[Closed] Christening Children for Schooling purposes

activity level of the PTA is a fairly good indicator that the parents care about the schooling and therefore influences the results of the school. Sums of £10k p.a. were average for fund raising

Do it. Why should any school be allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religion anyway? About time this practice was outlawed if you ask me. School is for education, not indoctrination. I have no problem with anyone who chooses to follow a path that feel happy with, but if you want to bring your child up a Christian, Muslim, Jew or Zoroastian, then do it at home. Children should be educated in schools to have an open mind, and be able to make their own choices when they are ready to themselves, not have ideology thrust upon them.

as a parent if you object to a religious connection a school has you can chose a community one.

Try living rurally. You don't get a choice, unless your choice is to drive 8 miles every morning and afternoon. A choice of sorts I suppose.

I haven't signed up for bothering though it was part of the local selection criteria as a) I live about 500 yards from the school, and suspect I would have a pretty strong case were there any issues and b) not being a hypocrite is part of my personal creed.

Bear in mind once your first is in, most selection criteria give weight to additional siblings too, despite the odd horror story you hear.

I attended a faith school (many years ago).
My eldest now attends the same school. The rules have tightened up a lot since my time there.

It is based on (ascending importance of selection criteria)
- at least one parent being an active church member.
Regular church attendance required. Church attendance inevitably goes up around Jan/Feb. A minimum of two-years attendance.
- sibling already in attendance at the school
- distance

We have two schools available. One faith, the other comprehensive. Both have good Ofsted reports and very good results. The faith school has better facilities but requires a bus journey. The comprehensive is walking distance.

We applied for the faith school. I admit it's been a bit of a game. Probably played better by middle-class.
We played it. We lost and were offered our second choice.
We immediately put our eldest onto the school waiting list. We were offered a place a couple of weeks later.
We were happy.

When considering the faith school - if you're prepared to "play the game" - I don't see it being *religious discrimination*. Which many have been saying - afterall, anybody who wants to better their application chances is free to do it within the guidelines given.

We did consider baptizing our daughter and my wife becoming a full member of the church. But iirc this has no bearing on the process of determining active attendance.

I wouldn't berate any parent(s) for wanting the best for their children. It's life.

I agree with charliemungus' and what he has written.

Hi Marcus - which schools in our area will only accept christened children? I thought most within easy reach of us were standard local authority controlled schools?

(assuming you're not a different Marcus from the one I know!!)

Dawkins did an excellent documentary on this which shows how damaging faith schools can be:

[url= http://www.channel4.com/programmes/faith-school-menace/4od ]Faith School Menace?[/url]

The sections where he interviews science teachers in a Catholic school and science pupils in a Muslim school are quite scary.

Not nearly as scary as [url= http://www.ministryoftruth.me.uk/2009/07/10/fairies-at-the-bottom-of-the-schoolyard/ ]Steiner Schools[/url] though.

But if schools follow Steiner’s views on science, education will suffer. Steiner believed that materialism was insufficient for the understanding of nature. He believed that science needs to “go beyond” the empirical and consider vitalistic, unobservable forces, a perspective also common in 20th century New Age healing approaches. Anthroposophical medicine, similar to homeopathy but even less scientific, claims that disease is caused only secondarily by malfunctions of chemistry and biology, and primarily by a disturbance of the “vital essence.” Anatomy and physiology a la Steiner are unrecognizable by modern scientists: the heart does not pump blood; there are 12 senses (“touch, life, movement, equilibrium, warmth, smell,” etc.) corresponding to signs of the zodiac; there is a “rhythmic” system that mediates between the “nerve-sense” and “metabolic-muscular” systems. Physics and chemistry are just as bad: the “elements” are earth, air, fire, and water. The four “kingdoms of nature” are mineral, plant, animal and man. Color is said to be the result of the conflict of light and darkness. Typical geological stages are Post-Atlantis, Atlantis, Mid-Lemuria, and Lemuria.

Hi Tim,

Hope you are well. We're in Belper now.

Choice is St Elizabeths or Long Row. Looking at St ELizabeths policy there does appear to be an admissions 'pecking order' From memory:

Roman Catholic with sibling
Roman Catholic
Other denomination with sibling
other demonination
Others

My wife's catholic and I'm a heathen...she would want any kids to go to the same catholic school she went to but I doubt they would let them in because of me.

