainly involved not breastfeeding in front of anyone because you don't need to breastfeed in public and it's selfish to do so, and did we not know breastpumps could be used instead if we absolutely had to feed our babies in public.

Trapped in an online echo-chamber of emotion?

lazygal

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's about as discriminatory as claims that children are being discriminated against in schools with a religious ethos, because their parents who choose to enrol their children in the school, don't support it's ethos.





Trapped in an online echo-chamber of emotion?

Nah, just more of the same 'arguments' that aren't really valid at all. Carry on posting, the points are hilarious! I'm sure there'll be advice on how we should do atheism 'properly' shortly. :pac:

Mary63

The Government really needs to deal with this issue and provide more schools in areas where schools are oversubscribed.

By allowing atheists access to catholic schools for example the problem of oversupply of children is moved elsewhere.You won't see Gaelscoils for example turning away too many children who speak Irish at home so why should catholic schools which are oversubscribed turn away catholic children to accommodate children of non believers.The solution is to provide more school places and to build non denominational schools if there is an actual demand in an area for this type of education.If there isn't a demand then I for one don't want my taxpayers money spent on half empty school buildings,it would be much more economical to provide a taxi service to take the non believers to a school in their locality which has places.

I also wish non believers would just look after their own family and get off their high horse regarding their fellow school parents.It is absolutely none of your business how other parents rear their children and you have no idea whether they practice their faith or not,even if they are in a catholic school and their children sit happily through religion class and there is no faith practiced at home,this is none of the atheists business,every family is entitled to their privacy away from judgmental eyes.

xband

No, but for some reason it's "believers" business to shove their particular religion down everyone's throat at all times using my tax money!

If we simply had actual community schools that were just like any other normal public service, this whole scenario wouldn't happen in the first place.

Ireland's education system is all about appeasing vested interests and right wing religious conservatives, not about actually providing the best environment for learning and ensuring all of our citizens have equal opportunity.

The message it sends is if you're not catholic you're a weirdo and if you're in Protestant school or Educate together that you're in non mainstream education.

Is that really how you want people to start life?

Cabaal

Mary63 wrote: »

The Government really needs to deal with this issue and provide more schools in areas where schools are oversubscribed.

But that doesn't resolve the issue att all.

My local catholic school can decide to allow catholic children from 10miles away ahead of my child all because of the discrimination they are allowed due to catholic ethos. Once the school is full with catholic children they can then tell me the school is full as the reason for the refusal, even though the real reason is because the child isn't catholic,

This would result in my local school being full but schools 10miles away not being full because parents 10miles away simply wanted to send their child to a different catholic school, which results in a massive inconvenience and costs for me to travel 20miles per day to attend just another catholic school.

Priority should be given on locality to the school first, baptism shouldn't come into the mix at all for any school. Its really that simple.

Arguing to say its ok to discriminate against children on religious grounds is as idiotic as the people that argued for discrimination against children based on skin colour. Its utterly pathetic and anyone that argues to allow discrimination on religious, gender or faith grounds is a pathetic excuse for a human being.

I also wish non believers would just look after their own family and get off their high horse regarding their fellow school parents.It is absolutely none of your business how other parents rear their children

Actually it is, its our tax money after all so we have every right to decide and to try and dictate how its spent. Only a complete idiot is ok with their tax money being spent in a manner that discriminates against children of any race, colour, religion etc.

To be honest I don't expect much from you when you are basically ok with subscribing to any religious beliefs just to get your kid any sort of eduction, not backbone at all. What an awful message for any child to be brought up with,

The Bishop Basher

lazygal wrote: »

Was this a specifically Christian spirituality? What faith did she end up forming? Was it a Christian faith or did she end up gravitating towards Scientology or Buddism or something else?

I would say it probably closest to Christianity but that's no surprise given it's had the largest opportunity to influence her. Having said that, she doesn't subscribe to any particular religion, she just believes what she believes without trying to squeeze it into a box, Same as myself.

No doubt her beliefs will change over the years as she continues to question and learn but for now she has a faith in a god that none of the rest of us have.

kylith

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think it's more a case of those parents who have everything their own way saying tough noogies to everyone else tbh.

It's unfair on those parents who are in a minority of course, but parents aren't likely to compromise their own children's education for the benefit of other parent's children.

