Top Judge recommends changing assemblies from being religion based

[Aruntraveller]

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/06/religious-teaching-school-assemblies-axe-report

So what are posters take on this issue.

Is it now time to give up the idea of religious assemblies and move to a more broad based gathering so as to be more inclusive or is it right that we should continue to define our country as "Christian" bearing in mind that Christian can be seen as both religious and cultural.

[Outrider]

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/06/religious-teaching-school-assemblies-axe-report

So what are posters take on this issue.

Is it now time to give up the idea of religious assemblies and move to a more broad based gathering so as to be more inclusive or is it right that we should continue to define our country as "Christian" bearing in mind that Christian can be seen as both religious and cultural.

Whilst I think it's way past that time - indeed, so it seems do most of the actual schools given that they either find the most tortured ways of describing what they do in order to give the impression of complying or they just outright don't bother - I was rather disappointed that this was the element the Guardian chose to focus on and make their headline.

The push to limit segregation of school-children is fairly thinly veiled attack on the notion of faith-schools (and, in their justification, also on the economic/class segregation that it supports) seemed to be a far more significant recommendation, along with the comments on the depiction of religion in the media (with an eye on the public service broadcasting remit of the BBC in the upcoming charter renewal and review) and the way religiosity is viewed by the criminal justice system.

O.

[Gordon]

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/06/religious-teaching-school-assemblies-axe-report

So what are posters take on this issue.

Is it now time to give up the idea of religious assemblies and move to a more broad based gathering so as to be more inclusive or is it right that we should continue to define our country as "Christian" bearing in mind that Christian can be seen as both religious and cultural.

The former - for many of us Christianity has no place in our lives in terms of being participants, so acts of religious activity (hymns, prayers) should have no place in the school day.

[SusanDoris]

More power to the BHA and NSS in their work to remove religious assemblies. The sooner  the words 'teaching of religion' is replaced by 'teaching about religions, the better. I listened to some of the Sunday programme today, but then turned off. Progress is so slow!

[floo]

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/06/religious-teaching-school-assemblies-axe-report

So what are posters take on this issue.

Is it now time to give up the idea of religious assemblies and move to a more broad based gathering so as to be more inclusive or is it right that we should continue to define our country as "Christian" bearing in mind that Christian can be seen as both religious and cultural.

As schools are likely to have many more unbelievers than believers, religious assemblies have had their day and no loss, imo.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As schools are likely to have many more unbelievers than believers, religious assemblies have had their day and no loss, imo.

I see the strategy
2006 Dawkins complains and campaigns against children being referred to as Muslim children or Christian children
2014 It's alright now as long as they are all Atheist children.

Vintage humbug and hypocrisy from the Flooster.

[Rhiannon]

I have no idea why anyone with a religious belief would want their kids getting the lukewarm, simplistic stuff served up at school assemblies - often by teaching staff who themselves are unbelievers. What's the point?

[Shaker]

I see the strategy
2006 Dawkins complains and campaigns against children being referred to as Muslim children or Christian children
2014 It's alright now as long as they are all Atheist children.

Vintage humbug and hypocrisy from the Flooster.

No, a statement of the bleeding obvious, I'd have thought. I have no hard statistics to hand - I doubt if youngsters are often polled on such things - but it strikes me as staggeringly unlikely that very many young people (let's say 16 and under) have an active, positive religious affiliation. This applies to those supposedly labelled thus (which of course in reality means "a child of religious parents or even merely of a purely formal, nominal cultural identity only"). There will be some, of course, but very few. Like the majority of the adult population most kids probably never give the matter a first let alone second thought. Since calling them atheists seems to get you worked up (I'm amazed you didn't call them anti-theists), call them apatheists or ignostics if that takes the curse off it for you.

In such a climate, the law about compulsory daily, broadly Christian worship is cleary a busted flush; I suspect that it will go by the wayside sooner rather than later.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No, a statement of the bleeding obvious, I'd have thought. I have no hard statistics to hand - I doubt if youngsters are often polled on such things - but it strikes me as staggeringly unlikely that very many young people (let's say 16 and under) have an active, positive religious affiliation. This applies to those supposedly labelled thus (which of course in reality means "a child of religious parents or even merely of a purely formal, nominal cultural identity only"). There will be some, of course, but very few. Like the majority of the adult population most kids probably never give the matter a first let alone second thought. Since calling them atheists seems to get you worked up (I'm amazed you didn't call them anti-theists), call them apatheists or ignostics if that takes the curse off it for you.

In such a climate, the law about compulsory daily, broadly Christian worship is cleary a busted flush; I suspect that it will go by the wayside sooner rather than later.

I don't know whether you read my e mail.

It isn't me who was worked up about giving children religious labels it was Dawkins in the God Delusion.

My money is on you at the time thinking 'oh Richard, you are sooo right'.

But you nor he have any problems in the idea of children being atheist or secular humanists.

That is pure humbuggery on your parts.

[Shaker]

I don't know whether you read my e mail.

It isn't me who was worked up about giving children religious labels it was Dawkins in the God Delusion.

My money is on you at the time thinking 'oh Richard, you are sooo right'.

Correct.

But you nor he have any problems in the idea of children being atheist or secular humanists.

Why does he say the exact opposite of this, then?

That is pure humbuggery on your parts.

It's a sign that you either haven't read or read but have forgotten anything he has ever said, and are reduced to misrepresenting him by making stuff up as you go along.

[floo]

I see the strategy
2006 Dawkins complains and campaigns against children being referred to as Muslim children or Christian children
2014 It's alright now as long as they are all Atheist children.

Vintage humbug and hypocrisy from the Flooster.

Don't be silly!

