Adam Leeson

This conversation is closed.

Single Faith Schools

Faith schools breed sectarian societies. These are not healthy for integration, and breed lack of knowledge between cultures that are living within the same society. Lack of knowledge/understanding can produce fear, hate, intolerance, many things. Should we let faith schools (and by this I mean ALL faith schools; Catholic, Muslim, Protestant, ALL) create boundaries between people? Should we sacrifice integration for political correctness? If I have children, I want them to go to school with children of ALL backgrounds.
There will always be groups within society where people interact with each other more than others (e.g. People into certain types of music, people of a particular faith, people who speak the same language, etc etc). But isn't this something to minimise? Especially when it involves cultures? Isn't integration important for understanding? And isn't understanding important for loving and knowing the people around you?
What do you think?

Obviously I have quite a negative outlook towards single faith schools. It would be good to hear something positive about them. Its always necessary to hear both sides of an argument.

EDIT: I would like to emphasise that I think multi-faith schools are necessary.

  • thumb
    Jul 25 2011: i share your negative outlook. if a child attends a single faith school, and has only been around children of the same background, how will this child be able to... well, integrate into society and handle situations when people from different backgrounds are involved? robbing a child of the experience of seeing different faiths, world view-points, hearing different languages etc., and learn things that single faith schools wouldn't even teach, doesn't seem like a good idea. it seems like the child that attends the single faith school will be severely limited in social experience and would be more likely to have a lack of knowledge, fear, hate, intolerance, etc. as adam as mentioned, just from being unexposed to children of different backgrounds, and the different social situations that come with that. the world doesn't need more of that.
  • thumb
    Jul 25 2011: Faith is not something that should be taught, and so a faith school is wrong in the first place. In my opinion, a school should teach facts about all religions and leave faith to individual decision. I think most people would then take a more rational and balanced view, allowing greater integration.
    • thumb
      Jul 26 2011: Faith is a home issue not one for public schools or school in general. Most religious schools are really just schools with a religious facade but like everyone else are money generators. I went to a religious college that had standards that were waived for certain athletes. As a student I had to give a statement of faith and talk with school leaders. If I had played basketball, soccer, or baseball and was a top athlete I could have walked in with no trouble. I could have been a islamic terrorist but as long as I could lead the team to victory I would have been accepted.
  • thumb
    Jul 27 2011: As negative as it may sound, I have to admit that I agree with you,Adam.Students should mix around and learn about other people's culture because when they become grown-ups , they don't get to choose people to work with.They don't get to choose people to mix with.There are numerous cultures/religion in this world,why be introduced to only one, right?
    • thumb
      Jul 27 2011: I don't think its negative at all. Its an ideal towards a positive end :)
      I completely agree about what happens when we grow up. The world isn't like that, why should schools be? And also I think its worth mentioning that, as we grow up, we lose our flexibility and, to some extent, our open minds. Get people used to other/new/different ideas and cultures while they're naturally more open to them.

      But I don't understand why it might sound negative? If you don't mind, I would really like to hear what you feel. Is it that we should all be open to everybody any way?
      • thumb
        Jul 27 2011: Sorry, I thought you thought the idea of a single faith schools were negative since you said this:

        "Obviously I have quite a negative outlook towards single faith schools. "

        But no worries,it's just a misunderstanding between us.Negative or positive,I still agree with you,Adam.

        I pretty much don't mind if my kids are to be schooled with people from everywhere around the world.I don't want my kids( if I would have them one day) to be stuck with one culture only.They need to know that this world is much more colourful that what meets the eye.
  • thumb
    Jul 26 2011: Don't you mean faith school breed sectarian societies? A secular society is what is desirable. I think the worst part of faith schools in the UK is that they are publicly funded.
    • thumb
      Jul 27 2011: Yes, I didn't know the correct form. Thanks! And I agree very much, although I wasn't aware/I had forgotten they were government funded. That seems wrong or sadly ironic.
  • thumb
    Jul 26 2011: I went to Catholic schools and they accept all religions because money is more important or as important as the idea of "God" to Catholics. As far as a I know only Jewish Academies are exclusive, but I'm not 100 percent.

    Also private institutes allow a more "prestigious" degree to be given to those who graduate from them. This is more of a problem then the fact they are religiously foundational. Kids getting straight A's in my public town go to the same schools as kids getting B's in a private school, not far, they are essentially paying to get ahead.

    An answer to this would be a required course in the curriculum. "World Religion" and perhaps even "Critical Critique".

    What divides people are details, need to illuminate the details to show how alike everyone really is to one another.
    • thumb
      Jul 26 2011: I am certain that some Islamic schools are exclusive to those who share the faith. At least in England anyway. But I think another issue is, as Ian said earlier, faith should not be in school. If any faith is taught, it should be all faiths.