But they are compromising their children's education! Taking half an hour a day and hours and hours during 2nd and 6th class away from teaching actual subjects in order to teach opinion is compromising their child's education! Not only that but it's been shown that children who are raised religiously have difficulty telling fact from fiction so it's also damning their critical faculties.

xband

What really gets me though is that Ireland had a history of the Church of Ireland / Anglican Church being the established church and attempting to coerce people into falling into line by controlling access to services like education and access to jobs and the establishment.

Catholics and other Protestants were basically on the outside all the time.

We then faught for religious freedom, equal rights and what happens?

The Catholic Church jumps into exactly the same role the Anglican church had during the bad old days.

The bullied becomes the bully and the society behaves exactly like pre Victorian Britian by excluding minorities from basic services.

It just proves that the word "republic" was only old nonsense lip service to keep some notion of being all radical, freedom loving types alive as part of our nationalist mythology.

The positions Ireland taken on this and many other issues are an utter disgrace for a so called republic about to go off waffling on about 1916.

In 2016 Ireland excludes religious minorities and the non religious from public education. That's the reality of it.

It's basically passive (and sometimes active) sectarianism that we accept because that's just how things always have been.

Bunch of hypocrites!

One eyed Jack

kylith wrote: »

But they are compromising their children's education! Taking half an hour a day and hours and hours during 2nd and 6th class away from teaching actual subjects in order to teach opinion is compromising their child's education! Not only that but it's been shown that children who are raised religiously have difficulty telling fact from fiction so it's also damning their critical faculties.

As far as they're concerned though, they're not compromising their children's education as they see it, and who's opinion do you think they're more likely to go with - yours, or their own?

There are plenty of posters here attended schools with a religious ethos, and it doesn't appear to have done their critical facilities any harm as adults. It's possible that this may have had something to do with the fact that children don't remain children indefinitely, and as adults are perfectly capable of making decisions for themselves and their children.

Shrap

xband wrote: »

What really gets me though is that Ireland had a history of the Church of Ireland / Anglican Church being the established church and attempting to coerce people into falling into line by controlling access to services like education and access to jobs and the establishment.

Catholics and other Protestants were basically on the outside all the time.

We then faught for religious freedom, equal rights and what happens?

The Catholic Church jumps into exactly the same role the Anglican church had during the bad old days.

The bullied becomes the bully and the society behaves exactly like pre Victorian Britian by excluding minorities from basic services.

It just proves that the word "republic" was only old nonsense lip service to keep some notion of being all radical, freedom loving types alive as part of our nationalist mythology.

The positions Ireland taken on this and many other issues are an utter disgrace for a so called republic about to go off waffling on about 1916.

In 2016 Ireland excludes religious minorities and the non religious from public education. That's the reality of it.

It's basically passive (and sometimes active) sectarianism that we accept because that's just how things always have been.

Bunch of hypocrites!

Indeed, wise one. :cool:

The Bishop Basher

Cabaal wrote: »

Actually it is, its our tax money after all so we have every right to decide and to try and dictate how its spent. Only a complete idiot is ok with their tax money being spent in a manner that discriminates against children of any race, colour, religion etc.

It's everyone's tax money so everyone should have a say surely ?

Even those with opposing views to you..

Of course the majority will always win out in the end but that's life.

No one ever said it would be fair.

Sometimes we just have to suck it up and move on.

The Bishop Basher

kylith wrote: »

Not only that but it's been shown that children who are raised religiously have difficulty telling fact from fiction so it's also damning their critical faculties.

Have you a source for this kylith ?

Shrap

Swanner wrote: »

Have you a source for this kylith ?

She does. I think the study was posted in the "Hazards of Belief" thread not long ago, but I'm sure she'll find it for you.

One eyed Jack

lazygal wrote: »

Nah, just more of the same 'arguments' that aren't really valid at all. Carry on posting, the points are hilarious! I'm sure there'll be advice on how we should do atheism 'properly' shortly. :pac:

Well I'm delighted for you that you find my arguments amusing. Meanwhile it's not I who am telling anyone how their children should be educated properly, that's coming from other posters who are trying to make arguments against segregation, while at the same time suggesting that parents who choose to send their children to a school with a religious ethos should instead keep their religion to themselves and send their children to Sunday school instead, so that the children of non-religious parents are not having their children exposed to religious indoctrination in a school with a religious ethos!

I would say you couldn't make it up, but that would just be too much irony, even for me

xband

One eyed Jack wrote: »

As far as they're concerned though, they're not compromising their children's education as they see it, and who's opinion do you think they're more likely to go with - yours, or their own?

