[Closed] Church schools and discrimination

the majority of places will go to children who can show regular church attendance

Good luck with that, unless they only have five places. They'll end up with a small number of practicing Christians and a sackload of pretend ones.

And yes, they are allowed to discriminate in this way. Publically funded religion for the kidz.

Not so much between the children of roadies vs mountain bikers, although obviously slimmer, better turned out children will have an advantage.

Essentially it's discrimination but tolerated.

Some friends of ours actually challenged this a couple of years ago at my son's school - they objected to the requirement to regular worship* and made noises that it was religious discrimination and the school very quickly changed its admissions policy.

I suspect if there was ever an actual proper organised legal challenge to it it would all come crashing down...

*edit - as opposed to my wife who went to church for the six months beforehand in a wholly hypocritical attempt to get into the school.... 😉

From what I remember, there's an admissions cap of 50% on faith schools. 50% must be admitted with no reference to their faith.

There are also other rules such as an undersubscribed school accepting anyone regardless of faith.

As an educator, the only thing I'm sure about is the further I can keep my children from religion, the better. Faith schools are simply pervasive division in our society. I think the Catholic Church took umbrage with the Tory introduced caps on admissions policies and refused to fund schools until it was removed. I'm yet to meet someone who attended a Catholic school who thinks they were pleasant places to be. Failure to meet a pretty basic bar.

I agree with the basic premise of your questioning. Unfortunately, religion still holds a slightly revered place in our society. An all roadie / heterosexual / single-race school would rightly not be allowed.

Just wondering out loud to  myself - if you don't qualify for a faith school why would you want to use it?

Just wondering out loud to  myself – if you don’t qualify for a faith school why would you want to use it?

Because they're better funded.

*edit* and the intake demographic tends to be self-selecting and therefore better behaved and with fewer 'problem' pupils.

Our closest school is a Catholic one but there's no way I was going to spend years wasting my Sundays so the kids could get in there. It's a good school, but there's a lot of religion taught there which doesn't float my boat as a filthy heathen.

In the end, my eldest wasn't interested anyway and also spurned the other local comprehensive in favour of a bus ride to a school in the next town. She is loving her first term there, so things worked out well in the end.

Not so much between the children of roadies vs mountain bikers, although obviously slimmer, better turned out children will have an advantage.

It's OK, the CX kids will roll up and kick all of their asses anyway 😉

Good luck with that, unless they only have five places. They’ll end up with a small number of practicing Christians and a sackload of pretend ones.

Depends entirely where you live. Large scale immigration has swelled catholic church and therefore school attendances hugely. Just because the Church of England* is dying on its arse, don't assume the rest of them are

* which isn't a proper religion anyway, more a default 'none of the above' box to tick

Proximity and results but as I said, not our cup of tea and I was just wondering how this is still allowed.

Somewhere, Walter is looking up from his briefings and wondering who to PM. 😀

Neither of my children where Christened. They are both at Uni after going through the usual:

Brownies/Cubs/Scouts and any other "established" related interests

Primary schools

Secondary and Grammar

Not once has the fact they have not been subjected to some fairy tale mumbo jumbo as a child come up.

I'm a regular attender at Church but send my kids to  a non-denominational school.

Where do I apply for my rebate?

Not once has the fact they have not been subjected to some fairy tale mumbo jumbo as a child come up.

Sure, but I suspect that they didn't go to overtly religious schools. Sadly, for a lot of people, their local school will have entry requirements based on religion and if you're not a regular churchgoer, you can forget any chance of your child going regardless of how close you live, or how bright they are. We were lucky to have good alternative options, but I know other families in other places that are not so fortunate.

@daern

No.

50% caps.

Pretty sure binners went to a catholic school. If that’s not going to put anybody off doing the same, I don’t know what would.

Which one (PM if you don't want to say) - I'm also in Surrey and went through this with my two.

We chose the local faith school because at the time it was the best option for our kids, in terms of size, proximity, results, focus on some extra-curricular stuff and so on. We didn't get in at first, had to go to appeal and the written appeal I submitted did query whether 'bearing false witness' was still one of the 10C's and where getting your local vicar to write a letter confirming your recent conversion to churchgoing stood in that regard. Fortunately we got in without going to a county council panel so I didn't have to read my appeal to the Headmaster, who at the time was a Canon of GF cathedral too, but we got on speaking terms soon after. They know, and they know that we know too.

