Top Judge recommends changing assemblies from being religion based

[Shaker]

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?

Probably some, but what's the betting that every single last one of them would be deemed 'more important' by you than this one?

[Hope]

Probably some, but what's the betting that every single last one of them would be deemed 'more important' by you than this one?

I doubt it, Shakes.  Apparently there are several hundred obsolete laws still on the British law books.  Here are but a few!!   http://dailym.ai/1XTydfR

Someone suggested that it would take at least a whole year of Parliamentary time to remove them from the slate!!  The reason they aren't removed is because they have been ignored for so long.  Perhaps you can tell us when a school/headteacher/local authority was last penalised for failing to provide such an assembly.

I'd certainly agree that any attempts to reassert the importance of such assemblies should be strongly opposed.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Shaker,

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

Not a bad idea, did anyone do that.

the Teacher asks, do you want to hear a story about Jesus.

Or what, ask the pupil.

Maths replies the teacher.

Tell me about this interesting character called Jesus, replies the pupil.

Asking the kids could be an education in itself.

Gonnagle.

[Rhiannon]

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?

Religious assemblies serve to exclude and divide children off from each other according to belief or lack of it. Leaving aside how unfair that is on the children as individuals, flagging up difference on religious grounds is a bloody stupid thing to do in today's world, wouldn't you say?

[Outrider]

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.

It really shouldn't come as a surprise that you fail to differentiate between education and indoctrination.

Forcing children to either partake of a particular religion's forms or to self-ostracise is indoctrination. Having educational establishments run a particular religion's rituals takes children who are impressionable and abuses the position of authority to inculcate in those children the idea that one particular faith group is 'right'.

To educate all children about a range of religious beliefs so that when they are of sufficient age and maturity they can make their own decision is what education is supposed to be about.

That does not intrinsically lead to atheism, and it's not teaching that atheism is THE way - it might well result in more atheists.

Equally, it doesn't define children as atheist children, it defines them as children: people who are still gathering the information they need to become who they are going to become.

Of course, if you want to rail against equal treatment and the denying of the place of privelege for Anglicanism you go ahead.

O.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Rhiannon,

Religious assemblies serve to exclude and divide children off from each other according to belief or lack of it. Leaving aside how unfair that is on the children as individuals, flagging up difference on religious grounds is a bloody stupid thing to do in today's world, wouldn't you say?

Oh I would!! much better to flag up what we have in common.

http://www.humanismforschools.org.uk/pdfs/the%20golden%20rule.pdf

http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc2.htm

Reciprocity, now that is a word worthy of Shaker, it has its good side and bad side, and I think worth exploring.

In place of the current legal requirement, the report urges the government to issue new guidelines that would build on “current best practice for inclusive assemblies and times for reflection that draw upon a range of sources, that are appropriate for pupils and staff of all religions and beliefs, and that will contribute to their spiritual, moral, social and cultural development”.

Although I did read on the Humanist web site that the Golden rule pre dates religion, how does that work, we are religious animals, how can something pre date what we actually are.

The Golden Rule is built on religious thinking.

"A human being is a part of a whole, called by us _universe_, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

Albert Einstein, embracing and expanding on the Golden Rule.

Gonnagle.

[Outrider]

Reciprocity, now that is a word worthy of Shaker, it has its good side and bad side, and I think worth exploring.

Although I did read on the Humanist web site that the Golden rule pre dates religion, how does that work, we are religious animals, how can something pre date what we actually are.

Religion requires language - faith is 'there's something out there', religion is 'we have codified the official judgment of what is out there'. Reciprocity doesn't require language, it's individual. We aren't religious by nature, we have a tendency towards faith, which leads towards religion.

The Golden Rule is built on religious thinking.

I'd love to think so, but I rather think that religion needs to accommodate the Golden Rule: we all have a sense of 'fair', religion needs to deal with that. Of course, we also have a sense of 'in-group' and 'out-group', which religion can also harness.

O.