There are plenty of posters here attended schools with a religious ethos, and it doesn't appear to have done their critical facilities any harm as adults. It's possible that this may have had something to do with the fact that children don't remain children indefinitely, and as adults are perfectly capable of making decisions for themselves and their children.

There are many who it absolutely has done damage to too. Just because you're taking a look at an online discussion forum doesn't mean that you've any comprehension of the impact or lack of impact of the ethos of schools on the population.

I was told by teachers that I wouldn't be allowed to go to secondary school without making my confirmation. I was sent out of class for "being a cheeky pup" because I didn't want to partake in a load of prayers.

I had to lie about going to mass as our teacher used to interrogate us about the gospel. I used t fake illnesses on Mondays to avoid this and actually started going to mass out of fear at one stage as a kid just to take notes.

I had to listen to a religion teacher rant at us about abortion.

I had to listen to authority figures condemning homosexuality as a "bad choice" unchallenged by anyone while being gay myself and felt if I had been bullied I had to deal with it myself without backup of the school. That's not something I would have had to consider in college or work at that time.

I didn't even bother complaining because it was just part of the conservative catholic ethos and I wasn't exactly in a position to protest.

And in 2016 my brother is being put under big pressure to baptise his daughter despite him being an atheist and his wife being a non Irish atheist and both sets of grandparents being non religious.

That's basically the kind of nonsense that comes from Irish education policies.

The Bishop Basher

Shrap wrote: »

She does. I think the study was posted in the "Hazards of Belief" thread not long ago, but I'm sure she'll find it for you.

Fair enough. Thanks. I was researching while on the Santa thread a few weeks ago and found studies that would directly contradict this. Happy to dig them out again but the lack of clarity would certainly indicate the level of subjectivity and complexity around this topic.

Shrap

Swanner wrote: »

Fair enough. Thanks. I was researching while on the Santa thread a few weeks ago and found studies that would directly contradict this. Happy to dig them out again but the lack of clarity would certainly indicate the level of subjectivity and complexity around this topic.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/religious-kids-are-more-likely-to-think-magical-protago-1607356841

True, paper never refused ink/internet never refused research. Still, here it is for ya.

Edit: Here's the actual study http://www.bu.edu/learninglab/files/2012/05/Corriveau-Chen-Harris-in-press.pdf

Cabaal

Swanner wrote: »

It's everyone's tax money so everyone should have a say surely ?

Even those with opposing views to you..

Of course the majority will always win out in the end but that's life.

No one ever said it would be fair.

Sometimes we just have to suck it up and move on.

You don't appear to understand minority rights do you?
Maybe come back when you do
:rolleyes:

It isn't ok for a "majority| to just just discriminate at the detriment of a minority group and thinking they can and its alright makes you a very foolish person indeed.

Once again, we're back to a majority of parents didn't want black kids in white schools so the marshals had to be called in in the USA to remove this discrimination...anyone who supported these parents are seen as utter scum by our history. We're back to the situation that if you think its ok to discriminate against children based on race, sex or religious beliefs (or lack there of) then you're not much of decent human being.

ABC101

kylith wrote: »

Not only that but it's been shown that children who are raised religiously have difficulty telling fact from fiction so it's also damning their critical faculties.

Kylith.... that must be one of the most ridiculous comments around.

If you seriously believe that... then perhaps it is you who is having difficulty in separating fact from fiction / blinkered bias!

The Bishop Basher

Cabaal wrote: »

You don't appear to understand minority rights do you?
Maybe come back when you do
:rolleyes:

It isn't ok for a "majority| to just just discriminate at the detriment of a minority group and thinking they can and its alright makes you a very foolish person indeed.

I never suggested it was ok. I just accept the realities of it.

ABC101

Cabaal wrote: »

You don't appear to understand minority rights do you?
Maybe come back when you do
:rolleyes:

It isn't ok for a "majority| to just just discriminate at the detriment of a minority group and thinking they can and its alright makes you a very foolish person indeed.

Cabaal..... so what would be your opinion of the Irish Divorce referendum which was passed by a majority of approximately of 11,000?

Shrap

ABC101 wrote: »

Kylith.... that must be one of the most ridiculous comments around.

If you seriously believe that... then perhaps it is you who is having difficulty in separating fact from fiction / blinkered bias!