It has been distinctly non-religious..... yes, it has a clearly religious name and a large cross in reception and acts of worship on a regular basis, and so on but plenty there from other faiths and no faith, and no-one seems to care if you cross your fingers and mumble rather than kneel and pray anyway. No ramming of anything anywhere, which is just as well because my eldest loves a good argument.

They do seem a slight oddity in our secular age, but in the end it's the strength of the education that is important, not the flavour of belief.

No.

50% caps.

Rumours around here are that this is not adhered to. I can't talk about other schools, but I've not heard of anyone getting into this particular school who isn't a regular churchgoer. And, let's be honest, it's pretty easy to be selective about the other 50%...

Of course the 50% cap is not adhered to  to do so would blow the ethos and only religious organisations are allowed to =discriminate in this way.  they also can discriminate in employment. We have a local care home that is "christian" based and they are legally allowed to discriminate in employment so as only to employ "christians"

IME it's not an issue. Many of the staff will feel the same as you, unless it's a convent school

The school will have places that it wants to fill, and the religious ethos can be positive for standards of behaviour, etc

My girls are year 5 and many of the parents of other kids in their year have suddenly found god just to get into the (marginally) better performing faith school. Personally I would feel embarrassed and a fraud for doing such a thing even though I do very occasionally go to church (as although I choose not to believe, I want my girls to at least see it for themselves and make their own choices). Saying that, just last week one of them said 'no-one has ever seen god so how can he possibly be real'.

Just wondering out loud to  myself – if you don’t qualify for a faith school why would you want to use it?

Depending where you live, particularly for primary, unless you can throw the kid on a bus or be happy driving them miles every day then you dont really have a choice.

For secondary its a nice format of covert selection. By restricting to those who are churchgoers you are selecting a few properly religious people and then a bunch of parents willing to sacrifice their Sundays to get the kids in.

Many of the staff will feel the same as you, unless it’s a convent schoo

From speaking to staff at one of the private schools nearby, unless you are of a particular religious persuasion you ain't going to progress very far. Of course, nothing overt is ever said, but if you know, YOU KNOW - you know?

I used to work in a CE school 😉

Isn't it to do with funding?

If the Church is paying then they can appy whatever entry qualifications they like, if it is local authority then it goes on geography?

My brother and sister in law are pretend Catholics in order to get their spawn into the local primary school. Imagine my delight when the Catholic High that it feeds into got a rubbish offsted, with special mention for bullying and being opressive! I guess they'll now have to pretend not to be Catholics to get them into the LA run school.

Essentially it’s discrimination but tolerated.

<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">...</span>

<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">I suspect if there was ever an actual proper organised legal challenge to it it would all come crashing down…</span>

No its not just tolerated, the law actively encourages it!    

I believe it all stems back to (1) the churches were the first to set up schools (before the state) and when the state took over running them there was an agreement that their religious character would be retained; (2) the political parties are scared of organised religion* and so none are brave enough to upset the apple cart; (3) so many people attended such schools, "and it never did them any harm", that they will happily maintain the charade, especially if their little one is getting into a better school as a result.

*and so they should be - political parties would love that much indoctrinated belief, unquestioning following, and loyalty not to mention their balance sheets!

the parents of other kids in their year have suddenly found god just to get into the (marginally) better performing faith school. Personally I would feel embarrassed and a fraud for doing such a thing

One lesson I never want to hand to my kids is that being a hypocrite or a liar is a good thing. People who attend church just to get their kids in to a school or visit a church for a month of Sunday’s just to get married there are bloody weird in my opinion.

It just seems like a pretty shitty and shallow thing to do. It’s in the same league as those who pretend to pray or sing at funerals, weddings or christenings. If you’re not a believer stop acting like a ****

It definitely breaks rule number one in my eyes. Don’t be a dick

This is not a public school therefore how are they allowed to discriminate?

Because faith schools have an exemption under the equality act. They also get the vast majority of their funding from the state. In my view, if parents wish to send their children to openly discriminatory schools, they should pay for it themselves.

The sooner religious schools are forced to be secular or risk having all their state funding revoked the better (or as a minimum have an open admissions policy  and restriction on the amount of time spent on religious activities).  Education not indoctrination. And whilst we're at it, remove the remaining bishops from the House of Lords too.

Never gonna happen though (especially with a Vicar's daughter as PM)

I'm just glad I could afford to move from where I lived previously, otherwise I'd have had to pretend to be religious to get my kids into the only decent local school. Yep, that's hypocritical - but like many parents I think it would be worth the tedious waste of time.

