Fall of the Catholic Church
Comments
-
Ah, but who pays teachers salaries - taxpayers or parishioners?
If parishioners, fair enough.
If taxpayers, then they have as much right to placement for their kids and as much of away in the matter as anyone else in the catchment area.
Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
0 -
Coherent? Says the fellow who conflates being polite with a recognition of a right?
You're either polite or you're not. You've demonstrated your inability to be polite by playing the man and not the ball on more than one occasion.
I never said you had a lesser right as a citizen because you aren't catholic. Feel free to share the comment I made where you believe I said so. I am sure none exists.
0 -
Personally, I think religious education should happen outside schools, paid for by the faithful.
It happens in other jurisdictions, and it leads to a more wholesome experience of the sacraments when they occur.
But that is a moot point.
1 -
What did you explain? Boards of management operating on a voluntary basis is not the church funding its own schools. So again I'll ask you to provide a breakdown of church funding of schools.
It is, as they are providing their time and services in service of the Church. I also explained that the Church owns the land and properties provided for the purposes of education.
The church is supportive is divestment? Remind is, how many schools that weren't due to close because of low numbers, have been divested?
I’ve no idea. In total though since the idea of divestment was announced around 2014, the best of my knowledge, there have only been a handful of schools divested.
So why aren't you lot calling for the church to fund its own way? I mean it's an easy question, don't know why you would attempt to dodge it.
There’s that ‘you lot’ again 😂 In any case, I didn’t attempt to dodge your question. I’m only speaking for myself, it’d be great if you’d save the condescending BS attitude for someone who gives a shìt, but I don’t expect you will. The reason I personally have no interest in calling for it is that unlike those people who are calling for it, I don’t support the idea of any children being excluded from a school. The people who are calling for it want to exclude children from “their” schools. They’re as bigoted as yourself, basically. I’m not a fan of that sort of shìtty attitude towards other people.
Every new school is blocked by the department of education? You will of course be providing evidence
I already provided evidence? It’s Department of Education policy that no new schools will be built in areas where it determines there are sufficient places in existing schools. Those schools generally happen to be Catholic schools, which do not fulfil the needs of children who are not Catholic, and their parents don’t support the ethos of the school. In my view that amounts to the State not fulfilling it’s obligations to parents and children.
The DES argues the opposite, that the current approach does fulfil the States obligations. The stated aim of Government is to establish 400 new schools by 2030, but they appear to be like I said - dragging their heels on the issue and blocking every attempt to establish new schools. They’re making it extraordinarily difficult for parents who wish to have their children educated in accordance with their values and beliefs, world views or philosophy. I don’t share their world views or philosophy, etc, but their children are as entitled to an education which is suitable for their needs as my child is receiving an education which is suitable for his needs. I don’t expect the State to provide that education, I do expect that the State provides for that education, and in return, the school teaches the national curriculum.
You’d imagine it shouldn’t be that difficult, but after nearly 20 years dealing with them, it appears the DES relish every opportunity they get and take full advantage of it to break people’s balls instead of trying to support them! If I didn’t know better I’d swear they imagine funding for education comes out of their own pockets 😒
Post edited by One eyed Jack on1 -
Taxation and public spending in Ireland doesn’t function like that. There’s no ring-fencing of taxes collected specifically for the purposes of education. It comes from a consolidated fund of all taxation.
In 2020, Government took in €103Bn, and spent €84Bn. About €20Bn of that income was Income tax, and about €9Bn was spent on education. Safe to say that any individuals tax contributions went nowhere near funding education, the effect would be negative if anyone were actually required to fund the education of their own children, and some children would receive no education if people were able to dictate where whatever they pay in taxes should or shouldn’t be spent.
The whole “I don’t want my taxes paying for this, that and the other” just doesn’t arise, as individuals have zero control over how public funds are spent. That’s a good thing for society as a whole.
1 -
Advertisement
-
There is prior art for ringfencing though. Look into how greyhound racing is subsidized by the state.
