This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Proposals to make worship optional in schools rejected by Peers

Proposals to make worship optional in schools rejected by Peers - Comments

SaganTheCat's Avatar Comment 1 by SaganTheCat

ffs

"OK children put your hands together, bow your heads and repeat after me: this is what people did before they invented education...."

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:10:15 UTC | #884218

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 2 by irate_atheist

What bunch of old tools.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:17:18 UTC | #884221

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 3 by irate_atheist

How I despise them.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:22:08 UTC | #884225

Mark Question's Avatar Comment 4 by Mark Question

Ah! Democracy in action. Reform of the House of Lords is well overdue.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:39:12 UTC | #884228

78rpm's Avatar Comment 5 by 78rpm

Ah's glad tuh see thet the Great State o'Texas kin have uh influence all th'way 'cross th' Atlantic.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:04:03 UTC | #884235

Sample's Avatar Comment 6 by Sample

Children are little more than slaves it would seem.

Mike

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:08:22 UTC | #884238

Carlinlives's Avatar Comment 7 by Carlinlives

Baroness Trumpington? Is Wodehouse or Waugh writing this satire?

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:19:51 UTC | #884239

Rosbif's Avatar Comment 8 by Rosbif

If the little blighters don't believe in gawd, how can they believe in gawd given privilege?

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:24:10 UTC | #884242

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 9 by irate_atheist

“Organised religion is violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism, tribalism, and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive toward children.”

― Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:29:16 UTC | #884245

Woodworm's Avatar Comment 10 by Woodworm

According to the beginning of the article, the law reuires "collective worship", not collective "religious" worship. Surely the sensible thing is for a school get the children to worship something more sensible than a fairy, like the use of rational thought or some such thing? Mind you, I have a suspicion that there is a requirement somewhere else in the law, not just of the "religious" bit, but of the worship being of a broadly Christian nature. Sigh.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:31:32 UTC | #884247

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 11 by MarkOnTheRiver

Comment 10 by Woodworm :

According to the beginning of the article, the law reuires "collective worship", not collective "religious" worship. Surely the sensible thing is for a school get the children to worship something more sensible than a fairy,

In my school days, that would have been the Holy Trinity of Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton and Jeff Beck.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:45:12 UTC | #884251

CLawrence's Avatar Comment 12 by CLawrence

I remember growing up in Norfolk in the 80s and 90s that we were forced to pray to jeebus in first school but religion was not even mentioned outside of R.E. in middle and secondary, not in class or assembly. I assume that my schools were breaking the law, good on them.

The requirement to worship in schools is nothing short of tyranny. You would think that even religious people would be at least annoyed about being ordered to worship.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:55:18 UTC | #884252

mmurray's Avatar Comment 13 by mmurray

Comment 11 by MarkOnTheRiver :

Comment 10 by Woodworm :

According to the beginning of the article, the law reuires "collective worship", not collective "religious" worship. Surely the sensible thing is for a school get the children to worship something more sensible than a fairy,

In my school days, that would have been the Holy Trinity of Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton and Jeff Beck.

So did you write JEJ at the top of every page ?

Michael

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:58:01 UTC | #884255

Marc Country's Avatar Comment 14 by Marc Country

Indeed, "collective worship" could be ingeniously interpreted as worshipping a collective, and that collective could arguably include all of humanity... so, humanist worship, I suppose.

Fine...

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:22:03 UTC | #884260

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 15 by MarkOnTheRiver

Comment 13 by mmurray :

Comment 11 by MarkOnTheRiver :

Comment 10 by Woodworm :

According to the beginning of the article, the law reuires "collective worship", not collective "religious" worship. Surely the sensible thing is for a school get the children to worship something more sensible than a fairy,

In my school days, that would have been the Holy Trinity of Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton and Jeff Beck.