The way I see it, if they're allowed to lie to your kids you can tell them whatever you like. Just ask them to believe you've been at church.

One lesson I never want to hand to my kids is that being a hypocrite or a liar is a good thing. People who attend church just to get their kids in to a school or visit a church for a month of Sunday’s just to get married there are bloody weird in my opinion.

It just seems like a pretty shitty and shallow thing to do. It’s in the same league as those who pretend to pray or sing at funerals, weddings or christenings. If you’re not a believer<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">S Stopacting like a ****</span>

It definitely breaks rule number one in my eyes. Don’t be a dick

I agree on the wedding part - it's 1 hour in one day and doesn't really matter in the long run. But what's more damaging to your kids - sending them to a poor performing comprehensive or spending a few days going to church so they can have a better education and future by attending a high performing VA/VC school? Bcause that's the choice many parents have to make. It's a dog eat dog world out there. The real solution would be to make all schools equally as good and give children the best possible opportunities regardless of which school they attend. But unfortunately that's not the case. It's hypocritical but the ends justifies the means imho. I don't have to make that choice but I'd have no moral qualms whatsoever about doing it.

It just seems like a pretty shitty and shallow thing to do. It’s in the same league as those who pretend to pray or sing at funerals, weddings or christenings. If you’re not a believer stop acting like a ****

I don't believe in God but went to a carol concert once and joined in singing (I do like Christmas carols....).  🙊 I sometimes wonder how I sleep at night! 😁

I seriously worry about what must have happened in the religious schools that some of you guys have obviously experienced - my two came out of a CofE primary school with not a hint of belief in either of them, so much so that LittleMissMC elected to take on a Catholic secondary to see if they can do any better!

Surrey CC publish the figures for schools which illustrate how many kids were given a place under each criteria in the previous year.  With the last criteria generally being `anyone else - distance from school' you can work out if you have a chance of a place living a fair way from the school as the figures list the furthest distance from the school a child was offered a place.  Therefore OP, regardless as to what the admission criteria says, you can see how it actually works out in practice even if you are not religious and at the back of the queue.  Also some church schools have less strict religious criteria than others even between CofE. I think one of my locals schools was simply "do you attend the local church", followed by "do you live in the parish" and they were below other criteria.

I seriously worry about what must have happened in the religious schools that some of you guys have obviously experienced

My mother had no interest in organised religion until she tried to get a job at a CofE school, 20 years later she is cleaning the damm church and singing on Sundays. Cults should be banned!!!

I believe it all stems back to (1) the churches were the first to set up schools (before the state)

This seems to be a bit of a myth. Whilst the church (as well as the guilds and some early workers unions) did have some schools they were nowhere close to provided the universal education required.

Therefore the state had to step in when it was clear the industrial revolution need a basic skilled workforce. Took many years though since lots of special interest groups either didnt want the common man educated in case they realised they were being taken for a ride or wanted to be in charge of education despite not being bothered to do the funding bit.

The main churches fell into both categories to some degree. One of the compromises made was that instead of the state or local government simply using the cash they provided to set up schools various groups, especially religious, could apply for grants to run them instead.

So in reality a lot of the church schools were closer to the free schools/academies of today. Paid for by the state but the credit going to the managing body.

http://www.educationengland.org.uk/history/

 No ramming of anything anywhere,

Times have changed then. Luckily I wasn't a choir boy at my Catholic school

It just seems like a pretty shitty and shallow thing to do. It’s in the same league as those who pretend to pray or sing at funerals, weddings or christenings. If you’re not a believer stop acting like a ****

Agreed. I will bow my head out of respect for others but won’t pray or sing - instead I just think positive thoughts and hope for good things/support for those I am attending for. But I still stand by my opinion that I won’t force my lack of belief on my children - I want them to understand and decide for themselves what they wish to believe and follow.

The admissions policy states that the majority of places will go to children who can show regular church attendance and the rest of the places will go to children of other faiths who regularly worship.

Good selection criteria i reckon.

Keeps them all in one place.

👍

I don’t believe in God but went to a carol concert once and joined in singing (I do like Christmas carols….).  I sometimes wonder how I sleep at night!

I bet you sleep soundly you monster 😉

But unfortunately that’s not the case. It’s hypocritical but the ends justifies the means imho. I don’t have to make that choice but I’d have no moral qualms whatsoever about doing it.