1 -
Oh I understand that like, didn’t know it applied to greyhound racing (not a fan), knew it applied to the Carbon tax though -
https://www.rte.ie/news/budget-2022/2021/1012/1253365-carbon-tax-funds/
But generally it doesn’t function like that, which is why I specified education in particular isn’t funded from any ring fencing of taxation.
The reason I’d be against any such idea is because it’s generally middle-class taxpayers who come out with the idea, with the idea that they should be able to deprive people who can’t pay for services themselves privately of any support from the State.
In reality it would put their ideas back at square one where voluntary organisations such as the Church would get in where the State is failing to provide public services, and what will those opposed to Church provision of public services have achieved? Nothing.
1 -
That's why I don't understand the opposition: priests and nuns are going to do a much better and more committed job ofcreligious instrction than a casual lay teacher - why not let them?
Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
1 -
Have you seen church attendances? If people were actually giving the option then the numbers partaking in the sacrements would crash.
Look how many undertake communion, led by the school, and how many attend mass the next week when it isn't led by the school.
So having the teacher do it, obviously not the first option, but far better than not having it at all.
Let's face it, a certain amount of Baptisms are undertaken not because of any deeply held religious belief but it makes things easier in terms of selection of schools.
0 -
I don't see how this will make a difference to the number - of little Johnny/Jenny is going to make their communion while never going to mass, they're going to do it regardless of where the instrction comes from.
Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
0 -
Advertisement
-
Ehh? Ring fencing taxes from being spent on religious education by the State means religious education is provided by the religious "authorities." There's no downside there as far as I can see - they're the beneficiaries.
Basically, since every expense of a school is (I guess supposedly) accounted for, remitting just enough to cover non-religious education and whatever else goes along with that, should be doable. If a school's budget includes '500 hours of teacher salary' of which 50 are for religious indoctrination, just cancel that teaching and save 10% of the salary budget (plus insurance, capital expenses, etc. relevant to classroom time.)
0 -
Not necessarily. In the United States, the priests and nuns and brothers mostly do not have a big part to play in the religious instruction of children.
"casual lay teachers" can often be very devoted to their faith, and would have the teaching experience to be able to impart their knowledge to children.
1 -
If be surprised if that were so, given that kids in the US don't do sacriment training during school time.
Also teachers should be chosen on their ability to teach, not the strength of their faith. Plus, you're going to need sometime to teach the kids from families that aren't proceeding with the sacrament.
Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
1 -
What you’re proposing is pretty much the current situation as it is now. Recently (well, six years ago now I guess), the Minister for Education done away with what was called “Rule 68”, which meant that religious instruction was no longer mandatory in all primary national schools -
That leans into the ‘hair splitting’ that was mentioned earlier between ‘religious education’, and ‘religious instruction’. The State cannot discriminate against patron bodies providing education which is religious in nature, because that would be the very definition of religious discrimination.
The schools budget won’t include teachers salaries because teachers are provided by the Dept of Education according to how many pupils there are in a school, same for much of the way most schools are funded - dependent upon the numbers of pupils in the school. DEIS schools are slightly different in that they receive extra funding provided they meet certain criteria -
https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/a3c9e-extension-of-deis-to-further-schools/
Again the ethos of the school is irrelevant, doesn’t matter if it’s religious or not, all schools classified as DEIS schools will qualify for the extra funding which is provided for education.
The equivalent I guess you’d be more familiar with are Charter Schools in the US, with the exception that public schools here are more accountable to the State because they also teach the national curriculum. We did have Charter Schools here at one stage, with accompanying attitudes to the poor, the same sort of attitude held by some middle-class taxpayers who imagine they should be able to dictate how public funds are spent -
Charter schools in Ireland were set up mostly in the 1700s by the Church of Ireland to educate the poor. They were state or charity sponsored, but run by the church. The model to copy was Kilkenny College, but critics like Bernard Mandeville felt that educating too many poor children would lead them to have unrealistic expectations. Notable examples are the Collegiate School Celbridge, Midleton College, Wilson's Hospital School and The King's Hospital.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_school
The attitude is far more prevalent in threads about providing State support to people who need it.
