Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Faith Schools again

2

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Again, I think that you give faith school too much credit/disservice. A few bad apples doesn't mean that the whole bunch is rotten.

    The whole concept of faith schools seems rotten to me.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The whole concept of faith schools seems rotten to me.

    Then you completely misunderstand the concept, or you just want everyone to abandon their religious beliefs and everyone to meld into one belief, probably the one you follow, possibly atheism.

    The purpose of faith schools is to make it easier for children to preserve their faith.
  • Options
    Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Posts: 16,688 Skive's The Limit
    The purpose of faith schools is to make it easier for children to preserve their faith.
    If that was simply it, then they'd let children of other religions enter. They'd simply not take part in the religious customs.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There are often not enough places / schools already for those in their own faith to go to.

    And no I don't think that would be appropriate. In a Muslim school they will teach Quran and Arabic, all the food will be Halal, they will probably have Islamic services at various times in the day. The culture there would be Muslim culture. It would not be appropriate for non-Muslim children to attend such a school.
  • Options
    Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Posts: 16,688 Skive's The Limit
    It would not be appropriate for non-Muslim children to attend such a school.
    That should be left to the partents (and the children themselves) to decide.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The purpose of faith schools is to make it easier for children to preserve their faith.

    The very concept of a 5 year old child having a faith is ludicrous. Just like the idea of a 5 year old child having a political persuasion is ridiculous.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Then you completely misunderstand the concept, or you just want everyone to abandon their religious beliefs and everyone to meld into one belief, probably the one you follow, possibly atheism.

    The purpose of faith schools is to make it easier for children to preserve their faith.

    The concept of faith schools is to facilitate in the indoctrination of young children, and, as IWS points out, the concept of a young child with faith is a nonsense.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That should be left to the partents (and the children themselves) to decide.

    :yes: I know many Muslim children who attend a non-faith secondary school and had no problems whatsoever, therefore I see no problem with non religious children attending faith schools.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The very concept of a 5 year old child having a faith is ludicrous. Just like the idea of a 5 year old child having a political persuasion is ridiculous.

    No it isn't. It isn't just about a "faith", it's about a culture that they are born into.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    , the concept of a young child with faith is a nonsense.

    Why?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No it isn't. It isn't just about a "faith", it's about a culture that they are born into.

    Oh, so it's not a faith school now is it? So we can dispense with all of the religious aspects and just "teach" culture to these kids instead? Since when was it a school's job, to promote a certain type of culture or religion? And worse still exclude children who don't fit into this culture based essentially on whatever shit they can pull out of their arse to justify it (which naturally we can't question, because it's their "faith").
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sofie wrote: »
    :yes: I know many Muslim children who attend a non-faith secondary school and had no problems whatsoever, therefore I see no problem with non religious children attending faith schools.

    It's a shame that those who run it (using our money) do. Unless of course you have a good academic record and could boost the schools average grades a bit.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They have religious (faith) schools because people want them. People want to send their children to them so the child will be brought up in an environment of their own religious culture.

    And once again, IWS, what you call "indoctrination" is effectively what you yourself do not believe in. You want everyone to be taught what you yourself believe.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They have religious (faith) schools because people want them. People want to send their children to them so the child will be brought up in an environment of their own religious culture.

    And once again, IWS, what you call "indoctrination" is effectively what you yourself do not believe in. You want everyone to be taught what you yourself believe.

    Comparing a belief with non-belief is a fallacy. What I, and I suspect IWS want, is that kids aren't taught the unsubstantiated nonsense purported by religion while their still Santa Clause susceptible. I don't think kids should be exposed to such an egregious divorce from rationality while they're so vulnerable and haven't yet the critical cognitive ability to refute their teachers.

    I don't like the idea of kids being taught "their" religion as much as i don't like the idea of kids being taught the world is flat.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Atheism is a belief - it's a belief in the non-existence of God(s). It's as much based on the unknowable as Christianity et al.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Atheism is a belief - it's a belief in the non-existence of God(s). It's as much based on the unknowable as Christianity et al.

    And who argued for the establishment of atheist schools?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And who argued for the establishment of atheist schools?

    What's that got to do with the argument over whether or not atheism is a belief?