If if I were unfortunate enough to have to make the choice I still would t do it. I would, however, kick up the mother of all shit storms, bombard social media and speak to the local press regarding discrimination. Teaching your kids about discrimination and the fact that it’s wrong no matter what guise it comes in aligns with my morals more than playing let’s ptetend for a few weeks to appease some arsehats.

then a bunch of parents willing to sacrifice their Sundays to get the kids in.

Alternatively, parents who will be willing to engage with the education process. (In my case up until the bitch in charge of my daughters sixth form refused compassionate leave of absence to allow her to recover her mental health. Christian my arse!).

Alternatively, parents who will be willing to engage with the education process.

Yup. In many ways its a test of parental engagement. If the parents are willing to give up their Sundays for a year or so before chances are they will be willing to get involved throughout the kids school life. Not a perfect test since aside from anything else you end up with some believers who would do the Sunday thing anyway but not a bad one.

Alternatively, parents who will be willing to engage with the education process.

Lie, deceive and pretend? Perfect example to be setting to their kids. It's con to boost recruitment by offering a reward at the end of it.

Quite simply organised religion has no place in education. If you want it for your kids then give up your Sundays for them to have the religious component.

Agreed. I will bow my head out of respect for others but won’t pray or sing – instead I just think positive thoughts and hope for good things/support for those I am attending for.

I've never met a sculpture student from St. Martin's college, but I still sing along to "Common People".

Lie, deceive and pretend? Perfect example to be setting to their kids.

I don't agree with it either, but I consider it to be a lesser crime than the state offering education on the basis of belief in sky fairies.

Quite simply organised religion has no place in education.

I agree but while they offered the better education in the area I did what it took to get my children the best education that I could afford at the time. Including multiple appeals to the LEA panel. I was also upfront with the children when later questioned as to why we did what we did.

Yup. In many ways its a test of parental engagement. If the parents are willing to give up their Sundays for a year or so before chances are they will be willing to get involved throughout the kids school life.

Perhaps, but that's not the reason for the admission criteria.

Presumably parents who showed equal levels of engagement by constructing a tissue of lies about their beliefs or complaining vociferously and repeatedly to the LEA would not gain the same level of credit.

It must be funny as a member of a congregation in one of these places to see the building get a lot emptier around the time that school places are confirmed each year.

Quite simply organised religion has no place in education. If you want it for your kids then give up your Sundays for them to have the religious component.

Ironic, considering where my monthly paycheque comes from, but I agree with this statement wholeheartedly.

Not sure about the 50% cap mentioned above.  My daughter goes to a Catholic school, in order to apply for admission you need a form signed by the local priest to say you were regular church goers.  The school is well over subscribed within the parish.  Preference is given to those with sibling currently at school followed by straight line distance you live from the school

I wonder what would happen with the reverse of this. A school that won’t take in children from religious families. I bet there would be an uproar. How many parents would fake being Agnostic or Aethiest just to get their kids in? You could have school staff hanging around churches, synagogues and mosques to spot them.

Quite simply organised religion has no place in education.

Did you know its a legal requirement for all pupils in UK state schools to have an act of worship everyday?

Did you know its a legal requirement for all pupils in UK state schools to have an act of worship everyday?

I did, and I think it's bizarre. In Canada, I grew up with 'Opening Exercises', which included the national anthem. No hand-over-hearth stuff. Just standing for a moment in respect.

While I agree with that idea, that should be the limit of what children experience beyond a good, strong curriculum.

No I didn't but I have just seen the guidance. Time which could be spent on many things beneficial and improving the moral character of pupils without any reference to any kind of religion.

Entirely happy that people study religion in the same way as history and geography but mass participation isn't something schools should be providing especially in a multicultural society. It's up there as one of the reasons people should be marking Athiest/Agnostic on census forms rather than C or E etc because it's a default.

Entirely happy that people study religion in the same way as history and geography

I don't even think this. I mean, a field trip to a church and/or mosque and/or synagogue and/or gurdwara if relevant to a specific geographical or historical question? Sure. Religion as a feature of peoples' cultures worldwide? Sure. Anything more should be left to the home, or voluntary study.

I completely agree with SR on this. I do think kids should visit different faith establishments at some point. If only to see what’s involved and in some cases for the architecture and art.

Sure. Religion as a feature of peoples’ cultures worldwide? Sure. Anything more should be left to the home, or voluntary study.

Given how dominant and misunderstood a lot of things are it's a relevant area of study, would help with the daily mail/alt right myths really. It's a topic worthy of study for all kids highlighting the good and the bad of these things

It’s a topic worthy of study for all kids highlighting the good and the bad of these things

It's just that religion is primarily about practice as opposed to lists of facts about.

