It is very rarely that I find myself siding with the High Priest of the Fundamentalist Atheist Religion and disagreeing with my former fellow-student at Theological Collage The Rev Geraint Tudur. But on the subject of school Assemblies I am with Prof Dawkins.
When I was in school many moons ago, as a young committed Christian, I thought that the Morning Assembly ridiculed the very meaning of an Act of Christian Worship.
The Headmaster could go from praising the Lord to praising the achievements of the First Rugby XV without batting an eyelid; and he could go from a hymn about Christian forgiveness into a threat of six of the best for those who's hair was too long without any sense of hypocrisy!
My headmaster was a deacon and a lay preacher in a local chapel. If he, a person used to leading Christian worship outside school, could make such a mockery of Christian worship in the School Assembly, how much more harm can the majority of headteachers today, who don't have a personal faith in Christ, do to the institution of Christian Worship?
If anything Jane Davidson hasn't gone far enough. Personally I believe that the School Assembly should be abolished as an act of Christian Worship.
I have nothing against getting the whole school together (with no right of opting out) in order to praise the achievements of school heroes or in order to give a communal bollocking to those who spit gum in the yard - but confusing such a meeting with worship verges on the heretical!
Marcus will, no doubt, tell me that it is not a good enough reason; but one of the reasons why I want a Welsh Parliament rather than a Welsh Assembly, is because the title Welsh Assembly always reminds me of Tuesdays and Thursdays in school when the hymns, the readings, the prayers, the football praise and the castigation's were delivered in Cymraeg!
Showing posts with label Religious education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religious education. Show all posts
23/06/2008
You Gov: Religious symbols
Last Friday's daily YouGov poll has a Welsh angle in that some of the question arose out of the decision by Sarika Watkins-Sing to take Aberdare Girls' School to court. Here are the results:
I had some difficulty with this one, on the one hand I believe that workplaces and schools have the right to make their own reasonable rules regarding what is or isn't acceptable dress code. On the other hand I realise that because my religious views don't require the display of any symbols, it is a lot easier for me to live within such rules than it is for those of other faiths. So I voted don't know to all the questions.
Clik Here is you would like to be part of the YouGov panels
An owner of a hairdressing salon has been fined 4,000 pounds and accused of religious discrimination for refusing to employ a Muslim woman who was not prepared to remove her headscarf when styling clients' hair or model alternative hairstyles.
Do you agree or disagree that the salon owner is guilty of religious discrimination?
Strongly agree 7%
Agree 14%
Disagree 20%
Strongly Disagree 55%
Dont know 4%
What do you think about the level of the fine (4,000 pounds) the salon owner has been asked to pay?Too high 28%
About right 10%
Too low 2%
The salon owner should not have been fined 56%
Dont know 5%
To what extent, if at all, do you think an individual's human rights have been infringed by rules that do not permit the wearing of the following religious symbols in the WORKPLACE?
A bangle (Kara)
A very large extent 10%
A large extent 12%
A very small extent 12%
A small extent 13%
Not at all 45%
Dont know 8%
A headscarf (Hijab)
A very large extent 6%
A large extent 13%
A very small extent 12%
A small extent 15%
Not at all 48%
Dont know 7%
A full covering (Burqa)
A very large extent 5%
A large extent 8%
A very small extent 9%
A small extent 10%
Not at all 60%
Dont know 7%
A necklace with a cross
A very large extent 17%
A large extent 14%
A very small extent 12%
A small extent 12%
Not at all 40%
Dont know 6%
A school has asked a Sikh pupil to remove a religious bangle (Kara) because all pupils are not permitted to wear jewellery other than wristwatches and plain ear studs. Do you agree or disagree with the school's ruling?
Strongly agree 47%
Agree 26%
Disagree 17%
Strongly Disagree 7%
Dont know 3%
To what extent, if at all, do you think an individual's human rights have been infringed by rules that do not permit the wearing of the following religious symbols AT SCHOOL?
Sikh bangle (Kara)
A very large extent 7%
A large extent 9%
A very small extent 10%
A small extent 13%
Not at all 55%
Dont know 5%
Muslim headscarf (Hijab)
A very large extent 6%
A large extent 11%
A very small extent 9%
A small extent 14%
Not at all 55%
Dont know 5%
A full covering (Burqa)
A very large extent 4%
A large extent 7%
A very small extent 8%
A small extent 11%
Not at all 64%
Dont know 5%
A necklace with a cross
A very large extent 12%
A large extent 10%
A very small extent 10%
A small extent 12%
Not at all 51%
Dont know 5%
I had some difficulty with this one, on the one hand I believe that workplaces and schools have the right to make their own reasonable rules regarding what is or isn't acceptable dress code. On the other hand I realise that because my religious views don't require the display of any symbols, it is a lot easier for me to live within such rules than it is for those of other faiths. So I voted don't know to all the questions.
