I am an atheist that has had nothing but a good experience with catholic schools

smacl

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

maybe that's my problem, I'm having it exactly the way I want it!

I'd be fairly annoyed if the shoe was on the other foot, having a Catholic doctrine shoved down my kids' throats with no say in the matter. Maybe then I might be a bit more exercised about the matter.
But at the same time, I still find it peculiar that someone chooses to send their kid to a Catholic school, with an ET very close, but opts out the crap religious bit*. In fairness to the school, they're being rather accommodating, which is the point of this thread.

(*I suppose they could say they're having it the way they want it!)

With respect, if you're not opting out of religion you have not tested how accommodating the school is or is not. What makes you say the school is accommodating? From where I'm sitting all the compromise is coming from you.

smacl

recedite wrote: »

I prefer the term "foreign nationals", because they do have a nationality. Just not the same one as you.

Makes no odds, once you start applying any kind of us and them nomenclature you're on the same slippery slope. While I fcuk up as often as often as the next person, i do make an attempt to address people at an individual level rather than consign them to a group and the address that group. As the late great Frank Zappa commented, you are what you is

Hotblack Desiato

lazygal wrote: »

I don't hold up the ET model as perfect either. There's far too much tolerance of religious crap, with various sky gods being talked about and none of the awful sides of religion discussed in any great depth. However, it does foster a more inclusive atmosphere and encourage a more child centred, independent sort of learning. I'd far prefer a non-denom school system though. I tolerate the learn together programme rather than laud it.

Exactly - I'm not in love with the ET model but it's the least bad one we have.

Schools should not promote religion in any way. It's damaging harmful nonsense which has, and continues to, cause immense harm and suffering in the world.

Roger Hassenforder

smacl wrote: »

With respect, if you're not opting out of religion you have not tested how accommodating the school is or is not. What makes you say the school is accommodating? From where I'm sitting all the compromise is coming from you.

Based on what I've seen, I don't imagine it would be a problem. Maybe I could up my Atheist game and test it, maybe get some kudos, but I couldn't be arsed. I chose this school ahead of an ET, and as I said earlier, their house - I'm happy to go along with their rules. Maybe my apathy is disquieting to someone with no choice.

"from where I'm sitting" and pointing out flaws is bordering on preaching!
Down with that sort of thing!

Michael Nugent

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

If parents choose to send their kids to a Catholic school, when there is choice, I find it peculiar when they reject the Catholic aspects of it.

This is one of the most difficult misperceptions about the Irish education system to deal with. In most cases, while there is theoretically a choice, the choice is impractical and parents are in reality obliged to send their children to a Catholic school whatever their preference is.

The European Court made this finding in the Louise O'Keeffe case. It found that, in reality, she was obliged to attend a Catholic school, and that the State was obliged to protect her human rights while she was attending that school, regardless of whether or not the Catholic Church ran the school.

smacl

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Based on what I've seen, I don't imagine it would be a problem. Maybe I could up my Atheist game and test it, maybe get some kudos, but I couldn't be arsed. I chose this school ahead of an ET, and as I said earlier, their house - I'm happy to go along with their rules. Maybe my apathy is disquieting to someone with no choice.

"from where I'm sitting" and pointing out flaws is bordering on preaching!
Down with that sort of thing!

Nobody has suggested that you should opt your child out of religion, merely that you haven't and hence don't appear to be in any position to say the school is accommodating. What compromises specifically have they made to suit your religious preferences as a parent? Perhaps when your kids are undergoing religious instruction the teacher casts them a knowing wink

Roger Hassenforder

Michael Nugent wrote: »

This is one of the most difficult misperceptions about the Irish education system to deal with. In most cases, while there is theoretically a choice, the choice is impractical and parents are in reality obliged to send their children to a Catholic school whatever their preference is.

The European Court made this finding in the Louise O'Keeffe case. It found that, in reality, she was obliged to attend a Catholic school, and that the State was obliged to protect her human rights while she was attending that school, regardless of whether or not the Catholic Church ran the school.

I'm talking about where there was an actual choice. There is a ET nearby.
If you don't want religion in your kids life why would you chose the Catholic One over the nonreligous?
I appreciate very few have such a choice.

evolving_doors

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I'm talking about where there was an actual choice. There is a ET nearby.
If you don't want religion in your kids life why would you chose the Catholic One over the nonreligous?
I appreciate very few have such a choice.

Didn't read all the thread but was there any waiting list for the nearby ETB?
In any event, parents choose schools on more than just religious grounds. If friends are going there etc

Roger Hassenforder

smacl wrote: »

Nobody has suggested that you should opt your child out of religion, merely that you haven't and hence don't appear to be in any position to say the school is accommodating. What compromises specifically have they made to suit your religious preferences as a parent? Perhaps when your kids are undergoing religious instruction the teacher casts them a knowing wink

Whats ironic is you purporting to be more qualified to know how accommodating they are rather than me, me with kids in the school, talking to parents, playdates etc.is there a checklist I need them to complete?
(It's almost as if there's a doctrine I must subscribe to...)

(Ideally theres no religion in state run schools, but there's another thread for that).

sbsquarepants

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

nope! they made their communions with the rest of their class. Some kids opted out all right, which I thought was a bit peculiar, as its a Catholic school.
I dont feel hypocritical as I'm not Catholic, but their mother is (but non church going!).