So, for example, my first undergraduate degree was in history and religious studies. I primarily focused on monotheistic faiths. For all that I could talk intelligibly about the 5 pillars of Islam, and times of prayer, and the Q'uran, I never once in 3 years stepped into a mosque.

Since then, however, I have done a lot of work here in Cardiff with the Muslim Council of Wales, and have consequently spoken at, and spent a fair amount of time in, one of the local mosques. This has been eye-opening. There is a big difference in knowing a 'fact' about Islam, and getting to know Islam. Same with Christianity. Some on here joke about Easter as being some sort of springtime zombie festival, and no wonder. If Christianity is encountered solely as a religion that believes in someone coming back from the dead once, and celebrating that once a year, then it is bound to be cast the way it is. If, however, children visited a church and saw some sort of observable manifestation of what that belief means, then they can at least come away with a sense of the people involved and how their belief affects them.

So I would still say: either that, or leave it out entirely. But both yours and my suggestions have got to be better than the current forced nonsense kids are still subject to!

I did, and I think it’s bizarre

So do schools, never seen it done and I've worked in 4.

<p>Did you know its a legal requirement for all pupils in UK state schools to have an act of worship everyday?</p>

<p>Not in Scotland it isn't, 6 times a year up here and optional.</p><p> https://www.gov.scot/Publications/2005/03/20778/53820</p><p></p><p>You English have one weird school system. Mind you our West Coast shennanigans probably look odd from outside as well so I wont dwell too much on it.</p>

This whole issue baffles me.

If a school that was secular chose to refuse entry to an child based in their religious beliefs (of whatever faith) there would be hell to pay.

Agreed with other comments that if faith is used to select/reject children, then no state funding.  Some of our taxes go to funding education, and there's no option to choose where your money goes based on religious orientation.

Perhaps that could be a thing?  On your tax return you could choose to apportion your tax to certain areas:

Education, NHS, Defence, policing, local services, infrastructure, bailing out failing industries/lining pockets of the already rich and chums of the MP's.

<div>SaxonRider
<div>
<div>Subscriber</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>

Quite simply organised religion has no place in education. If you want it for your kids then give up your Sundays for them to have the religious component.

Ironic, considering where my monthly paycheque comes from, but I agree with this statement wholeheartedly.

</div>

Will you stop with this reasonableness and mucking up of stereotypes!  😉

I wonder how many people who say they wouldn't pretend to be religious in order to get their children into a particular (and presumably better, otherwise what's the point) school, happily told their children there was a Father Christmas or an Easter Bunny?

I wonder how many people who say they wouldn’t pretend to be religious in order to get their children into a particular (and presumably better, otherwise what’s the point) school, happily told their children there was a Father Christmas or an Easter Bunny?

Don't forget the tooth fairy. I'm such a monster.

Neither father crhristmas or the easterbunny are "christian" symbols

Fair point. To counter, we didn't tell them they <span style="text-decoration: underline;">didn't</span> exist either, just as we haven't told them that God doesn't exist. I can't prove it either way and I'm happy for them to make up their minds.

While I do have a problem with there being church funded schools with specific selection criteria and people lying to meet those criteria, I think we also need to uncouple that issue with the thought that these schools are hotbeds of indoctrination. From my experience of both primary and now secondary - yes there is a Christian element to the school and the day, but there is no obligation to take part and if you are from another faith or no faith at all, you won't be treated any differently.

If there are cases where that isn't true, (some say teaching chances being more limited, for example) then that is a problem with the school and its governance rather than the system itself. IMHO.

(Oh, and BTW Father Christmas does exist and if you don't know that, I feel sad for you. But it's only October, I'll show my working when this discussion inevitably comes up later on in the year)

But not telling the truth about something is not telling the truth about something. Regardless  of what it is your not telling the truth about . . . .

You can't pick and choose when to have "integrity".

#of course you can. We all do it every day. 🙂

But not telling the truth about something is not telling the truth about something. Regardless  of what it is your not telling the truth about . . .

I suppose we have to judge for ourselves whether some fun make-believe for very young children is a bad thing or not.

If, however, children visited a church and saw some sort of observable manifestation of what that belief means, then they can at least come away with a sense of the people involved and how their belief affects them.

I've seen the effects of the beliefs. Frightening opiate for the masses. No one trusts a junky!