Clik Here is you would like to be part of the YouGov panels
30/11/2007
Teaching RE in schools
Not wanting to be outdone by fellow bloggers Adam Price and Normal Mouth, I managed to get mentioned in Golwg this week too. Here is the translation of the article (written by Ifan Morgan Jones):
Complaint About Changing the Ten Commandments
Ifan got the gist of what I said, but not quite!
My children were not given a new commandment. Respect your god and the gods of others, was given as an explanation of the meaning of the first commandment. However I did say that this was a totally false explanation of the meaning of the commandment, indeed, it is quite the opposite of what the first commandment says.
The point that I was trying to make is that most religions are exclusive they are totally intolerant of other religious viewpoints. One might think that this is unacceptable in a modern, diverse society, but it is still true!
Traditionally RE taught children how to live as good Christian citizens in a Christian country. Today RE attempts to teach a child about many faiths but it still has a role in teaching morals and citizenship. However, the moral and civic values that it teaches are secular, not religious. My complaint is that because secular mores are taught in RE the religious aspect of the education is falsified in order to fit into the secular mould.
Learning about religions is essential to understanding the arts, the humanities and, if not pure science, the antecedents of science. Teaching false religion for the sake of political correctness hinders such understanding. (Try teaching the end of the Tudor period to kids who are taught that Christianity is a lovey-dovey nice religion!)
During the next 15 days children in schools thorough England & Wales will pretend that a plastic doll is the baby Jesus, and will be loved by their parents for doing so. At the same time an English woman brought up on the fallacies of religious equality and religious tolerance will be in gaol for calling a teddy bear Mohammed!
On a final point of clarification, it wouldn't need a Miss Marple to work out which school my kids attend! I didn't want to name "the" school because I didn't want to blame one school for what I see as a general problem. The RE problem is one that exists on, at least, an England and Wales basis - so picking on the school that my boys attend would be unfair!
Ultimately, the problem is more than educational, it is constitutional! The United Kingdom is not a secular state it is a .. ym .. sort of... Christianish, if you can work it out let me know state!!!
Complaint About Changing the Ten Commandments
A preacher from the Conwy Valley is unhappy, because he claims that a school in his area has re-written a part of the Bible in order to make it politically correct
Alwyn ap Huw claims that his children have received a new version of the Ten Commandments that changes the Christian message.
In place of: Thou shalt have no other gods before me, he claims that the children had received a commandment that said: Respect your god and the gods of others.
That, he said, is the complete opposite of the central Christian message that God alone can give salvation.
"They are trying to teach respect for other religions, but lying about religious beliefs doesn’t show respect to them at all"
"They shouldn't try to change a child's understanding of religion by trying to make it more nice".
"Teaching things such as tolerating and respecting the views of others belongs to another subject".
"If lies, that do not reflect the facts of faith, are what is taught in Religious Education lessons, is there any point to such lessons?"
For the sake of his children, Alwyn ap Huw wasn't willing to say which school had made the change, but he said that this sort of thing was common in religious education thorough Wales.
Ifan got the gist of what I said, but not quite!
My children were not given a new commandment. Respect your god and the gods of others, was given as an explanation of the meaning of the first commandment. However I did say that this was a totally false explanation of the meaning of the commandment, indeed, it is quite the opposite of what the first commandment says.
The point that I was trying to make is that most religions are exclusive they are totally intolerant of other religious viewpoints. One might think that this is unacceptable in a modern, diverse society, but it is still true!
Traditionally RE taught children how to live as good Christian citizens in a Christian country. Today RE attempts to teach a child about many faiths but it still has a role in teaching morals and citizenship. However, the moral and civic values that it teaches are secular, not religious. My complaint is that because secular mores are taught in RE the religious aspect of the education is falsified in order to fit into the secular mould.
Learning about religions is essential to understanding the arts, the humanities and, if not pure science, the antecedents of science. Teaching false religion for the sake of political correctness hinders such understanding. (Try teaching the end of the Tudor period to kids who are taught that Christianity is a lovey-dovey nice religion!)
During the next 15 days children in schools thorough England & Wales will pretend that a plastic doll is the baby Jesus, and will be loved by their parents for doing so. At the same time an English woman brought up on the fallacies of religious equality and religious tolerance will be in gaol for calling a teddy bear Mohammed!
On a final point of clarification, it wouldn't need a Miss Marple to work out which school my kids attend! I didn't want to name "the" school because I didn't want to blame one school for what I see as a general problem. The RE problem is one that exists on, at least, an England and Wales basis - so picking on the school that my boys attend would be unfair!
Ultimately, the problem is more than educational, it is constitutional! The United Kingdom is not a secular state it is a .. ym .. sort of... Christianish, if you can work it out let me know state!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)