Where is the next generation heading?

[marshlander]

For some reason my browser is misbehaving at the moment and it's a pain trawling through for live but disappearing threads, so I'm starting this new one.

I came across these two articles this morning. They are both saying that the religious are gathering forces, by working on the minds of the world's children. Contrary to what might seem apparent I do understand why a subscriber to a particular belief system would want to send their child to a faith-promoting institution. There was a time in my life when I would have taken that route for my own children had such an option been available. I also seriously considered educating my kids "otherwise" (i.e. at home). As things turned out I am very relieved that my children had to attend state schools and mix with a range of people.

Under Labour, so called "faith-schools" have seen a greater expansion than during any other time I can recall. Even under Thatcher's most ideological Tory regime the number of faith-schools was apparently shrinking. We seem to have learned little from our experience of the last few decades of dissent and strife in the UK ... for better or worse Northern Ireland/Ulster is part of the United Kingdom. The established education system was a major way of perpetuating sectarian differences. The way forward was seen to lie in integrated schools. In the rush for votes Labour has conveniently forgotten where those educational divisions led. The terrorist bomb in Newry a couple of nights ago should serve to remind us, but the next day Ed Balls, Education Secretary, was justifying why faith schools should be allowed to put their own slant on the interpretation of equality and sex education legislation currently passing through Parliament. I sat in horror listening to a Muslim Head Teacher from Leicester speaking on the news last night explaining that he would comply with the law and teach the new requirements for sex education and then tell his pupils that being gay is wrong and against the teachings of the Qur'an. Then they would be free to make up their own minds ... whatever that means.

Anecdotes hardly amount to evidence, but in my family the children who served Mormon missions are the ones who seem to be unshakeably faithful now and are perpetuating the lies to the next generation. Those who did not go through the missionary hothouse have found their own ways in life, which do not require the certainties of that particular branch of belief. I know I have simplified this and have not discussed which might be the cause and which the effect.

In the USA the picture is different. Rather than being cloistered with others in same-faith schools, parents are keeping their children away from school in increasing numbers and educating them at home. It appears that this eduation amounts in part to religious indoctrination. Again I can see how this has come about and I see how I might have been tempted down this route had the conditions been in place for it to happen.

If a nation wants its children educated, does the state have a right to demand what form that education should take? If parents are moving their children into educational settings that teach loyalty to religion over freedom of choice and loyalty to a broader community how is the safety of minorities ever to be protected and the freedoms of all valued?

Religion is on all the Labour lips today. First children's secretary Ed Balls got a roasting for allowing faith schools an exemption from equality requirements in the curriculum. Then Jim Murphy, Scottish secretary, set up a speech tonight calling for religion to have a greater role in politics and for Labour to appeal to religious voters.

Despite all this, it's still too early to worry about a distinct shift towards religion in the British political culture. Labour just made a calculation. It realised it would upset religious groups more with the double-blow of the equality bill and the children, schools and families bill than it would upset equality activists by passing the amendment today.

For a long time, Labour was ruled by two men whose political senses were sharp enough to realise the folly of allowing religion into the political realm ... (more)

It is generally understood that today’s youth are more supportive of equality for gay and lesbian people. Faced with losing the next generation, fundamentalists are ferociously scrambling to capture the minds of youth through homeschooling and the subversion of public education. By sequestering students at home or creating public schools where the only drink served in the cafeteria is Kool-Aid, they hope to reprogram tomorrow’s leaders.

It appears America’s religious fanatics are modeling their efforts on the success of radical Islamists in the Middle East, who reversed the trend of secularization in the region by hijacking education. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman recently wrote about this phenomenon:

Beginning in the 1970s, the trend in Yemen, Morocco, Egypt and the Persian Gulf “was to Islamicize education as a way to fight the left…”

…Then, in 1979, after the Saudi ruling family was shaken by an attack in Mecca from its own Wahabi fundamentalists, the Saudi regime, to fend off the anger of its Wahabis, gave them free rein to Islamicize education and social life in Saudi Arabia and neighboring states.

The rest is a very sad and tragic history ... (more)

[fredv3b]

Marshy,

I really don't know about America, so I am not going to comment on America. However regarding the situation in the UK I am pretty relaxed, the main reason for this is that although the people I've met in life who did go to faith-schools were on average more religious than those who went to non-faith schools (hardly surprising has they probably had more religious parents), they weren't any less tolerant. (I've met enough agnostic homophobes in my life).

Under Labour, so called "faith-schools" have seen a greater expansion than during any other time I can recall. Even under Thatcher's most ideological Tory regime the number of faith-schools was apparently shrinking.

Most parents who are trying to to send their children to the new/expanded faith schools who would not have done in the past are not doing so out of religious fervour, but because these schools are perceived to be better than the local non-faith schools. Frankly, I could imagine, if I had kids, sending them to a CofE school rather than a poor non-faith school.

We seem to have learned little from our experience of the last few decades of dissent and strife in the UK ... for better or worse Northern Ireland/Ulster is part of the United Kingdom. The established education system was a major way of perpetuating sectarian differences. The way forward was seen to lie in integrated schools.