[Hope]

Religious assemblies serve to exclude and divide children off from each other according to belief or lack of it. Leaving aside how unfair that is on the children as individuals, flagging up difference on religious grounds is a bloody stupid thing to do in today's world, wouldn't you say?

I can understand what you're saying, but

1) how many religious assemblies actually occur outside of school that are already faith schools?  I'd even ask how many religious assemblies occur in faith schools?

2) don't religious assemblies (if 'religious' is used in the broadest sense) actually serve to teach all children about belief systems other than their own?

[Shaker]

I can understand what you're saying, but

1) how many religious assemblies actually occur outside of school that are already faith schools?  I'd even ask how many religious assemblies occur in faith schools?

2) don't religious assemblies (if 'religious' is used in the broadest sense) actually serve to teach all children about belief systems other than their own?

Do you really not know what the law stipulates on this?

[Hope]

Of course, if you want to rail against equal treatment and the denying of the place of privelege for Anglicanism you go ahead.

O, may I just remind you that a 'broadly Christian act of worship' isn't necessarily Anglican; it can be Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, etc.  In fact, of the people who have led 'religious' assemblies that I have experienced, many have been anything but Anglican.  I've attended Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, even the odd Pagan assembly, as well as Christian outside of Anglicanism. 

[Hope]

Do you really not know what the law stipulates on this?

Have you not been paying attention to the posts on the thread, Shakes?  As I pointed out before, in 25 years of teaching in secondary schools in the UK, the vast majority - possibly 85% have been non-religious in nature and of the remaining 15%, perhaps 8% have been remotely Christian in nature.  As I also pointed out, the law is generally observed in the breach, as are many of the hundreds of other obsolete laws that remain on the statute book but are rarely or never applied.

[Hope]

We aren't religious by nature, we have a tendency towards faith, ...

Linguistically, O, the latter phrase contradicts the former.

Of course, we also have a sense of 'in-group' and 'out-group', which religion can also harness.

Ironically enough, of all the world's philosophies, including atheism, there is only one that is truly all-embracing - Christianity!!  It is the only one that is 'for all humanity'

[Bubbles]

Interesting report.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/the-reporters-35005026

I can see where it is coming from.

Some of the reasons deep down  for the formation of extremists seems to be their feelings of non inclusion.

How do you feel about the report?

Could it be to open up the H of L to other faiths be a positive step?

To represent the faith of those in this country along the line of number of adherents ?

Or is that a can of worms and we are better of with the c of e that at least traditionally connected to government?

Would scrapping the religious aspect of the H of L make our disconnection with those of faith even greater and maybe even influence the extremist aspect into becoming worse than ever?

🌹

[Bubbles]

This is a snippet about it

Entitled "Living with Difference", the report has been released by the Commission on Religion and Belief in Public Life, set up by the Woolf Institute, an academic institute in Cambridge that specialises in interfaith relations.
It calls for politicians to overhaul UK public policy on religion and belief, to take account of the increasing impact of religion around the world and the more diverse nature of society in Britain, which is also less religious in many ways.
Its aim is to suggest practical ways for government and citizens to respond to social change in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, to ensure a shared understanding of the fundamental values underlying public life that guarantee religious freedom while protecting the liberties and values of non-believers.
Its recommendations include:
Opening up representation in the House of Lords to other faiths
Creating a grassroots "Magna Carta" style statement of values for public life, rather than a government-led approach to defining "British values"
Refocusing anti-terror legislation to promote rather than limit freedom of speech and expression
The commission was chaired by the cross-bencher Baroness Butler-Sloss, and has taken two years to prepare its report. Twenty religious and academic thinkers from every major religious tradition, as well as the British Humanist Association, received more than 200 submissions of evidence.
Baroness Butler-Sloss says that the recommendations amount to a "new settlement for religion and belief in the UK" and are aimed at providing space and a role in society for all citizens, "regardless of their beliefs or absence of them".

Even the BHA got involved in this one.