[i]I suppose we have to judge for ourselves whether some fun make-believe for very young children is a bad thing or not.[/i]

Exactly.

And at some point the target audience generally work out for themselves that it was just a sweet fairy tale that didn't mean any harm. Also useful as a means to making them behave themselves.

🙂

And at some point the target audience generally work out for themselves that it was just a sweet fairy tale that didn’t mean any harm.

Sure. And at that point I tell them the truth. Which is very different to teachers peddling tales of sky fairies to teenagers, in a formal education setting.

Point is that in most cases they aren't. It's there to provide it to people that want it, but if you don't then you can still participate in the education without the religion. Or bring your own religion, the school makes space available for muslim pupils to observe their daytime prayers.

If a school is indoctrinating kids that is the fault of the school, not of the system.

Point is that in most cases they aren’t.

Which brings us back to how you get into the school in the first place.

1/ by being genuine christian churchgoers (I'm not but i don't have the same hatred of religions as some do - YMMV)

2/ by pretending to be christian churchgoers (I have more of a problem with this tbh)

3/ by living close enough to the school to get in on distance

Only 50% of places are going to the true and fake christians. The rest are the same as any other.

Their ball, their rules.  Don't like it? Go somewhere else. Of course quiet possibly the funding won't be as good and all the little things might not happen either.

Oh yeah, if discrimination is wrong why do those who  preach against it discriminate against those who do?

Their ball, their rules.  Don’t like it? Go somewhere else. Of course quiet possibly the funding won’t be as good and all the little things might not happen either.

What take the state funding away from them? If they were private schools then that is a fine attitude but these are paid for by tax payers.

Oh yeah, if discrimination is wrong why do those who  preach against it discriminate against those who do?

You might need to explain that one? As far as we can see the religious schools are discriminating against people of no faith or those who don't want to jump through a series of pointless hoops to get in.

Don't get outraged or ow't, but I'd doubt you'd be able to send your kids to another 'mainly religious' funded school.

Our Catholic school is part funded by the church.  It just happens to be one of the best in the area, but me and my missus whole family had been there before all this mumbo jumbo came in. For us, as we'd been there, our kids had a place, and at secondary. The secondary accepts all religions but is mainly RC, priority goes to the local RC primary's first.   The other two secondary schools near by are also very good, as are the primary's.

Unfortunately, when one schools is performing better than others, they have to give priority - I'm sure this might happen with other 'faith' schools. We rarely go to church now, but have lived locally for years.  These schools do have to stop the 'best school' shoppers and with a small intake, what do they do ?    We just chose the school because we went there. In my son's case, he would have been better off at another local primary as some of his nursery friends were there, and ended up being bullied in the catholic primary.

Limited intakes do mean they can chose - I'm sure if we chose the local CofE or Muslim school because it was best, we'd be on the back foot.  Limited places.

Weather it's fair is questionable.  People do 'shop' about for the best state school, despite never having gone their themselves, or 'moved' to get in catchment areas.

I know a few people that moved, then got themselves 'christened' and shoot, to get into our local school. Some really got into the church (very false - going out on trips with the priest...).  Us, just so happened to live here all our lives and went to the school, and don't arse lick to either the church or school.

Only 50% of places are going to the true and fake christians. The rest are the same as any other.

No problem then.

What take the state funding away from them?

They are only partly funded, and for the third time of asking they educate 'at least' 50% non-churchgoing christians (on the basis that 50% of places go to churchgoing families and a proportion of these are temporary to get the vicar to tick the box on their form, so <50% are really churchgoers.

If they were fully funded, then they can set the rules exactly as they like.

Even if partly state funded this is wrong morally.  ~the state should have no stake in supporting religion of any sort.  state schools should not be involved in the indoctrination of children into religion.  Private schools should have to follow a curriculum set by the state.  some religious schools the religious element is small.  some its huge.

Quite simply organised religion has no place in education. If you want it for your kids then give up your Sundays for them to have the religious component.

I'm not sure as I agree, it's a context issue.

I think there's a value in teaching religion from an objectively academic point of view.  "Christianity believes this, however Islam believes that."  It's when a given religion is taught as fact alongside things like Maths that it's problematic for me.

I wonder how many people who say they wouldn’t pretend to be religious in order to get their children into a particular (and presumably better, otherwise what’s the point) school, happily told their children there was a Father Christmas or an Easter Bunny?

I think if I were a parent I wouldn't spin those things as anything other than a bit of fun.  If only because, it's one of the first lessons a child learns that their parents have been lying to them for years.