So did you write JEJ at the top of every page ? Michael

Not quite, but we did feel justifed in a daily air guitar rendition of the solo at the end of Stairway to Heaven. It was the closest I ever got to god.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:32:53 UTC | #884266

flamenco's Avatar Comment 16 by flamenco

"...collective worship" could be ingeniously interpreted as worshipping a collective, and that collective could arguably include all of humanity... so, humanist worship, I suppose.

Indeed. Almost exactly how I interpreted the requirement in my 22 years of conducting assemblies as a senior teacher. Never once said or lead a 'prayer'.

I told and enacted stories from many cultures and countries. I sometimes included a quiet moment to think (eg about the last time I said something positive to another person, and to whom I might say something nice later that day, or what I would do in the place of a character from the story just enacted, or think about the theme of the story... etc etc).

We would 'celebrate' achievement - of individuals and groups (teams, charity fundraisers etc) and repeatedly reaffirm the values and expectations of a positive community.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:43:22 UTC | #884270

Metamag's Avatar Comment 17 by Metamag

House of Lords

That says it all really...

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:44:02 UTC | #884271

Rosbif's Avatar Comment 18 by Rosbif

In my school days, that would have been the Holy Trinity of Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton and Jeff Beck.

No no ... Jimi Hendrix is the last true profit. It is written that he talks to Angels! If you believe othwise, I consider you an ol' lady and can therefore interpret the words of Chapter Hey Joe verse 2 as a call to jihad and I can shoot you for saying otherwise.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:08:30 UTC | #884279

MarkOnTheRiver's Avatar Comment 19 by MarkOnTheRiver

Comment 18 by Rosbif :

No no ... Jimi Hendrix is the last true profit. It is written that he talks to Angels! If you believe othwise, I consider you an ol' lady and can therefore interpret the words of Chapter Hey Joe verse 2 as a call to jihad and I can shoot you for saying otherwise

Your heresy is noted Rosbif. Your pennance shall be a continuous playthrough of Cliff Richards' quadruple concept album; Closer to God - Parts 1 - 4, and may the Lord (Jon) have mercy on your ears.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:42:55 UTC | #884286

Quiddam's Avatar Comment 20 by Quiddam

The Bishops get it

The Lord Bishop of Chester suggested the amendments were “tarred with secularist intent.”

No kidding

“It is important that we all remember that the Church of England is the established church of this country. That is why we have the Prayers that we have every day [in Parliament]. It is appropriate that that should be recognised in schools.”

And that neatly summarises the problem

What's ironic is that Britain, with compulsory daily prayers and hymns - and compulsory religious instruction - produces a high proportion of non-believers, whereas the US, where it's prohibited, has the reverse.

Quite why being a Bishop should guarantee an unelected position in government is another matter altogether.

We could lose the Queen as the Head of the Church, the unelected House of Lords, and compulsory religion in schools with advantage. Do they really have any place in a modern civilized society?

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:01:06 UTC | #884293

Stevezar's Avatar Comment 21 by Stevezar

Fortunately, I live in Texas, where this sort of thing is unconstitutional. You Brits need to leave the fifthteenth century behind already.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:13:03 UTC | #884296

Stevehill's Avatar Comment 22 by Stevehill

Baroness Trumpington suggested “it did not matter if pupils were bored, did not like going to chapel or were not interested in religious matters at the age of 15, 16 or perhaps even 17. That daily event gave each pupil a background to which they could return in later life. It was very important to have.”

It did not matter. IT DID NOT MATTER!

Who the fuck do these fucktard bastard faithheads fucking think they fucking are, that they have a moral right to dictate to a sentient 17 year old that it DOES NOT MATTER if they want to fill his or her head with 2,000 year old superstitious bullshit that has no grounding whatsoever in any established fact, whether or not that person wants it.

And by the way, the imbecilic fucktard baroness seems to have forgotten that existing law allows 16 year olds and above to opt out anyway, regardless of parental (or her) wishes.

I'm speechless. And more than a little furious.

[P.S. The legal requirement, set down in 1944, is that the worship must be of a broadly Christian character.]

