This is where Scottish teachers go to let off some steam. Join the debate in the Scotland Opinion Group and chat about the key issues affecting education in Scotland.
halfajackMuch of the SNP membership are poles apart when it comes to their beliefs about anything but the common goal of independence
Leadership too.
To answer Freddie's question, I think they'll keep the status quo re denominational schools. The Catholic vote in the west of Scotland is too important to tamper with.
And in light of the Ibrox news, would you want a blue-nose running your school's finances?
socrates82Perhaps Alex Salmond has decided that there is some irony in complaining about sectarianism in a country in which the state allows children to be separated from their friends at age five (or below) purely on the basis of their parents' religious beliefs.
Most children go to different schools because of where they live or where their parents can afford to live.
Even where children live in the same area, many parents choose to send their children to a non-district school because they believe it is a better school or because they don't want their children to mix, and be friends, with the children at their district school.
Some parents choose to send their children to denominational schools where they mix with children of all faiths and none, from different social backgrounds.
No state school, denominational or non-denominational, is allowed to separate children on the basis of their parents' religious beliefs as clearly stated in the Education (Scotland) Act 1980.
Of course, there are still some who believe that getting rid of denominational schools would make Scotland a religiously more tolerant society.
I suppose one could also argue that getting rid of people with a different colour of skin from the majority might make us a racially more tolerant society but would it mean anything?
Tolerance is about tolerating and if we cannot respect parental choice, and the distinctive views of others in society, Scotland will be the poorer for it.
Flyonthewall75Tolerance is about tolerating and if we cannot respect parental choice, and the distinctive views of others in society, Scotland will be the poorer for it.
The National Secular Society makes the point that if young children are shown, at age five, that religious differences are deemed to be so important that kids have to be separated from their toddler friends whose parents want them to go to "faith schools", then it is little wonder that these perceived differences can manifest themselves in later life.
Re: Faith schools in general, there is an argument that most religious beliefs have no supporting evidence whatsoever and should therefore never be presented to children as anything other than supernatural beliefs which have formed a big part of our culture. Because, as far as I can see from the evidence, that's all religion is.
Flyonthewall75No state school, denominational or non-denominational, is allowed to separate children on the basis of their parents' religious beliefs as clearly stated in the Education (Scotland) Act 1980.
That is not true. Many teachers and parents have challenged sectarian schooling and employment and lost their cases.
I understand that Glasgow Celtic FC is also in debt - 7 million debt. Presumably, Rangers FC are just as bad.
I really do wish that some poster, who knows something about professional soccer, would explain HOW football clubs, whose matches draw huge attendances, can get into debt. Remember that, unlike other business enterprises, football clubs receive their money up front and in cash. They do not have the problem of debtors defaulting or cheques bouncing - which are common reasons for a business to go into administration.
socrates82There is a huge difference between tolerance of adults' right to hold any religious view they want (And I for one am completely "tolerant" of that right) and "tolerating" something which is clearly divisive, private schools being another example.
So what you are saying is that you are quite happy for people to hold religious views so long as they don't practise those views in a way which you consider divisive.
Unfortunately, that is not what the law says. All parents are perfectly entitled to send their children to a denominational school if that is what they wish and their right does not depend on how you feel about it.
socrates82The National Secular Society makes the point that if young children are shown, at age five, that religious differences are deemed to be so important that kids have to be separated from their toddler friends whose parents want them to go to "faith schools", then it is little wonder that these perceived differences can manifest themselves in later life.
Well, they would say that wouldn't they. The National Secular Society has its own agenda and will do anything to discredit religious belief in any shape or form. Where is the evidence that children who are separated from toddler friends manifest particular behaviour characteristics later in life?
socrates82Re: Faith schools in general, there is an argument that most religious beliefs have no supporting evidence whatsoever and should therefore never be presented to children as anything other than supernatural beliefs which have formed a big part of our culture. Because, as far as I can see from the evidence, that's all religion is.
Okay, so now we're getting to the heart of the matter. You don't believe in religion because you can see no supporting evidence for religious beliefs and you don't agree that such beliefs should be passed on to children.
That's fair enough.