And yes, every expense of a school IS accounted for, it has to be in order to comply with the Education Act, which is handy if one of the members of the Board of Management also just happens to be an accountant -
2. Catholic Primary Schools Management Association (September 2010 Newsletter):
"Boards of Management are required, under the Education Act 1998, to keep accounts of income and expenditure. A financial report should be prepared annually. The accounts should be properly audited or certified in accordance with best accounting practice on a yearly basis. There is no strict definition of the term “certified” but it suggests that a suitably qualified accountant is satisfied that the accounts are both properly presented and accurately reflect the underlying records. An “Accountant’s Report” appended to the accounts would typically place responsibility for the completeness and accuracy of the underlying records on the Board of Management.
It may be the wish of certain Boards however, to commission a full audit of the financial statements for both their own comfort and for full transparency although the cost involved would normally be greater than that of “certification”.
The accounts should be certified or audited by an accountant who is independent of the BoM and who has the appropriate qualifications and professional indemnification. Three copies of the certified/audited accounts should be made – one for the Board of Management, one for the Patron, one for the accountant. The report should be available if requested for inspection by parents, Patron, Trustees, or the Department."
This advice is similar to that given by the other patron groups such as the Church of Ireland Board of Education, An Foras Pátrúnachta, Educate Together Ltd., etc.
In the case of secondary schools a further copy would be produced for forwarding on to the Financial Services Support Unit (FSSU).
0 -
It is, as they are providing their time and services in service of the Church. I also explained that the Church owns the land and properties provided for the purposes of education.
None of that is the church funding its own schools. So i will ask you for a third time to provide a breakdown of church funding.
I’ve no idea. In total though since the idea of divestment was announced around 2014, the best of my knowledge, there have only been a handful of schools divested.
if you had read your own link, you would have a fair idea. you could count them on one hand. The church as usual all talk.
There’s that ‘you lot’ again 😂 In any case, I didn’t attempt to dodge your question. I’m only speaking for myself, it’d be great if you’d save the condescending BS attitude for someone who gives a shìt, but I don’t expect you will. The reason I personally have no interest in calling for it is that unlike those people who are calling for it, I don’t support the idea of any children being excluded from a school. The people who are calling for it want to exclude children from “their” schools. They’re as bigoted as yourself, basically. I’m not a fan of that sort of shìtty attitude towards other people.
what children would be excluded from school? Nobody calling for divestment wants to exclude anyone. but you know that already. What you want is special treatment for catholics. I don't think you know what a bigot is. im actually embarassed for you.
I already provided evidence? It’s Department of Education policy that no new schools will be built in areas where it determines there are sufficient places in existing schools. Those schools generally happen to be Catholic schools, which do not fulfil the needs of children who are not Catholic, and their parents don’t support the ethos of the school. In my view that amounts to the State not fulfilling it’s obligations to parents and children.
what evidence did you provide? you claimed every new school. that clearly isn't the case. you mean catholic administered schools. As you have failed to show, the church doesn't fund any catholic schools.
2 -
and?
what does any of that have to do with the claim that the church funds its own schools?
1 -
None of that is the church funding its own schools. So i will ask you for a third time to provide a breakdown of church funding.
I’ve provided it twice. You see it differently, fair enough.
if you had read your own link, you would have a fair idea. you could count them on one hand. The church as usual all talk.
I read my own link already, I had no idea how many schools you were referring to after reading it either. It’s as though you only want to hear what you want to hear, and not what you’re being told.
what children would be excluded from school? Nobody calling for divestment wants to exclude anyone. but you know that already. What you want is special treatment for catholics. I don't think you know what a bigot is. im actually embarassed for you.
Travellers and immigrants and people living in poverty. And I’m not going to do the nit-picky silliness you’re engaging in by suggesting you must provide evidence for your claim that nobody calling for divestment wants to exclude anyone. I know already that you’re wrong. I’ve had plenty of arguments with people who would prove your claim to be BS, no trouble identifying what a bigot is, but for the purposes of clarity -
a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
what evidence did you provide? you claimed every new school. that clearly isn't the case. you mean catholic administered schools. As you have failed to show, the church doesn't fund any catholic schools.