Apparently I'll need to start going to church on a regular basis and pretend to be a catholic.

What makes it worse is I haven't been christened or baptised so i'm not even a Christian, I'll have to go through all that nonsense.

If you ask me faith schools should be welcoming non-christians and people from other faiths...or do they have enough believers and the churches are already full? Seems moronic if you ask me - [i]"you can't come to our school unless you believe in god already...and when you get here we'll teach you why you should believe in god, oh wait a minute..."[/i].

I would have thought their response should be [i]"I know you aren't a Christian, but come to our school anyway...we'll teach your son/daughter all about god and why they should be catholic/christian/muslim".[/i]

The other interesting thing is that once you take into account the relative affluence and social standing of their intake, religious state schools don't actually get better results than non-religious ones, it is just that they exclude poor people who are less likely to get better results.

This seems contrary to most of the evidence I have seen. I am interested, can you point at some evidence? I'd also like to know why exclusion on religious would result in indirect exclusion by class. The implication is that poor people are generally less religious, or maybe less concerned about the nature of their children's education.

CharlieMungus - Member

"The other interesting thing is that once you take into account the relative affluence and social standing of their intake, religious state schools don't actually get better results than non-religious ones, it is just that they exclude poor people who are less likely to get better results."

This seems contrary to most of the evidence I have seen. I am interested, can you point at some evidence? I'd also like to know why exclusion on religious would result in indirect exclusion by class. The implication is that poor people are generally less religious, or maybe less concerned about the nature of their children's education.

[url= http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/13781 ]Faith schools - selection by the back door[/url]

The chair of the Accord Coalition for inclusive schooling, Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, commented: "The strong performance from faith schools is entirely predictable given that all recent research - including the government's own findings - show that religious entry requirements lead to covert social selection."

"This is done either deliberately, for example by getting prospective pupils to write statements about their religious beliefs and therefore gaining insights as to their levels of articulation, spelling, punctuation and sentence structure; or indirectly, because insisting on regular church attendance means automatically privileging higher socio-economic groups, as families from those groups are more likely to regularly attend church," said Dr Romain. "Thatin turn skews faith schools' social and ability profile and boosts their results."

He added: "This is why the former Department of Children, Schools and Families 2008 report on the effectiveness of the School Admissions Code found that faith schools were the schools most likely not to comply with the schools admissions code by engaging in practices that were favourable to those with greater social capital and higher socio-economic status."

talspark - Member
i would not let my daughter get within a hundred yards of a priest.
have you been to the [b]scotland[/b] recently and seen what religios segregation/bigitory is doing here ......its totally f.....d up

McHamish - Member
My wife's catholic and I'm a heathen...she would want any kids to go to the same catholic school she went to but I doubt they would let them in because of me.

Apparently I'll need to start going to church on a regular basis and pretend to be a catholic.

Ta,

Will read

McHamish; they will let them in [b]because[/b] of you 😀

You honestly think a Catholic School teaches religion exactly the same as a non denomination/religious School? or a teacher with firm religious beliefs the same as an athiest/agnostic Teacher?

MFL Jr attends a RC primary, we don't attend church though. He know more about faiths such as Islam & Hinduism than I did at his age. One faith they don't seem to have covered in detail is Judaism. They usually celebrate the main festivals for these faiths for some reason (ethnicity probably 99% white in the school).

I'd guess that his school has probably over provided information regarding other faiths to avoid the misconception that the kids get indoctrinated

Just read the local league tables for secondary schools, top two school are none demoninational, then two of the RC schools. The situation in the primary schools is different though, with the faith schools topping the tables. Wouldn't say the local area can select according to socio-economics, nearly everywhere is a shithole locally.

When are you supposed to Christen them BTW?

We know / have met loads of kids / parents at Long Row (we live on Long Row) and everyone I've met seems to really like it. The kids always seem happy when they go past also. We're going to send our kid there I reckon.

The uniform at the catholic school is the worst kind of faux private school uniform, always seems pretty stupid on the tiny kids. You also see far fewer of them walking home from school, it's more of the kind of place parents drop kids off at, personally I'd prefer my kids to go somewhere that walking to school is normal, and that is more of a local school, part of the local community.

To be honest, if you're the sort of person that thinks this much about your kids education, as long as you don't send them to a drug filled hell hole type of school, they'll probably get on fine.