[Gordon]

I'd say the last thing we need is more religious 'leaders' shoehorned into our political governance process simply by dint of them being religious 'leaders' unless we also open up to the House of Lords to the no less qualified 'leaders' of, say, the butchers, bakers and candle-stick makers. Much better to get rid of anachronisms like the House of Lords in favour of arrangements which are, for want of a better term, democratic.

People should of course be free to carry on being members of religious organisations, and religious organisations should also be free to seek positions in political governance arrangements via the electoral process, but the rest of us should be equally free to reject a religious manifesto on the same basis that we can reject the manifestos of any other group seeking political support: at the ballot-box.   

[Outrider]

1) how many religious assemblies actually occur outside of school that are already faith schools?  I'd even ask how many religious assemblies occur in faith schools?

The fact that people are ignoring the law doesn't mean that the law isn't still there, and that the implications of that law aren't still bad.

2) don't religious assemblies (if 'religious' is used in the broadest sense) actually serve to teach all children about belief systems other than their own?

Only if they're non-Christian to start with. It doesn't teach them about 'other' religions - arguably it doesn't teach at all - it mandates that they take part in an act of Christian worship. It normalises Christian practice, which automatically alienates all other practices.

O.

[Outrider]

O, may I just remind you that a 'broadly Christian act of worship' isn't necessarily Anglican; it can be Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, etc.  In fact, of the people who have led 'religious' assemblies that I have experienced, many have been anything but Anglican.  I've attended Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, even the odd Pagan assembly, as well as Christian outside of Anglicanism.

There are a number of Christian faiths, and any of them would be applicable I agree, I'm presuming Anglicanism because it's the most widespread, but that is presumption on my part.

I think it's good that other faiths have been offered the opportunity to come and show what they do, but that's outside of the expectations of this law, which explicitly mandates regular Christian activity.

O.

[Gordon]

Ironically enough, of all the world's philosophies, including atheism, there is only one that is truly all-embracing - Christianity!!  It is the only one that is 'for all humanity'

No it isn't.

It isn't 'for' me for a start, and I don't wish to be considered as being by default 'embraced' by one brand of ancient middle-eastern religious superstition: you may, if you wish, but if so please don't assume it applies to everyone.

[Shaker]

Linguistically, O, the latter phrase contradicts the former.
Ironically enough, of all the world's philosophies, including atheism, there is only one that is truly all-embracing - Christianity!!  It is the only one that is 'for all humanity'

How is something like, for example, atheism not all-embracing? All that it takes to be an atheist is not to be convinced by claims about gods.

Replace atheism with the name of any religion and the point still applies. Everybody could be a Buddhist if they wanted to be.

As for Christianity being 'all-embracing,' isn't this the religion whose central figure said that there's no other way to God but through him?  You must have a different definition of 'all embracing' to me.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Forum,

For your edification, Jeremy Vine, Radio 2, 12.00 hrs, will be discussing school assembly's.

Gonnagle.

[SusanDoris]

Do hope you will give us a run-down - I'm listening to  Radio  - 4.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

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.

School assemblies are not religious or cultural, there were jokes about "Heart warming piano solos" and "Spot the singer" even when I was in school. Their main value was to delay the start of the daily torture for twenty or minutes whilst a man among boys told us that owing to the state of the pitches there would be no outdoor sport again today.

Anne Butler Sloss takes school assemblies far more seriously than do those who have to attend the same, but then she is getting paid to write the report.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Susan,

Do hope you will give us a run-down - I'm listening to  Radio  - 4.

A few atheists telling us that religion has no place in schools, one chap telling us that the country is going down the drain.

Another guy saying that the Queen is not doing her job, defender of the faith.

The expert ( so called expert ) was telling us that the country has changed dramatically in the past 20 years, more non believers, on the subject of Christianity, different kinds of Churches springing up.

One mum telling us that her son would rather remember his grandad than God.

Which gives me an idea, instead of Christian assembly, we could have worship granda day, I know of one Mod on here who would love that, bring your granny and granda day.

Gonnagle.

[SusanDoris]

Thank you, Gonnagle.

[Nearly Sane]

Gonzo was being sarcastic.