Religion and Engaging with the Teacher

I think part of the problem here is there's no such thing as 'atheist beliefs' - all atheism is, is not believing in a god. It's the default, everyone is born an atheist. They then chose to believe in a god at some point in their life.

There's a massive difference between raising a child as an atheist and raising them religious.

In one scenario, you're just saying you don't believe in something, there's no evidence to you that it exists. That does not mean that at some point in the future, such evidence could present itself and you could change your opinion. It's unlikely, but you're not completely ruling it out by considering yourself an atheist. Again, all it means is you don't believe in a deity right now.

In the other scenario, you are saying that yes, the deity does exist and not only does it exist, here's a strict set of rules it laid down to us humans a few thousand years ago which you must follow to get into the afterlife etc.

They are completely and utterly different.

Your child is receiving religious instruction so yes, you are allowing the school to force catholic beliefs onto your child. It's really not hard to understand - but many Irish people who grew up in this system have a hard time seeing how abnormal and abhorrent this is, even if they are no longer believers themselves - that's the power of childhood indoctrination in action!

And there's no need to be abusive.

You are calling the op a hypocrite for sending their child to an RC school but you've done the same thing. Explain how that works please.

As I mentioned above, not believing in something (aka, atheism) is not a 'belief'. You just don't believe in something. I'm sure you also don't believe in many other things, they aren't 'beliefs' either.

Excluding your child from religion is not 'forcing a belief' on them, because there's no 'belief' to force. Non belief is not a belief.

Well not a religious belief at least.

Yeah, Ireland. 🙄

right... what do you propose they do?

Some of the atheists (or some of the ones siding with the OP, anyway) are putting forth some pretty dishonest arguments here. You might want to ask yourselves if you’re sure you’re on the right side if you can’t argue your case honestly.

what "dishonest" arguments would those be?

Pretending that a system where over 90% of primary schools are under the control of a church is perfectly fine - that seems pretty dishonest to me.

It was a bogus question.

It's the same circular argument. I can only go to this one extremely religious school. How do I avoid all religion at this school.

They shouldn't have done nothing about it anyway. Which is a common theme on these threads.

I see parents doing all sorts of things to get into specific school, pretend to separate, rent a house, buy a house, move in with their parent, move house, move county, move country etc. Be part of lobby groups, get ET built, get catchments areas changed, lots of things. All these things involved compromises, and hardship. often its about getting into a better school, a different peer group, different education methods, etc.

Arguably religion and avoiding it would be more important than all these things. So why put less effort in achieving what you want. It doesn't add up.

Saying people should "just move" or even better "set up a school" is laughably unrealistic. We have well under half of marriages now taking place in a church, yet about 94% of schools are church controlled. You can't move to get a school place if there are no places left there.

Anyway, why should anyone have to move for their child to be treated equally and with equal respect in a school? That's saying it's OK for certain schools to treat some kids like shít. It's not OK. It's never OK.

Living locally and applying at birth, usually.

It's not acceptable that well over 90% of schools are run by a church yet funded by the state. I'm not the one making excuses, you are.

Like I said its a catch 22. You're not open to any compromise. So asking for suggestions is disingenuous. You only want exactly what you want, and you want it instantly. There is no solution (that I know of) to that.

You're basically asking how people can guaranteed a place. I'm explaining why no one can. No one is special in that regard.

Schools in rural areas are closing though lack of numbers. City schools are over subscribed.

Location, location location.

" You're basically asking how people can guaranteed a place."

I think that's muddying the waters.

It:s a right to education which we take to be universal. Not based on your baptism certificate, or lack thereof being the decider who gets the education.

I'd be very annoyed if a surgical team insisted on a group prayer before surgery, with a priest blessing the area... That's assuming I get past hospital reception without a baptism cert!

But ya I know, I could just go away and build my own hospital, or move near a non denominational one.

A state education and health have nothing to do with indoctrination.

That's a recent change. (which I mentioned earlier) Anyone complaining about a child in school now. Had an opportunity to be on a waiting list, so they are complaining about a situation that didn't exist when their child applied for schools.

...

Yippee, a waiting list tens of kilometres away which in Dublin traffic means one parent giving up their job.

But yeah, "choices" 🙄

You might suddenly get sick.

You don't suddenly end up a kid of school leaving age and suddenly realise you can't facilitate your life choices, in your current location.

So its a disingenuous comparison.

So what exactly is the point of religious education/instruction?

It's important to you, but is completely irrelevant to a large and growing number of people, and there's no reason or value in making their children undergo religious education if the parents are not active members of that religion.

Consumerism has got nothing to do with religion or the lack thereof. Churches are notoriously cash-greedy while preaching that money is evil!

It might the most inconvenient option but its sill an option. People do it for lots of other reasons.

I'm still interested in suggestions that solve the OPs issue, how to be fully integrated in a faith school while not having any contact with religion.

Or maybe they should all be taught in proportion to their prevalence in the population? That’s fairness.

It’s ludicrous to suggest that every religion that has any adherents at all should be given equal time. That isn’t what fairness looks like. That’s what pandering to a handful of malcontents looks like.

lol. This comment is so ridiculously stupid I don't know where to start.

Firstly if you know of a school that teaches all religions as part of its curriculum?

Secondly I'm an atheist. Why would I teach him about religion if I don't believe in it. Yes I get the point of me sending my child to a catholic school but I'm not being hypocritical about sending him for a few years and then once he's settled in throwing a strop and saying I don't want my son taught religion.

If he was going to a Buddhist school I'd have no issues with him being taught Buddhism etc etc. But he's going to a catholic school.