Hi Joe, Thanks for the response - It is encouraging to hear that parents you have spoken to like Long Row. - We are new to Belper and as yet I havent had the chance to speak to anyone who sends their children to either school. Indeed, we are only starting to think about schooling and I dont know much about either school.

I would certainly be wanting our children to walk to which ever school they attended. - On that note, do you know if there is a back way into St Elizabeths avoiding the A6 ?

Try living rurally. You don't get a choice

You could move? Depends how important your kids' education is to you I suppose. Anyway.

I've not commented here yet, but as a childless atheist I've been reading this thread with interest. I particularly liked McHamish's observation, that if you're a nonbeliever then you're exactly the sort of person that needs their education. Surely that's the raison d'etre of a school?

The only thing I can think is that they'd rather use it as leverage to get the parents into church, so that when the kid comes home from school the religiousness is more likely to stick than if the parents are undoing all their "good" work. Plus, why have one new believer when you can have three?

MFL, My corridor shares in the Religious and Moral Education dept cover ALL religions equally. That is council policy,indeed probably nationwide in Scotland.I know for a fact it is the same in the Catholic secondary that I did my probation,which was rather a suprise.

I agree with Fred. I wonder though what would happen if legislation was passed that banned the education of religion at schools, but allowed groups such as churches to assist in secular education if they wished. Would the effort currently invested by faith groups in education dry up or would they continue to invest time and effort in education?

In the current system could the Humanist Society fund a school and insist on evidence of atheist attitudes before letting children in?

In the current system could the Humanist Society fund a school and insist on evidence of atheist attitudes before letting children in?

they could use it as a method of selection, they would however have to accept children with a faith and also have to teach the national ciriculum which includes religions

I imagine however all the Humanist parents are too busy faking baptisms and church attendance to get into the local primary of choice rather than put the work in to get their "non" faith school. 😉

Chrisl,no they wouldn't and why should they? But I think the schools would still exist,just your council tax would go up as the local authority bought out the buildings and land from them.Not much of a cost up here,but down in the home counties? dear oh dear!

Do it. Why should any school be allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religion anyway? About time this practice was outlawed if you ask me. School is for education, not indoctrination. I have no problem with anyone who chooses to follow a path that feel happy with, but if you want to bring your child up a Christian, Muslim, Jew or Zoroastian, then do it at home. Children should be educated in schools to have an open mind, and be able to make their own choices when they are ready to themselves, not have ideology thrust upon them.

Bang. Go.

Whilst it may not be hard science I think it was Freakonomics which clearly showed that the factors most strongly affecting child performance were not the choice of school but parental background. Of course aspirational parents will all try to put their children into the "best" school, whilst those with lower expectations or who would find transport a problem will base their decisions on geography or other factors - but all this does is skew the stats.

Its discussions like this that make me very happy to live in Scotland where the default position is children attend their local school; I do see a worrying trend however with increasing numbers of people put "placing requests" in to attend schools further away. This is to such an extent locally that there is a "perceived" problem with local children getting places etc at some schools - although in actual fact it is extremely rare for a "catchment area pupil" to not be accepted at the local school. IMHO, this you go to the local school approach avoids the "elitism" that we see in the English schools system and is actually a good "leveller". However it can in some very localised areas result in some degree of house price distortion which further propagates the "successful parents breed successful children" issue. Its clear that the system south of the border doesn't fix that issue either though.

Someone suggested that sectarianism was an issue up here, and it can be in some areas (the exception to the everyone goes to the local school rule, are that Roman Catholics* can elect to attend a RC school instead [which I believe is entirely state funded but still had active involvement in RC instruction]). I believe this you are either "normal" or "catholic" split is very unhealthy and is part of the seeds of sectarianism.

* technically anyone can apply, and although religious background is a factor in pupil placing at RC schools, many would be under-subscribed and would accept pupils from any background. However it would be unusual for any non RC background pupil to attend a RC school in Scotland.

hora - Member
When are you supposed to Christen them BTW?

you're not! Do pay attention at the back! 🙄

"GW - Member
nah, but my 4yr old has"

Could your 4 year old also teach you to use punctuation?

Your brilliant education obviously worked wonders.

thought it was a pretty ****ing good effort for 2am and fairly wasted TBH!
I don't actually have a 4yr old BTW

The nearest High School for my daughter is a Catholic school, it's only 2 miles away and she is well inside the catchment area, so it should be a no-brainer.