    PS - arguing for religion to be taken from schools is arguing for de facto atheist schools.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What's that got to do with the argument over whether or not atheism is a belief?
    Nothing, but then what has the definition of atheism got to do with faith schools?
    PS - arguing for religion to be taken from schools is arguing for de facto atheist schools.
    How the hell do you leap to that huge conclusion? An atheist school would be one that teaching that there is no God (an opinion I've never heard of being considered worthy of study, I might add). And advocates of such might demand a scientific refutal of all religious ideas portrayed in the education system. It would be allowed to give preference to children of atheist parents. Who argued for that? I don't see the logic between non-religious equalling atheist. There is a huge sea of secularists and agnostics in the middle that have no particular religious faith. The point is that all publicly funded facilities should be available for use by everyone's children, and shouldn't be promoting, however poorly, one particular faith.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Atheism is a belief - it's a belief in the non-existence of God(s). It's as much based on the unknowable as Christianity et al.

    Poppy-cock.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nothing, but then what has the definition of atheism got to do with faith schools?
    Comparing a belief with non-belief is a fallacy.

    I was answering coathanger.
    How the hell do you leap to that huge conclusion? An atheist school would be one that teaching that there is no God (an opinion I've never heard of being considered worthy of study, I might add). And advocates of such might demand a scientific refutal of all religious ideas portrayed in the education system. It would be allowed to give preference to children of atheist parents. Who argued for that? I don't see the logic between non-religious equalling atheist. There is a huge sea of secularists and agnostics in the middle that have no particular religious faith. The point is that all publicly funded facilities should be available for use by everyone's children, and shouldn't be promoting, however poorly, one particular faith


    Non-religous doesn't neccessarily mean atheist. Atheism and Christianity are the same side of the coin - there not opposites. Both our belief systems.

    The opposite of religion is agnoticism. And as an agnostic I'm certainly not an atheist.

    If you want your children to be brought up as atheists lobby for an atheist school. I'm sure if enough people wanted them the Govt would be happy to set one up (after all it supports faith schools, not because it particually wants children to be indoctrinated into catholicism or CofE, but because the state only pays part of the costs).

    In the meantime other people should be allowed to send their children to faith schools without the fundamentalist school of atheism trying to force their beliefs on them.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Non-religous doesn't neccessarily mean atheist. Atheism and Christianity are the same side of the coin - there not opposites. Both our belief systems.
    Belief based on evidence is not the same thing as belief based on faith (in many cases, consciously in spite of evidence). Atheists generally (I would say always, but then I wouldn't be leaving myself open to the possibility that one exists ;)) base their belief on evidence, and therefore since none exists for God, they don't believe it. I have never met an atheist that says there definitely no God, because the whole point of rational thought is to leave every option open to new evidence. Atheists are atheist because the default position of people is scepticism until evidence presents itself. An utterly different way of thinking than that of faith. Different ways of thinking with biologically different purposes.
    If you want your children to be brought up as atheists lobby for an atheist school. I'm sure if enough people wanted them the Govt would be happy to set one up (after all it supports faith schools, not because it particually wants children to be indoctrinated into catholicism or CofE, but because the state only pays part of the costs).
    I would like my children to be presented with all the tools to make up their own mind. I certainly don't want them to be indoctrinated into a certain belief system. I thought that was the whole point of school? To be presented with new ideas and be taught to think about them critically. But again, that's not the point. The point is that public money shouldn't be used to promote religious ideas that not only is there no evidence for, but in many cases of specific religious claims, there is clear evidence against.
    In the meantime other people should be allowed to send their children to faith schools without the fundamentalist school of atheism trying to force their beliefs on them.
    Have you not read a word I wrote? Try actually refuting my arguments rather than just repeating what you believe to be my aim, when I have clearly demonstrated it not to be the case.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There's no evidence for God and no evidence against him either. If you can give me evidence God doesn't exist I'll become an atheist (ie I won't believe in God). if someone else can give me evidence God exists I'll follow a religion. Absence of proof is not the same as proof absence.

    As there is no evidence either way I'm happy being agnostic.