Whilst I agree that educational segregation (which was in effect demanded by local populations) was one what in which segregation was perpetuated I am not convinced how much that applies outside of Northern Ireland. The different communities of Northern Ireland did not see themselves as forming a larger community, the population of Northern Ireland. They saw themselves as separatley forming part of 'British Citizens' and 'the Irish people'. I did not go to school with Southerners or even kids from the other side of town, but we did not grow thinking ourselves separate from Southerners (even if they were a wee bit strange and inferior ). The North and the South are both part of England.

In the rush for votes Labour has conveniently forgotten where those educational divisions led. The terrorist bomb in Newry a couple of nights ago should serve to remind us

There are separate communities not because of segregated schools but because they have always been separate, ever since King William confiscated Catholic's land in the north of Ireland and gave it to Protestant settlers.

I sat in horror listening to a Muslim Head Teacher from Leicester speaking on the news last night explaining that he would comply with the law and teach the new requirements for sex education and then tell his pupils that being gay is wrong and against the teachings of the Qur'an. Then they would be free to make up their own minds ... whatever that means.

To be honest I am not entirely sure what the fuss is about? Do we seriously imagine that whatever laws we pass, and ensure that all kids go to non-faith schools, that Muslim kids would not have orthodox interpretations of the Qur'an drilled into them? Surely, the point is that previously faith schools have been able to skip any points of sex education they don't like, now they have to teach it, although they will still be able to say they disapprove. This way Muslim boys will be taught about safer sex and will know about Civil Partnerships and that they can say no to an arranged marriage, find someone they love and settle down in a manner that the rest of modern Britain considers respectable.

If a nation wants its children educated, does the state have a right to demand what form that education should take? If parents are moving their children into educational settings that teach loyalty to religion over freedom of choice and loyalty to a broader community how is the safety of minorities ever to be protected and the freedoms of all valued?

If a nation wants to pay for children to be educated, then it has a right to demand what that money is and is not spent on.

[Synaesthete]

I just think how an individual shapes their mind should be down to them. Guidance is essential, and both guidance and education should be open-minded, accepting, unbiased and respectful.

This whole thing about "working on the minds of the world's children". WTF right do they have to do such a thing? Religion is but one part of life, but one part of a person. It is NOT the be all and end all.

Why do we not STOP forcing children and young people to be something religious, and instead work WITH them, on THEIR levels to afford them the opportunities to be the best of themselves.

[marshlander]

Marshy,

I really don't know about America, so I am not going to comment on America. However regarding the situation in the UK I am pretty relaxed, the main reason for this is that although the people I've met in life who did go to faith-schools were on average more religious than those who went to non-faith schools (hardly surprising has they probably had more religious parents), they weren't any less tolerant. (I've met enough agnostic homophobes in my life).

Gaia theory, eh It will all balance out in the end?

Most parents who are trying to to send their children to the new/expanded faith schools who would not have done in the past are not doing so out of religious fervour, but because these schools are perceived to be better than the local non-faith schools. Frankly, I could imagine, if I had kids, sending them to a CofE school rather than a poor non-faith school ...

I have heard it said that the best way to cure belief is to send children to a C of E school. Having sat through a friend's ordination recently in Ely Cathedral I can well believe it. I haven't heard such peculiar rhetoric since the last time I went to Glastonbury Tor. I suppose the language must make somebody feel good :confused:

These hypothetical kids ... I would imagine you would send them to a "good" C of E school if your only other choice were a poor performing state school? There have been a few religious schools being handed a notice to improve by OFSTED recently and, in the name of equality, the expansion of faith-schools includes a growing number of the less tolerant religions and those that are convinced that everyone else is wrong.

If a nation wants to pay for children to be educated, then it has a right to demand what that money is and is not spent on.

Which is one of the reasons we have OFSTED. I've heard of recent cases of schools failing, but also accusations that some inspections in some faith schools have lacked rigour. Having done a little inspecting for OFSTED a few years ago I can't imagine how a school could get away with performing badly, but I know the criteria for inspection have changed a few times since my day.

[marshlander]

I just think how an individual shapes their mind should be down to them. Guidance is essential, and both guidance and education should be open-minded, accepting, unbiased and respectful.

This whole thing about "working on the minds of the world's children". WTF right do they have to do such a thing? Religion is but one part of life, but one part of a person. It is NOT the be all and end all.

Why do we not STOP forcing children and young people to be something religious, and instead work WITH them, on THEIR levels to afford them the opportunities to be the best of themselves.

A parent who is convinced that their religion is THE way is hardly going to take a step back and risk damning their child for eternity. What they suffer in this life is of little consequence if one believes in the redemption of an afterlife.

To be honest I don't know what the answer is. I know I would like to see RE removed as a compulsory school subject as well as the requirement that schools hold a daily act of worship. The comprehensive education experiment was never given a chance to achieve its aims because there was never the will to apply it comprehensively. I can see us being unable to offer our children a fair and secular education for the same reason. The curriculum is overcrowded enough, but obviously the religious vote carries significant weight. I suppose the best we might hope for is some kind of balance, but the pendulum is swinging far too wildly at present.