      Personally I am against private institutes as well, but that's another thing. Equal education for all, that's my opinion, in the early years at the very least (before university). Those with money paying for better education.. those students getting the best grades and therefore the choice of the best universities afterwards.. they get higher paid jobs because of it.. they can afford better education for their children... URGH, it angers me.

      And yes, I agree. At my school it was called 'Religious Education', which was a class wherein we were taught a bit about all religions.

      And I couldn't agree more with your final statement :) We cannot understand someone if we know nothing about them and their culture.
  • thumb
    Jul 29 2011: Hi Adam
    I understand your concerns. However in a free society the parents have the responsibility for the upbringing of their children. My children were educated in regular school, although my daughter went to music school in her early teens.
    If we have no choice in schools then it leaves the way open for indoctrination by the government of the day.
    There are many things today which would come under the 'political correctness' banner which I believe to be highly corrosive to society. If I had children of school age today, I may well look at alternatives. Many people send their children to faith schools just to be taught plain respect & decency, which has given way to chaos in many places.
    Sure there will be bad faith schools as well as bad regular schools, but we musn't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
    The more choice the better.

    :-)
    • thumb
      Jul 29 2011: Hi Peter, its great to hear a differing opinion I can't really disagree with. However, do you not think that there is an issue of segregation and lack of understanding between groups that is perpetuated by these sorts of establishments? As was pointed out in another post, society isn't filled with people who share the same ideas; isn't it a good idea to make our schools the same? Surely school is about preparing people for the real world; a social education as much as an academic one.
      Obviously, if faith schools were done away with all schools would have to be much more prepared in certain respects, and would possibly need different specialists in each school. And I suppose there could be some tensions in an environment where children in the same school were not included in the same activities. Although, having said this, I have some friends who went to a school where there was a large percentage of children belonging to faiths of a middle-eastern origin, and they now have a far greater understanding of different faiths and cultures, and I believe they are a lot more open because of it.
      The success of this, however, can often be dependant on the parents.. how the ideas are addressed at home can have a much larger impact than anything else. But then again, if this was applied wouldn't any sort of intolerance diminish over the generations? Couldn't these things have a massive impact on our future societies?

      Also, I don't think its creating choice; I think its creating exclusivity.
      • thumb
        Jul 30 2011: Hi Adam

        I suppose for me it comes down to a mistrust of the state. If we have free choice in education then the odds are that the majority will make an ok choice. If we insist on everyone going through the same gate then we have to trust the gatekeeper. I don't. At the moment they can't even balance a budget, which is something we ordinary Joe's manage fine for the most part. They tell us lies & are naive enough to think that we believe them.

        Sure some schools may be used to foster sectarianism, some elitism etc. the fact is though that human's are individuals & should be treated as such. That is our strength. Check out the countries that have lost that, would you really rather have old style communist china ?

        Also consider that we all see things in the light of our own experience. Nothing is perfect, but it probably isn't as imperfect as we think it is.

        :-)
        • thumb
          Jul 30 2011: I would say, however, that us ordinary Joe's don't quite experience the same level responsibility that a government has to juggle.

          And no, choices in education are often only for those who can afford them. Where is the equality in that? Wealth + Education = an unjust, perpetual cycle (as mentioned in a previous post).

          And I think people can be individuals whilst experiencing the same things. I think our actual strength is our ability to be individuals in environments that a) sometimes make it difficult, and b) we all experience but see differently, and understand in different ways. Getting rid of these schools would not diminish any kind of personal individualism, it would just make this more diverse and equal for everyone.

          And no, I don't think what we have now is that bad, and I'm happy with the person that my education has made. But society evolves, and I think this would be a change for the better.
      • thumb
        Aug 1 2011: Hi Adam

        Why should we 'get rid' of schools because some people don't like them ? I don't like fox hunting, but was very much against the attempts to ban them. Why ? Mostly because if we let our authorities go down this route then they will eventually get around to banning motorbikes, & that would affect me.
        We need to decide whether we want freedom or not. If we do then some people will do things we don't like. the pay-off is that we get to do what we like.
        I have friends whose children were educated at church. He is a painter & decorator, she, a full time mum who worked for free in the school. (Not wealthy). Their kids blossomed & had no trouble integrating into a regular university. Another couple home-schooled their 5 kids, & they are working away in the regular world no problem. Do you really want to tell these folks that they cannot do this ?
        On the wealth thing. Ideally folks should get as much education as they can handle academically. The pressure should be to lift folks up to the higher standard, not ban the higher standard so that everyone is the same. Wealthy folk can afford that bit better in everything, cars, houses, holidays, & yes education. Wealthy people are wealthy by & large, because they worked for it. Their incentive was to become wealthy, & in doing so no doubt created jobs for other people. That's capitalism, & it works. Let's strive to make more people wealthy & give greater freedom, not condemn our kids to the lowest common denominator.