However, other people do have religious beliefs and have every right to pass them on to their children.
xmalFlyonthewall75No state school, denominational or non-denominational, is allowed to separate children on the basis of their parents' religious beliefs as clearly stated in the Education (Scotland) Act 1980.That is not true. Many teachers and parents have challenged sectarian schooling and employment and lost their cases.
Education (Scotland) Act 1980
9. Conscience clause
"Every public school [F41, every grant-aided school and every self-governing school] shall be open to pupils of all denominations, and any pupil may be withdrawn by his parents from any instruction in religious subjects and from any religious observance in any such school; and no pupil shall in any such school be placed at any disadvantage with respect to the secular instruction given therein by reason of the denomination to which such pupil or his parents belong, or by reason of his being withdrawn from any instruction in religious instruction."
Flyonthewall75Okay, so now we're getting to the heart of the matter. You don't believe in religion because you can see no supporting evidence for religious beliefs and you don't agree that such beliefs should be passed on to children.That's fair enough.However, other people do have religious beliefs and have every right to pass them on to their children.
Why do we need to divide up the school system to do that?
Flyonthewall75All parents are perfectly entitled to send their children to a denominational school if that is what they wish and their right does not depend on how you feel about it.
"The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds." (Article 13, Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the UN, 1989).
Can you honestly say that children in e.g. RC schools, receive a balanced view on issues such as gay rights and abortion?
socrates82
"Can you honestly say that children in e.g. RC schools, receive a balanced view on issues such as gay rights and abortion?"
No, I cannot say that. I do say that children in RC schools should be taught that homosexuality is wrong, that abortion is wrong, that the Pope is infallible and all the other doctrines of Catholicism. That is the purpose of Catholic schools.
Your question is an excellent reason for Catholics to keep control of the education of Catholics. Anti-Catholic bigotry in the field of education provoked the Catholic church into establishing its own schools. That was the case in Scotland, Ireland, England, the USA and Australia. It does not matter whether the anti-Catholics are fundamentalist Protestants or aggressive secularists; an anti-Catholic is an anti-Catholic.
"It seems to me there is ample opportunity for parents to "pass on" religious beliefs in the home and by taking them to the church/place of worship of their choice.
Why do we need to divide up the school system to do that?"
socrates82It seems to me there is ample opportunity for parents to "pass on" religious beliefs in the home and by taking them to the church/place of worship of their choice.Why do we need to divide up the school system to do that?
In an age of increasingly aggressive secularism, why would parents choose to give up the provision, and support, of denominational schools which they value?
socrates82You're clearly very big on parental "rights". What about children's rights? Do they not matter? "The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds." (Article 13, Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the UN, 1989).
Convention on the Rights of the Child
Article 5 (Parental guidance):
Governments should respect the rights and responsibilities of families to direct and guide their children so that, as they grow, they learn to use their rights properly. Helping children to understand their rights does not mean pushing them to make choices with consequences that they are too young to handle. Article 5 encourages parents to deal with issues "in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child". The convention does not take responsibility for children away from their parents and give more authority to governments. It does place on governments the responsibility to protect and assist families in fulfilling their essential role as nurturers of children.
socrates82Can you honestly say that children in e.g. RC schools, receive a balanced view on issues such as gay rights and abortion?
That depends on what you mean by 'a balanced view'?
With regard to primary age children, I have found that parents in general, of all faiths and none, tend to be very protective of their children being influenced as to the normality, or otherwise, of issues of sexual orientation at a young age.
I can't speak with first hand experience of secondary age pupils, but my impression is that they are far from being indoctrinated in such matters and have the opportunity to develop an informed moral conscience as they mature.
Aber1991 "I do say that children in RC schools should be taught that homosexuality is wrong, that abortion is wrong, that the Pope is infallible and all the other doctrines of Catholicism. That is the purpose of Catholic schools.
Flyonthewall75 I can't speak with first hand experience of secondary age pupils, but my impression is that they are far from being indoctrinated in such matters and have the opportunity to develop an informed moral conscience as they mature.
One person is saying that kids should be fully indoctrinated in all Catholic doctrines, including the particularly-curious idea of "papal infallibility". The other is saying they are "far from being indoctrinated".
Which is it then?
Top of page