I provided plenty of evidence already of the department of education’s efforts to block the establishment of new schools. I told you already it’s Department of Education policy that no new schools will be established in areas where there are sufficient places in existing schools.
Four years ago -
Where demographic data indicates that additional provision is required, the delivery of such additional provision is dependent on the particular circumstances of each case and may, depending on the circumstances, be provided through either one, or a combination of, the following:
- Utilising existing unused capacity within a school or schools,
- Extending the capacity of a school or schools,
- Provision of a new school or schools.
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2018-11-27/274/
Four weeks ago -
Where data indicates that there is not sufficient existing capacity to meet school place requirements in an area and that additional provision is required at primary or post primary level, the delivery of such additional provision is dependent on the particular circumstances of each case and may be provided through either one, or a combination of, the following
- Extending the capacity of a school or schools,
- Provision of a new school or schools.
https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2022-05-12a.383
Almost fcuking verbatim 😂
I know what I meant. I don’t need you to tell me what I mean. I certainly don’t need you to tell me what I mean when you’re filtering everything I’m telling you through your own already held prejudices, and then tell me I don’t know what a bigot is.
2 -
Still boils down to the fact that some parents - the noisiest ones - are a bit lazy. They don't want to travel to bring their children to a school which would meet their needs and wishes.
Perhaps next request will be asking the state to have someone drop by the house and prepare breakfast for the kids while the parents have a bit of a lie on.
0 -
I’ve provided it twice. You see it differently, fair enough.
you have provided nothing but nonsense. I will make it easier for you. If the church funds its own schools as you claim then you will be able to provide some information on
- The money they spend on wages/salaries
- Maintenance
- Heating/electricity
- supplies for students
- equipment for extra curricular activities
These are requirements of funding a school. so you will have no problem providing some or all in relation to the chruch
I read my own link already, I had no idea how many schools you were referring to after reading it either. It’s as though you only want to hear what you want to hear, and not what you’re being told.
well you clearly didn't because you didn't have a clue.
Travellers and immigrants and people living in poverty. And I’m not going to do the nit-picky silliness you’re engaging in by suggesting you must provide evidence for your claim that nobody calling for divestment wants to exclude anyone. I know already that you’re wrong. I’ve had plenty of arguments with people who would prove your claim to be BS, no trouble identifying what a bigot is, but for the purposes of clarity -
jumping ahead and getting the excuses in of why you cant provide evidence
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
If i was intolerant to or had hatred too catholics you might have had a point. Unfortunately for you my issue is solely with the seperation of church and state. you trying to play the victim card wont work here
I provided plenty of evidence already of the department of education’s efforts to block the establishment of new schools. I told you already it’s Department of Education policy that no new schools will be established in areas where there are sufficient places in existing schools.
you claimed every new school. evidence or retract
I know what I meant. I don’t need you to tell me what I mean. I certainly don’t need you to tell me what I mean when you’re filtering everything I’m telling you through your own already held prejudices, and then tell me I don’t know what a bigot is.
I don,t think you do because you make a lot of claims and seem unable to back any of them up. If you did know what a bigot was you wouldn't be trying to label me as one. yet you don't seem to have any shame for the display of ignorance
2 -
how far should they have to travel before they aren't lazy in your mind? A rough radius will suffice.
2 -
Advertisement
-
Climb down out of yourself like a good man 😂
Your ‘you lot’ BS is the epitome of bigotry.
The rest of it like you wanting an actual breakdown of over 3,000 schools financial affairs? That’s what you’re looking for? I don’t have it to hand, and I wouldn’t be able to get it for you. I didn’t imagine you were being so unreasonable that you wouldn’t accept that the idea of funding schools means providing the land and the property and the staff to manage those schools on an entirely voluntary basis.