However, we live in Scotland and Catholic schools up here are allowed to openly admit in their admissions policy that they discriminate on religious grounds.

In this day and age of anti-discriminatory regulation it makes me laugh how they can get away with it!

My wife spoke to the chap who is in charge of pupil placement in West Lothian and he said that Catholic schools up in Scotland can choose who they want to attend because they are funded out of Catholic monies.

What a load of bull's muck.

As well as being discriminatory it is being sectarian and this is something that the SNP and the second party up here, Labour, don't like.

Let's see what happens when the application process runs its course and they say where my daughter is to go to school.

Just read the local league tables for secondary schools, top two school are none demoninational, then two of the RC schools.

league tables based on 5 A-c's or the new EB no doubt, not the CVA which makes more sense.

I can't understand what the fuss is all about? Given how passionately anti religion so many of you are why would you even consider sending your kids to a faith school? Who cares what the entry criteria are? If you really are so convinced by your atheistic standpoint I would expect you to be taking your kids somewhere else or is it all a bit of a keyboard warrior posing? And if it's the local school then, as was mentioned earlier, perhaps you should move to a place closer to a school more in tune with your philosophical views or be prepared to transport your kids.

It's also fair to say that not all schools that appear to have a link to a particular religious movement / body are the same and are also not necessarily faith schools.

The point, for those too dim to appreciate it is that state funded schooling shouldnt have religious aspects to it

^^
why not?

Because the point of a school is to learn facts, rather than fairy stories?

There's an argument that religious education is valid for the same reason history is valid; that it's useful to know about the world around us and what got us there. I have no real issue with this (apart from anything else, an informed choice is only possible if you're informed). This sort of RE, however, is wholly different from teaching a given religion as the one truth (or indeed, truth).

Because the point of a school is to learn facts

Seriously? You think school should be about learning facts?

Even then, the faith aspect is pretty much that, faith. It's not taught in the same way as the curriculum subjects. It is contextualised as part of the belief system. And if lots of the folks (tax payers) believe in it and want it as an option in their education system,then why shouldn't it be provided?

Incidentally,

Is there a central record of christenings, confirmations et al? Is there anything to stop you going "ah yes, little Hermione was christened ages ago"? Is there any means of finding out whether, say, I was christened (short of asking my mum)?

^^

Look on your scalp, just near your crown, there should be a number there which refers you to the church where you were baptised

http://rcdhn.org.uk/churches07/churchcontact.php?chid=xxx

replace xxx by the number on your head

good point compound the lie about your religious beleief with a lie about actually being one after all iirc two wrongs do may a right
Dr M - The thing about education is that you should not teach an opinion as factual. There is no "proof" of God. Can I have a vegan school with no meat and we can say how everyone else is wrong to eat meat etc or should I just accpet that that is one opinion amongst many?
religious secondary schools do not teach sex education the same as non faith schools or contraception and "ban" organisations in the school from saying anything other than abstain. Certain Islamic schools [often gender segregated] do not teach art or music as it runs counter to their beleiefs etc.
I do object to funding these via taxation - indocrination of your children about your beleifs is really the job of the parent not the state - see vegan point above and my kids not eating meat- but any religious person can be sent at state expense to the nearest religious school whatever the cost. Sadly non beleivers have no right to go to an non faith school and just get the nearest school.
This ignores the fact thjey are wrong on their beleif an dthat education ais about learning as well what next David icke schools for the gullible?

Seriously? You think school should be about learning facts?

I'm struggling to see where you're going with this.

Engaging my pedantry filter, you could say that it's really about learning believed / perceived 'facts', theories I suppose. It's about learning about the world around us and how to live in it, teaching life skills and such. Arguably also, many high school "facts" are simplified 'lies to children' in order to teach basics and pique interest.

Putting on my cynical hat, you could talk about how the curriculum could be improved, that they'd be better off learning how to cook and such rather than learning about the intricacies of China's tea export trade in the 1950's.

Thinking extra-curricularly, school is about learning social skills, about trying not to get the crap beaten out of you, and integrating with "society" and fitting in.

Thinking about STW, you could be trolling and talking horsesh!t.

Have I missed anything?

Look on your scalp, just near your crown, there should be a number there which refers you to the church where you were baptised

I have a Harry Potter scar(*), does that make me the son of the devil?