        :-)
        • thumb
          Aug 1 2011: Firstly, I think "Why should we 'get rid' of schools because some people don't like them?" is an extreme over-simplification. And how does banning fox hunting lead to banning motorbikes? People want fox hunting banned because it is cruel. You seem a little paranoid about 'the man' to be quite honest. Motorbikes and fox hunting are also two VERY different subjects, how can you possibly lump them into the same boat? Many people would be against banning motorbikes for totally rational reasons, and so I'm afraid I find these arguments null and void.

          And how are establishments that are totally exclusive to certain types of people allowing freedom?

          And no, I don't want to tell them they cannot do this; I want to tell these schools that they have to open their doors to anyone, of any faith. And home-schooling can be great - I have some friends who have been home schooled, and they are beautiful people.

          Yes, of course the focus should be to get everyone to the same high standards, but when the private institutions take all the best teachers because they can afford to pay them higher salaries, the 'lower end' will never get any where near the same level of education (and therefore continues the perpetual cycle). Schools that require students to pass an entry exam - I am not against them. If someone is gifted then they should be pushed. But there are not, and will never be, enough scholarships for anyone to be able to say that poorer people have equal opportunities.
          And please don't ignore my previous point; wealthy people can afford better education, and can therefore get better qualifications, and therefore get higher paid jobs, and therefore can send their kids to get a better education, etc etc. This is absolutely CRUCIAL. It perpetuates the class system and inequality. Capitalism, surely, isn't based on keeping the lower classes where they are? All people must have equal opportunities to make whatever they want out of themselves. AND; people of all classes work hard.
      • thumb
        Aug 2 2011: Hi Adam

        On the motorbike thing; it is merely an illustration. Once we accept the nanny state then ALL our freedoms come up for grabs. Fishing, Rock Climbing, Target Rifles, Knitting. You name it, there will be some who would like to ban it. Fox hunting is a walk in the park in comparison to our slaughter houses.

        Anyone can set up an exclusive school; think about it...

        I agree that it is a downside to capitalism that wealth can buy a better education. That's life. My wife & I had to scrimp & save to send our daughter to music school. She is now a professional musician, but it held us down financially for years. It was well worth it though, that's what parents are for.

        Personally I am for capitalism, as historically it is the best system; that doesn't mean we shouldn't push for the necessary funds to be put into the regular schools though. Let's just be grateful that there are funds available, & not be too hard on the system that makes that possible.

        Don't lose site of the fact that many of the world's most successful people were not exactly ace material at school. Life is to a large extent what we make it.

        :-)
        • thumb
          Aug 3 2011: To be honest I don't think the illustration is a useful one. I think fox hunting is largely considered cruel because it is a sport, and I think many people in western society today feel a certain amount of respect/empathy for life and animals. If the population of any type of animal grows too large culling is indeed necessary, but it should not be turned into a cruel sport. The slaughter houses too should execute animals in the quickest, most painless way as well.
          Also, surely the fox hunting ban was due to the efforts of the protesters, not the 'authorities'? I doubt the authorities would care too much one way or the other.

          How do you mean anyone could set up an exclusive school? Sorry, I know nothing about this.

          I think 'that's life' is a little too defeatist for my liking. Its also very easy to say 'that's life' when you're between lower-middle class & upper class.
          I do think that completely getting rid of private schools is a) not really an option and b) probably not the best thing to do, but there should be efforts to give all classes equal opportunities.
          And yes, in the UK I don't think anything but a capitalist system would work for quite some time; however, I have heard of socialist systems working in other countries.

          On the point of private schools, I would like to see a system like that of the Student Loans - different income brackets having to pay different amounts, or something to that effect. I'm sure it would still be expensive, but for me that would be a step in the right direction. And more scholarships!

          Funding and more funding for schools that need it. Better teachers, better ideas, much work has to be done in our education system; yes, we must be grateful for what we have, but it is far from satisfactory.

          Yes, many of the world's most successful people were not great at school, but the majority of us need a good education to get to where we want to be.
          And think about all of the potentially great people that don't get the chance to continue.
        • thumb
          Aug 9 2011: Hi Pete,
          Just wanted to say that these riots throughout England show to me the necessity for a decent education for all, and how bad things happen when you neglect the lower classes..
          Don't you think so?
          The very large majority of these riots are mindless violence - what else can you blame (as the source) but a lack of education over the generations? These riots make it apparent that we have a lot of bored and poorly educated young people, whose parents lack discipline (who are often the ones who have little value for education because their own education was poor). If they had been trained to think, maybe things would be different.
          In this sense, in the sense that good education is for the rich and the poor are neglected, we can blame our under-modified capitalist system.
      • thumb
        Aug 9 2011: Hi Adam

        Yes it sure is a mess. I think it's a long shot to blame faith schools, or even regular schools. We are losing site of the wrong & right in society. We have degraded the family unit, lots of kids have never met their dad. There is no discipline in the home, school, or even the penal system. Last, but not least, there is no fear of God. We are told we are modified monkeys. If it wasn't for my faith I would be tempted to go out & get a new telly along with the rest.