I have 2 now adult kids, who both made their communions despite myself being an out and out atheist and their mother being your common or garden "catholic" - ie no idea what being catholic actually means and never sees the inside of a church except for wedding, funerals and the kids "blessed sacraments"
I have 3 young kids not in school yet - but it will most likely be the same thing with them, different mother but with the same religious ethos. (Actually come to think of it the baby is 18 months and hasn't been baptised, I think my missus actually forgot about her, so maybe she'll escape, time will tell!)

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

seem to be a lot of parents whose certain very obvious values I wouldn't necessarily like my children being exposed to, .

I'm not sure what you mean by this - which obvious values?

smacl

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Whats ironic is you purporting to be more qualified to know how accommodating they are rather than me, me with kids in the school, talking to parents, playdates etc.is there a checklist I need them to complete?
(It's almost as if there's a doctrine I must subscribe to...)

(Ideally theres no religion in state run schools, but there's another thread for that).

Nope, just asking why you say they're accommodating? What exactly is it they have done to accommodate you?

Roger Hassenforder

smacl wrote: »

Nope, just asking why you say they're accommodating? What exactly is it they have done to accommodate you?

they haven't done anything to accommodate me...

looksee

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

they haven't done anything to accommodate me...

There have been numerous references to the school being accommodating. If you really insist on being pedantic change question to '...accommodate your children.'
But you knew that, didn't you?

Roger Hassenforder

looksee wrote: »

There have been numerous references to the school being accommodating. If you really insist on being pedantic change question to '...accommodate your children.'
But you knew that, didn't you?

Actually get your facts right Looksee, and less of your "pedantic" guff. no where have I said they've "accommodated me", or "accommodated my children" .

From the get-go in this thread I've said I'm happy to go along with their rules, after all I chose a Catholic school.

I've said other parents who opted out, said the school accommodate them. And at the risk of being inexact, you'll understand I'm also alluding to them opting their children out. I don't know how exactly, as I didn't cross examine them. Hence my request is there a checklist I can ask them to complete for the members cogitation.

"but you knew that didn't you"... :rolleyes:

smacl

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Actually get your facts right Looksee, and less of your "pedantic" guff. no where have I said they've "accommodated me", or "accommodated my children" .

From the get-go in this thread I've said I'm happy to go along with their rules, after all I chose a Catholic school.

I've said other parents who opted out, said the school accommodate them. And at the risk of being inexact, you'll understand I'm also alluding to them opting their children out. I don't know how exactly, as I didn't cross examine them. Hence my request is there a checklist I can ask them to complete for the members cogitation.

"but you knew that didn't you"... :rolleyes:

Apologies if I'm going a bit blind, but where exactly did you say that? Nearest I saw was

Based on what I've seen, I don't imagine it would be a problem.

which was why I pressed you somewhat on how exactly the school was accommodating, as it seems to be an assumption rather than a first hand experience. I wasn't knocking your choices or the school, just looking for the rationale behind them. I don't understand the reasons why a non-religious family with a child attending an accommodating religious ethos school would put their kids through major religious ceremonies such as communion. FWIW, main reason I've seen is pressure from grandparents for the likes of Christenings.

Roger Hassenforder

smacl wrote: »

Apologies if I'm going a bit blind, but where exactly did you say that? Nearest I saw was

which was why I pressed you somewhat on how exactly the school was accommodating, as it seems to be an assumption rather than a first hand experience. I wasn't knocking your choices or the school, just looking for the rationale behind them. I don't understand the reasons why a non-religious family with a child attending an accommodating religious ethos school would put their kids through major religious ceremonies such as communion. FWIW, main reason I've seen is pressure from grandparents for the likes of Christenings.

I suppose "based on what I've seen and heard might have clarified things!

My kids mother (aka the wife) is a non practising Catholic (aren't most of them!), she wasn't too pushed about the ceremonies either, but subconsciously might have been having regard to her parents. We never really had a conversation though, where I wanted to opt out, she wanted to opt in, so it never came to a head. I'm probably a bit too "meh, whatever" about it.

recedite

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by this - which obvious values?

People coming from places where misogyny, homophobia, crime and corruption are the norm are obviously going to carry some of that baggage with them.
No doubt some will transform the minute they set foot on european soil, but there are plenty of unsavoury characters on the move.

smacl

recedite wrote: »

People coming from places where misogyny, homophobia, crime and corruption are the norm are obviously going to carry some of that baggage with them.

What, like the Vatican? Why we let people with such baggage interfere with our kid's education really does baffle me. :pac:

recedite

The best thing then is to have all the kids mixed together in standard secular schools. That way the baggage that various groups bring with them is shown up for what it is. Kids can then see clearly what they all have in common, and what is just their own family baggage.
Too much choice is a bad idea, whether that is natives choosing not to mix, or immigrants wanting to set up their own communities with their own schools. Dept. of Education is up for more and more diversity of patrons though, thinking the more the merrier.

smacl

recedite wrote: »

The best thing then is to have all the kids mixed together in standard secular schools. That way the baggage that various groups bring with them is shown up for what it is. Kids can then see clearly what they all have in common, and what is just their own family baggage.
Too much choice is a bad idea, whether that is natives choosing not to mix, or immigrants wanting to set up their own communities with their own schools. Dept. of Education is up for more and more diversity of patrons though, thinking the more the merrier.

No argument there, once all the kids are allowed to retain and manifest their own identities.