(* - no, really)

My wife spoke to the chap who is in charge of pupil placement in West Lothian and he said that Catholic schools up in Scotland can choose who they want to attend because they are funded out of Catholic monies.

As well as being discriminatory it is being sectarian and this is something that the SNP and the second party up here, Labour, don't like.

Let's see what happens when the application process runs its course and they say where my daughter is to go to school.

I have no problem with religion being taught about but I think the state shouldnt be involved in peoples faith.
I would object if faith was involved in my medical care too or policing etc

Seriously? You think school should be about learning facts?

I'm struggling to see where you're going with this.

I'm not going anywhere, it was a straight question. School is currently much more than learning facts. School is about teaching for understanding, reasoning, evaluation, synthesis, discrimination etc. Facts are becoming worth less as google takes over.

I'm not being cynical or pedantic or extra-curricular,just practical. I'm not trolling, I really don't think heavy emphasis on facts, is useful.

In church schools the particualr religion is not taught as fact, it is taught as faith and it is,in most cases, not integrated with the curricular education. Evolution is taught in biology in religious schools.

I really don't think heavy emphasis on facts, is useful.

you are certainly not our current education secretary thats for sure

Can I have a vegan school with no meat and we can say how everyone else is wrong to eat meat etc or should I just accpet that that is one opinion amongst many?

These schools do not say everyone else is wrong, they say other people believe something else. I imagine if there was a strong popular movement, then you probably could have vegan schools.

religious secondary schools do not teach sex education the same as non faith schools or contraception

they do if it is curricular subject.

you are certainly not our current education secretary thats for sure

this is true, i know a little about education.

And not all faith schools are state funded. Some rather sweeping generalisations going on that are not helpful but then again I suppose that is the STW way - why bother with facts if they get in the way of your argument. Keeps it amusing and entertaining and we all keep coming back. 🙂

The better schools also address societal things such as attitudes and character, integrating with others, seeing the wider social picture. Not sure that they qualify as "facts" but are an important aspect of education. And these can be taught equally well in faith and non faith schools as well as being taught horrifically badly in both.

not all faith schools are state funded

and they can do what they damn well like I dont care.

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8415678.stm ]Faith school judged to be guilty of racial discrimination.[/url]

A Jewish friend of mine went to this school. She is totally opposed to such faith schools which were allowed to discriminate.

Those of you what know me on here, know that I will defend the right of individuals to practice whatever faith they should so choose, and enjoy the freedom from hate, prejudice and discrimination to do so. But I also believe in equality of education for all, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation or wealth. Let's have a totally level playing field. Anything else simply serves to divide society.

I would object if faith was involved in my medical care too or policing etc

Don't Babylonians have to swear some sort of oath of allegiance to her Maj the Queen? The head of the Church of England?

Keep the State Secular. Religion has it's place, just not in the organisation of a multi-racial/cultural/philosophical society.

Bikingcatastrophe - Member
And not all faith schools are state funded.

They are in my town and I struggle to understand how they can write down in their (and the country's admission policy) about how they will discriminate on religious grounds about who they will or will not admit.

How far do you think any company up in Scotland would go if they openly said they would only employ Protestants?

It beggars belief, but I am wise enough to understand why it happens 🙁

Sorry, double post.

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lords_Spiritual ]Lords Spiritual.[/url]

Religion has it's place, just not in the organisation of a multi-racial/cultural/philosophical society.

but religion is part of what makes ita multi- cultural/philosophical society

but religion is part of what makes ita multi- cultural/philosophical society

true but that makes no difference to what he said.

overall,whilst it is discriminatory, it isn't elitist.
There is nothing wrong with being discriminatory, that's part of meeting individual needs.

These schools do not say everyone else is wrong

You shall have no other gods before me.

School is currently much more than learning facts. School is about teaching for understanding, reasoning, evaluation, synthesis, discrimination etc. Facts are becoming worth less as google takes over.

Double post

Treble post

There is nothing wrong with being discriminatory, that's part of meeting individual needs.

maybe so, I dont agree but never mind. The point is though that the state shouldnt sponsor it.

School is currently much more than learning facts. School is about teaching for understanding, reasoning, evaluation, synthesis, discrimination etc. Facts are becoming worth less as google takes over.

Ye sthat is what league tables and results are all about

the exams and qualifications are increasingly less based on facts, and if you look at CVA scores rather than exam results you get a better idea of how good a school is..