[Hope]

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/06/religious-teaching-school-assemblies-axe-report

So what are posters take on this issue.

Is it now time to give up the idea of religious assemblies and move to a more broad based gathering so as to be more inclusive or is it right that we should continue to define our country as "Christian" bearing in mind that Christian can be seen as both religious and cultural.

Perhaps Parliament will now take note of what many people, Christian and non-Christians alike, have been saying for donkeys' years.  Ironically, having worked in secondary schools for a lot of my working life, I don't recall when I last attended a religious  assembly - in fact I don't recall ever attending an exclusively Christian one.  Primary schools are a bit different because the majority are small enough to have a hall large enough to take the whole school at once.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Trent,

http://www.corab.org.uk/background-information

Background Information

Purpose

1.   The Commission on Religion and Belief in British Public Life has been convened by the Woolf Institute, Cambridge, to:

A.consider the place and role of religion and belief in contemporary Britain, and the significance of emerging trends and identities
B.examine how ideas of Britishness and national identity may be inclusive of a range of religions and beliefs, and may in turn influence people's self-understanding
C.explore how shared understandings of the common good may contribute to greater levels of mutual trust and collective action, and to a more harmonious society
D.make recommendations for public life and policy.

Ideas of Britishness, national identity.

The Queen, a very British idea, is the National Anthem still sung at school assemblies, somebody save our gracious queen, no I much prefer God, as Billy Connolly tells us, God is the very man for the job.

Fish and chips, harmless but very British.

Ideas of Britishness, national identity, what are they?

Gonnagle.

[Hope]

More power to the BHA and NSS in their work to remove religious assemblies. The sooner  the words 'teaching of religion' is replaced by 'teaching about religions, the better. I listened to some of the Sunday programme today, but then turned off. Progress is so slow!

Susan, the two organisations you mention came to the party many years after the majority of the public on this issue. 

Regarding the comment "The sooner  the words 'teaching of religion' is replaced by 'teaching about religions', I doubt whether an RE syllabus has existed that included the former for 40 or 50 years.

[Hope]

I have no idea why anyone with a religious belief would want their kids getting the lukewarm, simplistic stuff served up at school assemblies - often by teaching staff who themselves are unbelievers. What's the point?

Having attended school assemblies for many years, Rhi, I'm not sure that any religious parent would worry - after all, most of the time they're not even lukewarm or simplistic.  They usually include almost nothing religious.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Trent,

Funny, ( well I find it funny ) The Commission on Religion and Belief in British Public Life are funded by The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.

(JRCT) is a Quaker trust which seeks to transform the world by supporting people who address the root causes of conflict and injustice. This support is provided, primarily, through funding applied for by applicants.

JRCT trustees are Quakers, and decision-making and practice are based on Quaker values. Trust meetings are based on Quaker business method.  Each Trust meeting starts and ends with a period of silent worship.  We don’t vote – we try to listen to each other and to God, so that we are guided to the right decision.

Gonnagle.

[BashfulAnthony]

No, a statement of the bleeding obvious, I'd have thought. I have no hard statistics to hand - I doubt if youngsters are often polled on such things - but it strikes me as staggeringly unlikely that very many young people (let's say 16 and under) have an active, positive religious affiliation. This applies to those supposedly labelled thus (which of course in reality means "a child of religious parents or even merely of a purely formal, nominal cultural identity only"). There will be some, of course, but very few. Like the majority of the adult population most kids probably never give the matter a first let alone second thought. Since calling them atheists seems to get you worked up (I'm amazed you didn't call them anti-theists), call them apatheists or ignostics if that takes the curse off it for you.

In such a climate, the law about compulsory daily, broadly Christian worship is cleary a busted flush; I suspect that it will go by the wayside sooner rather than later.

Ignoring your abusive attitude,, which is your personality I suppose; even you admityou have no evidence:  a fault you and your ilk are constantly accusing religionists of.  As to daily worship, you have even less knowledge of what goes on in schools than you have about, say, rugby league!

[Shaker]

Ignoring your abusive attitude,, which is your personality I suppose; even you admityou have no evidence:  a fault you and your ilk are constantly accusing religionists of.  As to daily worship, you have even less knowledge of what goes on in schools than you have about, say, rugby league!

Considerably more, as I know school-age youngsters but zero rugby players.

[Rhiannon]

Having attended school assemblies for many years, Rhi, I'm not sure that any religious parent would worry - after all, most of the time they're not even lukewarm or simplistic.  They usually include almost nothing religious.

Might as well do away with them then, wouldn't you say?

[BashfulAnthony]

Considerably more, as I know school-age youngsters but zero rugby players.

So, you know youngsters?  So what?  I didn't ask you about that. I was referring to school assemblies.   Do read more carefully, old chap!     

[Shaker]

So, you know youngsters?  So what?  I didn't ask you about that. I was referring to school assemblies.   Do read more carefully, old chap!   

So I'm rather more likely to know, on that basis, what the average assembly is like in schools today than my nearest half prop forward slingback or whatever they call themselves.

[BashfulAnthony]

So I'm rather more likely to know, on that basis, what the average assembly is like in schools today than my nearest half prop forward slingback or whatever they call themselves.

Doesn't follow at all.  I can just see you discussing school assemblies with the local kids!       What a pathetic attempt at argument!   

[Shaker]

I don't. I can ask a couple of young folk of my acquaintance, however.

[BashfulAnthony]

I don't. I can ask a couple of young folk of my acquaintance, however.

Keep trying!  It gets more pathetic!   

[Hope]

Might as well do away with them then, wouldn't you say?

Wouldn't worry me if they were done away with, but I wonder whether there are more important obsolete laws that Parliament ought to be considering doing away with?