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:13:51 UTC | #884297

sunbeamforjeebus's Avatar Comment 23 by sunbeamforjeebus

Simply sickening that these people still wield power in our country! What the fuck is the word 'worship' doing in our modern parlance anyway!

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:15:59 UTC | #884298

Sajanas's Avatar Comment 24 by Sajanas

@Quiddam

There is nothing less cool than being forced to do something at school. From what I've seen watching British TV, and the 3 or 4 British friends I've made, the choice to have church in school is catastrophic for religious enthusiasm. I went to church a lot here in the US, but the Lutheran's tended to do some fun things as well, and in a lot of ways, the actual church service was just the boring thing you had to work through to get to do the fun activities later. Completely divest it of that, and make it an obligation forced on you by teachers and not your family, I can easily see why people would lose interest in it even earlier than I did with my former religion.

I will say, as messed up as American religious politics is, at least we don't have church people mandated to be part of government like in the UK, or have money taken directly from our payroll and given to churches like in Germany. It surprises me how states that are very secular allow the religious to hold them over a barrel, when it seems like by and large the populace just doesn't care.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:46:07 UTC | #884306

Frankus1122's Avatar Comment 25 by Frankus1122

A true test for a Western democratic theocracy. "Democratic theocracy" is incongruously true. Something has to give.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:47:14 UTC | #884308

Mr DArcy's Avatar Comment 26 by Mr DArcy

"Lord Hill made reference to the British Household Survey of 2010 and said “more than 70 per cent of people said that their religion was Christian, and we think it right, therefore, that these values should underpin the ethos of our schools.”"

That'll be the baptism, wedding and funeral crowd no doubt. And maybe a few Christmas church goers too. Oh hallelujah! Britain is just so Christian and righteous...................................not!

70% my backside. It will be interesting what this year's Census shows up.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:00:06 UTC | #884314

mlgatheist's Avatar Comment 27 by mlgatheist

Blockquote The Lord Bishop of Ripon and Leed said “We do not want to marginalise worship or spirituality within the life of our schools.

Why would we not want to do that? Schools should be for education not indoctrination.

Blockquote When the nation faces a time of crisis or indeed of joy and delight, it tends to do so in terms of prayer.

What was the last crisis that occurred that caused the majority of people to turn to prayer and why would you suppose that it did that? If it was in the last 2 decades then it most likely would be due to the brainwashing of the people, as children, in doing so. It is time to spot this practice.

Blockquote Children need to know what prayer is about, and one of the best ways for that to happen is through the worship that takes place in both church schools and community schools.

Actually that is not true. The best way for children to know what prayer is all about is for their teachers and parents to tell them that prayer is just talking to yourself.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:10:08 UTC | #884316

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 28 by irate_atheist

Comment 22 by Stevehill -

Seconded.

Every. Single. Word.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:11:56 UTC | #884318

Rosbif's Avatar Comment 29 by Rosbif

Your heresy is noted Rosbif. Your pennance shall be a continuous playthrough of Cliff Richards' quadruple concept album; Closer to God - Parts 1 - 4, and may the Lord (Jon) have mercy on your ears.

So there is a Hell after all!

I shall say 4 Hank Marvins and pray for redemption.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:13:13 UTC | #884320

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 30 by Alan4discussion

Comment 26 by Mr DArcy

"Lord Hill made reference to the British Household Survey of 2010 and said “more than 70 per cent of people said that their religion was Christian, and we think it right, therefore, that these values should underpin the ethos of our schools.”"

As Dara OBriain said, " Are you a catholic atheist or a protestant atheist?

Lord Hill is of course cherry-picking his surveys, as this survey showed: -

http://richarddawkins.net/articles/568607-religion-respecting-the-minority

the latest 2010 BSA report, published earlier this month, only 42% said they were Christians while 51% now say they have no religion. Admittedly, some other surveys – including the last census – have produced different findings on these issues, usually to the advantage of the religious option. There is also a margin of error in all such exercises.

However, I can see no reason why schools should not issue an opt-in / opt-out choice as a standard part of admissions procedures or inductions.

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:26:21 UTC | #884326