Mr Gove doesnt agree with this so it will no doubt change back again

In church schools the particualr religion is not taught as fact, it is taught as faith and it is,in most cases, not integrated with the curricular education. Evolution is taught in biology in religious schools.

You need to watch the Dawkins documentary I linked to earlier:

[url= http://www.channel4.com/programmes/faith-school-menace/4od ]Faith School Menance?[/url]

So they say there's is the only one true god but the others are not wrong or they do it so well they break the first commandment

You shall have no other gods before me.

you might be surprised how rarely that comes up. They also don't teach that commandment as fact,but as faith.

Ye sthat is what league tables and results are all about 🙄

C'mon Junkyard, this is beneath you.

Either you know what league tables are based on and this statement is meaningless or you don't know what they are based on and you shouldn't be posting it.

No, i really don't need to watch / read Dawkins any more. He spectacularly misses the point by targeting polarities rather than the everyday beliefs.

. The point is though that the state shouldnt sponsor it.

I don't see why not, lots of taxpayers want it and other alternatives are available.

A_A that is just another league tabled based on exam passes related to intake "grade" or expectations or factors beyond the schools control. yesiot is better but it is still a league table. when did Maths and science get less fact based? Is there no correct answer in education anymore?
ofsted guidance BTW I accept the ability to think , reason ,articulate is also a neccessary skill etc

"No meaning can be attached to an absolute CVA value, and any ranking of schools by their CVA values is meaningless."

Charlie yes religous people are known the world over for not taking the word of God as a fact and not really acting on it iirc it is what defines them as religous people - And you want to mock me [ you have a point re tables to be fair]

other alternatives are available

IIRC someone took a court case re this might have gone to Europe as well or be in the process

no you can only select to go to a faith school you cannot select to go to a non faith school you just get your nearest school they get the choice not us.

not sure what you mean here, you can usually chose to go to a few non-faith schools locally, and you can usually only get to your nearest faith school, if you want a faith school. Does that contradict your point?

CharlieMungus - Member

. The point is though that the state shouldnt sponsor it.

I don't see why not, [b]lots of taxpayers want it[/b] and other alternatives are available.

Lots eh? In that case...

Source?

Lots eh? In that case...

Source?

ermm... all the ones in all the faith schools in the UK?

Empirical evidence

science get less fact based

science is not based on facts its based on theories

charlie imagine you live in an area and there are only two schools locally both are religous ones. You can choose the faith school that matches yours. Imagine neither does then you can go to the nearest faith school that matches yours and have the transport paid by LEA. If you are a non believer you cannot go to the nearest non faith school and have your transport fees paid - you will get one of the faith schools. Only religous faith [ not absence] qualifies.
I am tired , hard week did I word it badly before?

Local authorities (LAs) must provide free home to school transport for children if they are between 5 and 16 years old and are attending their nearest suitable school. This is provided that the school is further away than the statutory walking distances, which are:

•2 miles for pupils aged under 8

•3 miles for those aged 8 and over
Examples of a suitable school are:

•a faith school if you have expressed a preference for a school based on your religion or belief
•a special school if your child has special educational needs (SEN)

Someone challenged this as a non beleiver and lost but I cannot recall any details
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Schoolslearninganddevelopment/SchoolLife/DG_10013990

the cost in Lancashire is £4 million, 400 k in Bristol etc

science is not based on facts its based on theories

No it isn't. It's based on evidence.

when did Maths and science get less fact based

knowing lots of maths facts and science facts. Would not make you good at science or a good scientist / mathematician. Knowing what to do with those facts and when are much more important.

Charlie yes religius people are known the world over for not taking the word of God as a fact and not really acting on it iirc it is what defines them as religious people

but that's the point, the 'really religious' are the ones who make the news. The great 'mass' of the 'quite religious' and 'traditionally religious' manage to be dualistic with life and religion.

And no, I'm not trying to mock you. I am genuinely sorry if that's how it came across.

science is not based on facts its based on theories

No it isn't. It's based on evidence.

String theory?

Mathematics?

Astrophysics?

The great 'mass' of the 'quite religious' and 'traditionally religious' manage to be dualistic with life and religion.