[fredv3b]

Gaia theory, eh It will all balance out in the end?

Most things work out in the wash.

I have heard it said that the best way to cure belief is to send children to a C of E school. Having sat through a friend's ordination recently in Ely Cathedral I can well believe it. I haven't heard such peculiar rhetoric since the last time I went to Glastonbury Tor. I suppose the language must make somebody feel good :confused:

Many have suggested that the CofE more closely meets the definition of a social institution than it does a religious one.

These hypothetical kids ... I would imagine you would send them to a "good" C of E school if your only other choice were a poor performing state school?

In those circumstances, yes. There is no way I am sending any kids of mine to a "bad" school, particularly hypothetical ones.

I know I would like to see RE removed as a compulsory school subject as well as the requirement that schools hold a daily act of worship.

I would like to see R.E. as I was taught it banned completely. I was given a sanitised view of all major religions, sanitised to the extent that it verged on the untrue. The raising of 'difficult' or controversial topics was not allowed. Lots of schools don't bother with an act of daily worship (often for practical reasons) and, with the exception of inspectors duly noting that 'the school does not meet the requirement for a daily act of worship', nothing happens.

The comprehensive education experiment was never given a chance to achieve its aims because there was never the will to apply it comprehensively.

The main reason for the move to comprehensive education had nothing to do with the 'comprehensive education experiment'. Lots of Councils, particularly rural ones (and therefore often Tory), felt that having to provide different tiers of school covering the same area, was plain inefficient and comprehensive education made more sense. Hence the fact that the former Secretary of State for Education with the title of presiding over the greatest number of Grammar School closures is a Mrs Thatcher.

Interestingly, the experiment behind Butler's 1944 Education Act was never carried out comprehensively either. In many parts of the country there simply wasn't a proper set of Technical Schools on Grammars and Secondary Moderns.

[princealbertofb]

I hope you are not pulling the wool over your eyes, Fred... It's still something that we have to be really wary of. In France, for the moment, religious education has been totally removed from the school system except in private institutions, but I have read that some parts of Paris have been almost totally confiscated (on certain days during religious ceremonies) by the Muslim communities there, regardless of what the laws of France say. So to believe that there is no encroachment on public liberties is to be either too tolerant or a bit ignorant. Watch out!

[fredv3b]

I'm sorry PA, I don't follow your post.

I hope you are not pulling the wool over your eyes, Fred... It's still something that we have to be really wary of.

What, specifically, do we have to be wary of?

In France, for the moment, religious education has been totally removed from the school system except in private institutions, but I have read that some parts of Paris have been almost totally confiscated (on certain days during religious ceremonies) by the Muslim communities there, regardless of what the laws of France say.

'Totally confiscated', I'm sorry I think we have managed to loose something there in translation.

So to believe that there is no encroachment on public liberties is to be either too tolerant or a bit ignorant. Watch out!

Sorry, what are 'public liberties'?

My apologies if I am being really stupid in not understanding.

[sox-and-the-city]

To be honest I don't know what the answer is. I know I would like to see RE removed as a compulsory school subject

Is that within or outwith faith schools?? Personally, i feel that RE is vital to education. I'm not saying in any way that faith schools are an idea a agree with. If i had it my way the whole educational system would be entirely secular HOWEVER that doesn't mean we shouldn't educate children and young people about belief systems and the values they embody.

Surely the point of our educational system is to prepare children for the real world and (in an ideal world at least) this means turning them into the best rounded people possible. Learning about belief systems and faith groups is vital, if only so that we can be understanding of the ways in which other people see/understand the world, never mind that our vision of what is right and wrong and indeed our language, and thus the very way we see the world and interact with it is irreversibly steeped in religion. Let's not forget that the English words for God and good have the same root, nor that Goodbye was originally God be with you and holiday holy day. An understanding of Religion is vital to understanding our culture and our society's expectations of us, if nothing else. Then there's the issue of spiritual development, which is just as important a part of someone's development as any other, and which can be aided by learning about the different ways in which one might pursue it.

Where are we to teach young people about morality, our perceptions of morality and what that means to different cultures?? We wonder why we have all the problems we do in Britian with our scummy underclass of essentially sociopathic youths who have no concept of community when our educational system entirely fails to give children an opportunity to socialise properly and understand what it means to be a functioning member of society and you would remove the only area of education which gives children a chance to explore and understand what values and morals are??

p.s having read this over i want to apologise for he general tone of it, it isn't meant to sound so accusatory...

[princealbertofb]

I believe Sox that you are right about teaching the kids about the understanding of other cultures and various faith systems, but what I think Marshlander and you and I are talking about is the endoctrination, which seems completely wrong. Free for any adult mind to go and seek their spiritual wealth and health in whatever religion or religious community they like. It's the encroachment of religious dogm into our politics that is becoming more and more a problem. In some countries where the dogm was that there would be no religion at all (communist regimes) it hasn't worked out either because it was replaced by the negation of something that seemed vital to lots of people. Now is the swing of the pendulum the other way.