    If you are an agnostic you believe it is impossible to know.

    http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/dictionaries/english/data/d0081529.html

    Atheists by definition do not believe in God.
  • Options
    Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Posts: 16,688 Skive's The Limit
    Correction: The definition of an atheist is that they "believe there is no god". "Do not believe in God" is true about an agnostic or follower of a polytheistic religion as well.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    you should not dictate to other parents though how they should bring up their children and at what age they should introduce religion into their lives.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That's a matter of opinion I guess. I myself see religious education as a form of abuse and brainwashing. If it were down to me I would ban religious education for under 18s.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    I myself see religious education as a form of brainwashing.

    I do as well. However, there is a difference between teaching someone and brainwashing them. (my school did the latter)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Correction: The definition of an atheist is that they "believe there is no god". "Do not believe in God" is true about an agnostic or follower of a polytheistic religion as well.

    True - mea culpa
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There's no evidence for God and no evidence against him either. If you can give me evidence God doesn't exist I'll become an atheist (ie I won't believe in God). if someone else can give me evidence God exists I'll follow a religion. Absence of proof is not the same as proof absence.

    As there is no evidence either way I'm happy being agnostic.

    If you are an agnostic you believe it is impossible to know.

    http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/dictionaries/english/data/d0081529.html

    Atheists by definition do not believe in God.

    There's no evidence there isn't an invisible green spider living on Saturn's rings either. Presumably you're a green-spider-agnostic also?

    This is where religion, and belief in a deity, becomes dangerous - because it purports the same critical thinking as atheism. It doesn't. At all. Not even a little bit.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There's no evidence for God and no evidence against him either. If you can give me evidence God doesn't exist I'll become an atheist (ie I won't believe in God). if someone else can give me evidence God exists I'll follow a religion. Absence of proof is not the same as proof absence.
    There is enough evidence to suggest that the probability of a God existing is so small that it is negligable as an idea (the very concept of trying to explain how something complicated came into being, by proposing something even more complicated is intellectually bankrupt). This argument comes from people who in their defence claim that God is far too complicated to explain through science, yet jump at the chance to quote anything that purports to be scientific proof of God's existance, and also claim to know the thoughts and desires of this deity, which of course is beyond science to even comprehend. And as for individual specific religious beliefs, well the amount people explain with religion seems to get smaller and smaller with each new discovery, unless of course you still believe that diseases are a punishment for our sins rather than the result of micro-organisms (of which there is no mention in the various religious texts conveniently), or that the world was created in six days (another example of backtracking on a huge scale). So even without going into the existance of God, I can clearly state that Catholicism is wrong and Judaism is wrong and back it up with a huge body of evidence. All you are showing by arguing that a belief in God and atheist beliefs are identical but opposite, is a fundamental misunderstanding as to the way that atheists come to their conclusions.

    However, this is an absolutely redundant point, because I am not arguing for my opinion to be taught as fact. I am arguing for children to be taught about all of the various methods of looking at the world, as well as the reasoning for each one, and allow them to make up their own minds. And funding schools that promote one specific dogma and exclude children who's parents don't follow this is unethical. Maybe you'd like to address this, which is actually a real issue rather than a philosophical argument that wouldn't actually be very important if people didn't attempt to force their religious views onto others.

    Just out of interest though, as an agnostic, what do you think the chances are that a God exists? 50/50? 60/40? As an atheist, I don't 100% know that God doesn't exist, just like I don't 100% know that we're not actually in a computer simulation, but the percentage chance of God existing in my view is far closer to 0% than 1%.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sofie wrote: »
    I do as well. However, there is a difference between teaching someone and brainwashing them. (my school did the latter)

    Oh, I certainly believe there are degrees of indoctrination, and I'm sorry you got one of the shit ones. But the fundamental thing about religious thinking is the same. That faith is a virtue, that religious ideas shouldn't be questioned, these are common to all religious ways of thinking.

    And I'll give you a small example. And I know that this particular question isn't just an example of a school's influence but I think it illustrates a point about how religious influence works when it supresses the desire to question thing that might seem trivial. Of the people who went to a Christian school of some sort, who thinks that Jesus was bascially a good man? Hell I did. It's common knowledge that he is. And when I was asked the same question about Muhammed, I realised that I thought about it far more critically and actually considered things like evidence, and the arguments of people who didn't think he was good, that I'd never even bothered to ask about Jesus, because after all with Jesus it was a given. And of course those brought up in the Muslim faith will most likely act the same way but opposite.
Sign In or Register to comment.