A conclusion of study 2 of the research I just referenced a few posts back:
Pg 18/19

The presence versus absence of a religious education is associated with children’s conviction that ordinarily impossible events can or cannot occur in a realistic story. Thus, secular children, who had no exposure to such an education, systematically concluded that the protagonist in fantastical stories is pretend and justified that decision by reference to the impossibility of the story events. By contrast, children who had been exposed to religion via church or parochial schooling did not systematically conclude that the protagonist was pretend, and made fewer appeals to the impossibility of the story events.

http://www.bu.edu/learninglab/files/2012/05/Corriveau-Chen-Harris-in-press.pdf

lazygal

ABC101 wrote: »

Cabaal..... so what would be your opinion of the Irish Divorce referendum which was passed by a majority of approximately of 11,000?

Against whom did that discriminate?

ABC101

lazygal wrote: »

Against whom did that discriminate?

The right to live in a country where the constitution is a reflection of what you believe in..

Have a look for yourself here...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

31% (approx) of the eligible voting electorate decided that Divorce should be written into the Irish Constitution.

xband

lazygal wrote: »

Against whom did that discriminate?

Those who wanted to force unhappy couples into loveless marriages, ensure battered wives and husbands couldn't move on and force people they didn't like to go into exile abroad.

The poor darlings were dragged kicking and screaming into the 19th century in 1995.

kylith

Shrap wrote: »

A conclusion of study 2 of the research I just referenced a few posts back:
Pg 18/19


http://www.bu.edu/learninglab/files/2012/05/Corriveau-Chen-Harris-in-press.pdf

Thanks Shrap, I'm on the mobile so finding stuff can be a bit tricky.

That study always seems like a no-brainer to me. If you tell a child that it's a fact that a man can walk on water and people come back from the dead why wouldn't they accept that people can fly or trolls exist? It's no stranger than what they're being told is unquestionable truth in school.

looksee

ABC101 wrote: »

Kylith.... that must be one of the most ridiculous comments around.

If you seriously believe that... then perhaps it is you who is having difficulty in separating fact from fiction / blinkered bias!

Have you read the study?

Cabaal

ABC101 wrote: »

The right to live in a country where the constitution is a reflection of what you believe in..

Have a look for yourself here...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

31% (approx) of the eligible voting electorate decided that Divorce should be written into the Irish Constitution.

errr it still does not discriminate, all you are doing is adding pointless whataboutery to this thread.

The only case I'm aware of of a person outright refusing to accept divorce is Mr Maurice Lyons of Co Kilkenny who was jailed for refusing to believe that his wife had the right to leave him inline with the laws of the Irish state.

Maurice got bank rolled by some religious organizations to fight the Irish state on the issue and to stop his wife leaving him. He didn't win the case and rightly so.

Lets remember that this is the same Mr Lyons who disputed the outcome of the recent marriage equality vote in May 2015 which was passed by a very large majority.

If you want to side with Mr Lyons by all means please do, I'm sure you'll be in great company.
:rolleyes:

xband

It added rights for other people and took none away.

If you don't want to get divorced, don't get divorced. Nobody's forcing you to.

You lost the right to stick your nose into the private lives and marital affairs of other citizens. That's all.

The situation of the school system mess actually does force people to do things they wouldn't agree to normally.

ABC101

Shrap wrote: »

A conclusion of study 2 of the research I just referenced a few posts back:
Pg 18/19


http://www.bu.edu/learninglab/files/2012/05/Corriveau-Chen-Harris-in-press.pdf

The research states that while nearly all children found the figures in the realistic narratives to be real, secular and religious children were split on religious stories.

Of course... a child who is instructed not to believe in anything Religious...... will dismiss any religious stories as fictional.

A child who is brought up with a religious faith.... and has been told religious stories such as Noah & the Ark for example.... will believe Noah was a real person.

How can a believer believe in something.... if they don't believe.

In addition with real life events.... children of belief had no problems in distinguishing real life events.

WRT myself...

I am a believer....I believe in God... I believe God created the world / universe or allowed nature to take its course and nature (using the laws of nature) created the universe....and when I am asked how did the universe come about.... I am clearly (to an atheist) unable to separate fact from fiction, because I have included a fictional term (God) in my answer.

In addition.. this idea... can be extended to show that I am unable to discern fact from fiction in all other areas too...like what side of the road I am driving on... or is the car I am driving in... real or imaginary...don't ask me ... coz I am a believer who clearly does not know any better.... or is unable to know the difference.

Is that the finding of the study?

Please somebody tell me I am wrong!