Re knowledge of course applying facts is just as important as knowing them but great thinkling, a keen mind and limited facts wont help that much see the great Greek philosphers/thinkers views on medicine - people need both facts/knowledge and thinking. Re fact good point re use of word but maths may be a better example honestly 1 + 1 = 2 Russell and Whitehead proved it
EDIT;Charlie we may be in danger here of confusing lack of certainty/clarity with fact. String theory may be disproved/proved by evidence , experiment greater knowledge but creationism cannot becuase it is the word of god

Couldn't be arsed to read much of this thread, but my take on this:

As someone who grew up going to church (C of E), went to a church school (C of E), has been around churchy people most of my life, but has never had any kind of faith / belief, and has relatives (by marriage) who are Catholics....

C of E = Really fairly harmless, well meaning, wooly, nothing too much to be scared of, won't employ mind-bending tactics to ensnare your children.

Roman Catholics = properly ****ed up, attracts really quite odd / unhinged people, wouldn't trust my kids anywhere near them.

FWIW I am playing the system to get my kids into a local, very good C of E funded school. (Hence church attendance forms part, a big part, of the selection criteria)

* No offence intended to any Catholics on here, I know there are a few who have faced totally unwarranted abuse in the past.

What they beleive and dont believe at the same time? They follow and they dont?

Actually, yes.

1 + 1 = 2

not with raindrops it doesn't. Maths is just a model which can be applied in a wide range of situations

Roman Catholics = properly ****ed up, attracts really quite odd / unhinged people, wouldn't trust my kids anywhere near them.

you really have no idea what you are talking about, you realise this sounds like 'Christians who are like me are fine, but those other ones...Dangerous!!'

science is not based on facts its based on theories
No it isn't. It's based on evidence.

String theory?

Mathematics?

Astrophysics?

String theory is a hypothesis - it cannot be a theory without the ability to be falsified. Like religion in some ways. (Edit: someone made it up as an idea. That doesn't make it science. If you think so then I have a thesis about flying aardvarks to discuss. The ones I just made up.)
Mathematics: some say it is, some say it isn't but just a servant of science, e.g. [url= http://andrewlias.blogspot.com/2004/08/is-mathematics-science.html ]link[/url].
Astrophysics - of course it is. Without the evidence of planetary bodies being there and moving as they do with the properties they exhibit (e.g. 'evidence') then it wouldn't exist.

you really have no idea what you are talking about, you realise this sounds like 'Christians who are like me are fine, but those other ones...Dangerous!!'

Au contraire, as I have already stated I have almost a lifetime's experience of the church, albeit C of E. Hence I know exactly what I am talking about.

My views on the RC church are based on very little personal experience, hence I am happy to be contradicted by any practising Catholics, or anyone with far more knowledge of the Catholic church than me.

CharlieMungus, perhaps you'd care to reveal the experience that has led to your views on the church - maybe then I'll treat your views / utterings with respect.

Mathematics: some say it is, some say it isn't but just a servant of science,

ok, but what do [i]you[/i] think?

Evidence of phenomena which might be explained by the existence is not the same as evidence of the body.

What do I think? Fair enough.

I think that mathematics is a pure abstract that is not a science but is a tool to describe interrelationships within theories of physical phenomena. It is the only tool that can ever prove anything as it is abstract. You cannot prove any science as it is based upon theories used to match evidence of phenomena. I am trained as a scientist but mathematics is not my branch so my foundations are not certain (but this *is* STW!).

Evidence of phenomena .. statement, while fairly opaque etc. still does not matter. The important part is 'Evidence of....' That's where science starts and the theories are then rolled in for fun.

Roman Catholics = properly ****ed up, attracts really quite odd / unhinged people, wouldn't trust my kids anywhere near them.

My views on the RC church are based on very little personal experience,

is why i said

you really have no idea what you are talking about,

CharlieMungus, perhaps you'd care to reveal the experience that has led to your views on the church - maybe then I'll treat your views / utterings with respect.

Perhaps??? Oooh the suspense, i try to prove my credentials to you then wait in eager anticipation to see if you will treat my views with respect. Oh my oh my. Oooh the tension. Will I make it?? No, I can't do it! The tension is too much. Sorry, I'm not very good under pressure.

'Evidence of....' That's where science starts and the theories are then rolled in for fun.

hmmm, don't you need a theory before you can say what it is evidence of?

I can see the two are closely related, but if I see power spikes as evidence of ghosts, it's not yet science is it?