I told you from the outset I had no idea, you told me I’d have an idea if I read my own link. Just to remind you what you actually asked for -
The church is supportive is divestment? Remind is, how many schools that weren't due to close because of low numbers, have been divested?
I told you I have no idea, you seem to think I’m hiding something from you, and then you tell me I have no clue. Yes, I told you that already - I don’t have a clue, I have no idea. Because I don’t.
YOU claimed that nobody calling for divestment wants to exclude anyone. I don’t need you to provide supporting evidence for your claim, I know you’re wrong, because I’ve argued and fought against plenty of people who are calling for divestment precisely because they want to exclude people they don’t want in “their” schools. You’d have to hear it for yourself the pissing and moaning that was done when the Department of Education sent out the circular that schools could no longer discriminate against children with specific needs in their admissions policies. Oh boy 😂
Evidence of your claim is definitely not required. It’s BS, simple as that.
I won’t be retracting anything, because I know exactly what I said. You want to do the dancing on the head of a pin nonsense that I said “every school”, here’s what I actually said, referring to every attempt to establish new schools -
That’s a pretty broad brush you’re attempting to tar people with the “you lot” stuff, but suffice to say you’re wrong in any case, as the Church is supportive of measures to divest schools, and it’s the Department of Education is dragging their heels on the issue and blocking every attempt to establish new schools -
https://www.rte.ie/news/2022/0307/1284755-schools-divesting-nenagh/
I don’t expect you’ll be the least bit embarrassed by your own ignorance, but because you’re an individual, I don’t refer to “you lot” the same way you do because I’m not prejudiced to thinking that everyone who opposes Church involvement in education IS a bigot. Most people in my experience at least are perfectly reasonable and rational and are able to discuss these things without being petty and trying to put words in people’s mouths and tell people what they’re really thinking according to that person’s own already held prejudices about other groups in society.
1 -
In the US, I know of one family who did a 70 mile round trip 2 times a day to drop/collect their children to/from catholic school.
They wanted a certain ethos for their family, and were not shirking their responsibilities in doing so.
The question you need to ask and answer yourself is how far are you willing to travel to bring your children to a school which you believe suits your/their needs. I am sure that my opinion of what constitutes laziness does not mean much to you. Moot point.
1 -
Why does anyone need to travel when they're is a perfectly good taxpayer-funded school in their catchment areas?
Perhaps the next request will be that you can only dial 999 if you have a baptism cert?
Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.
1 -
Well it's not a perfectly good school for your requirements though is it.
1 -
Nail on the head. It isn't and the state has a responsibility to give equal rights and access to all children. Why should one kid, just because their parents got them baptised, get preferential treatment? Join our religion or suffer the consequences!
1 -
Now that is absolutely rubbish, and you know it.
0 -
But it's not just one kid who's been baptised. Its the opposite. It's a minority of parents who do not wish to have religion for their children who seem to think they can dictate what should happen in the school.
You want a particular ethos in your school? Find one to suit your child so!
0 -
It doesn't matter, might doesn't make right. The state has a responsibility to treat kids equally, and failing to provide a local school is one way of discrimination. Do you agree with discrimination of kids?
So, we either provide a school for each religion and non religion or, the much better option, provide a school that is free from all religion and leave the parents and children look after their own religious needs.
You see that is the difference. You want a particular ethos, and are happy because the state accommodates you. But I don't want any particular ethos, leave that for outside interests. Why should my kid be excluded because of a decision I made? Seems very unfair to the child to pay a price for my decisions?
3 -
I don't think religion should be in schools that are almost entirely state funded.
That said I think the desire for faith schools is understated in these forums. I also think the unwillingness of people to travel to schools other than the nearest one is hard to justify. That's partly down to activism than necessity. But people are entitled to be activists. I don't have an issue with that.
1 -
Advertisement
-
You want your child to be part of the local soccer club. He plays in the forwards. As the ball comes to his direction, he picks it up with his hands and hand passes to a team mate. Oops.
You just want convenience. And you want everyone else in the school to suffer or feel guilty because you/your childs demands are not be acceeded to.
1