One eyed Jack

xband wrote: »

There are many who it absolutely has done damage to too. Just because you're taking a look at an online discussion forum doesn't mean that you've any comprehension of the impact or lack of impact of the ethos of schools on the population.

Just as well I never made that claim then.

I was told by teachers that I wouldn't be allowed to go to secondary school without making my confirmation. I was sent out of class for "being a cheeky pup" because I didn't want to partake in a load of prayers.

I had to lie about going to mass as our teacher used to interrogate us about the gospel. I used t fake illnesses on Mondays to avoid this and actually started going to mass out of fear at one stage as a kid just to take notes.

I had to listen to a religion teacher rant at us about abortion.

I had to listen to authority figures condemning homosexuality as a "bad choice" unchallenged by anyone while being gay myself and felt if I had been bullied I had to deal with it myself without backup of the school. That's not something I would have had to consider in college or work at that time.

I didn't even bother complaining because it was just part of the conservative catholic ethos and I wasn't exactly in a position to protest.

If you weren't even bothered to complain, how did you expect anything would change? I rarely address people's personal experiences, because I don't want to diminish the impact they feel it has had on them. I'm very much aware of the impact that the RCC, religious orders and religion have had on Irish society throughout history, my own parents would make the WBC blush tbh! :pac:

So fundamentalist were they, that we never talked at all about sex and sexuality, and so in my teenage years it was quite the revelation for me when I realised that I was heterosexual (up until that point, I'd had no reason to question my sexual attraction to men, "it is what it is sure", I was never conflicted about it because nobody ever talked about "those things", too busy making the next generation of GAA players and digging turf to be thinking about men ).

When I moved out of home at 16, it was because I figured my parents and I were never going to see eye to eye as we were in constant conflict with each other, and it was a case of either they go or I go, and since it was their home, I went.

Look I could write pages and pages on the impact people who use religion as a control mechanism have had on my life, but I don't blame religion for that. I put the responsibility solely where it belongs - on the people who used their interpretation of religion to inflict cruelty upon other people. Thankfully, those people are in a tiny, tiny, almost forgettable minority, as is the impact of their influence upon my life.

I've met far more people who identify as part of a religious community who have been a positive influence in my life, including people who were resident in the Mother and Baby homes decades ago.

And in 2016 my brother is being put under big pressure to baptise his daughter despite him being an atheist and his wife being a non Irish atheist and both sets of grandparents being non religious.

That's basically the kind of nonsense that comes from Irish education policies.

Nope, that's basically the kind of nonsense that comes from people being too afraid to stand up for themselves. I had the same craic with my brother and his wife who both identify as atheist, they were asking me to be Godfather to their child. I wasn't going to judge them for it, because I understand that they were doing what they thought was best for their children.

My own wife is non-religious (has never identified as atheist, no interest at all in religious matters), and we seem to get on grand, never felt any pressure to do anything we didn't want to and it's never been an issue in how we chose to raise our child.

Shrap

ABC101 wrote: »

The research states that while nearly all children found the figures in the realistic narratives to be real, secular and religious children were split on religious stories.
..............................

Is that the finding of the study?

Please somebody tell me I am wrong!

You're wrong.

Finally, in both studies, secular children systematically categorized the characters embedded in fantastical stories as pretend, and most of their justifications referred to the impossibility of a central event in the story. Effectively, secular children responded to these stories just as they might respond to a fairy story—they inferred that the central characters were fictional because they were involved in an event that is ordinarily impossible in reality. The pattern of responding for children exposed to religion was different. In both studies, they were less likely to judge the characters in the fantastical stories as pretend, and in line with this equivocation, they made more appeals to reality and fewer appeals to impossibility than did secular children.

To summarize, despite important parallels between the story judgments of the secular and religious children, we also see a divergence—not just in their responses to the religious stories—but also in their responses to the fantastical stories. The secular children responded to the fantastical stories just as they might respond to a fairy story, whereas this stance was muted among the three religious groups. They were less systematic in their categorizations, less likely to invoke the impossibility of the story event, and more likely to appeal to reality

What is most disturbing to me is that of the four groups of children - a)non-church going/secular school, b)church going/secular school, c) non-church going/parochial school and d) church going/parochial school, ONLY the non-church going and secular schooled children displayed this massive divergence with the others and the wholly systematic catagorisation of characters doing impossible events as pretend characters.

Which goes to show that our non-religious children are being as held back in their critical thinking as are religious, in having to go to schools with a religious ethos. Even if they are sitting at the back of the class colouring pictures.