        You can educate people all you like, but if you take away dignity & ultimate hope. All that is left is to eat & drink because tomorrow we die !

        :-)
        • thumb
          Aug 9 2011: I am far from saying that it is the fault of faith schools, but I do believe that if the previous generations of lower class citizens had had access to a better education, and had not been neglected by their government, this might have been a lot less severe. Do you not understand what I am trying to say? If people are educated they have educated opinions, their brains are better trained to think, and their decisions are generally more intelligent ones. When people are educated they are more likely to think "is this right? Is this wrong? Should I be doing this? Should my child be doing this? Is it fair if I do this to another person?"

          I am talking about a long process;
          people not getting a good education because they are poorer > because their education wasn't great their minds weren't challenged and pushed and improved > they don't really see the need for or importance of education because of this, and don't develop as many ideas about cause and effect, and therefore good, bad and discipline > they don't encourage their kids to learn because of this view they have > and the cycle continues in a downward spiral through the generations (albeit a slow process).
          Kids are our future, schools are where they learn; how could this issue not be about a neglected lower class and their education? These riots are mindless violence - not strategical violent protest. And they do not have the insight to know that they are ultimately making things worse for themselves, for their countries economy and their own home towns.

          And I think it is very sad that you yourself would not be strong enough, nor would have developed your own sense of right or wrong enough, to not go out and find a telly without having your concept of 'God' lodged in your mind. Beliefs, empathy and principles are all learnt things - I have learnt to hold many beliefs, and I can revise them when necessary. And that's another thing I think is of great important; being dynamic.
  • thumb
    Jul 28 2011: You have made your view clearer to me with your explanation
  • thumb
    Jul 28 2011: Adam I just listened to a news article from the UK that talked about Sharia law being applied in neighborhoods this last week and how the UK government is trying to bring it undercontrol. I agree children need the widest of experiences for life as long as they are good experiences and not destructive of the child's innocence.
  • thumb
    Jul 28 2011: Agreed but is it our duty to integrate each and every person. Look at what is happening in the UK with Sharia Law trying to be imposed in neighborhoods. Should all citizens of UK be required to integrate into Sharia law?
    • thumb
      Jul 28 2011: The Sharia Law is not a law that applies to all UK citizens, only those who voluntarily agree to it. It is also overseen by the county and high courts.

      And I believe it is our duty to allow the children in our own countries to experience all walks of life, yes. Children are the future, of course, so how we segregate them is important for all of us, and the future of each country's society.
  • thumb
    Jul 28 2011: Ahh now it makes more sense
  • thumb
    Jul 27 2011: Cultural diversity is a wonderful thing, and those who can embrace it have a lot to gain. I very much enjoy living abroad and meeting people from other cultures. At the same time, there are things I disagree with, and won't respect. Not all differences have to be respected; you have to maintain your own principles, even if abroad - maybe more so in this case. If I was in a country that stones people to death for adultery, I'm not going to respect that! Immigrants can integrate, but also challenge cultural norms, which may lead to positive changes. Societies are not static. So when I disagree with faith schools, it's not, as James might tell me, an instinct to dislike something different, it's because I've thought about what they do, and I don't like it. Well, not everything they do, obviously, as they do a lot of good too, but I don't think it's right to tell a child that one faith is right and all the others are misguided (but because we're good people we accept them in the community) I don't think it's right to indoctrinate any faith. I see the good in people without having to claim to know God or some other higher power by whatever name. I can choose for myself what I have faith in. Then it's real faith, not a cultural obedience.
    • thumb
      Jul 28 2011: I agree with everything, but I would say that if there is a country that has cultural norms and laws that you just cannot respect, you shouldn't live there. Which is sad as it would limit people from seeing many beautiful and different things, and stop people becoming part of certain cultures. But still, I think you must respect the country you live in. To move country must be to accept change.
      Challenging cultural norms is one of the many great things that a multi-cultural society brings, and I think its important for a forward thinking society, but the country's own culture and traditions must be respected.
      And the reason I have stayed away from the 'indoctrination is not right' argument (in which I agree with you very strongly) is, with all the 'taboos' of speaking out against religion at the moment, I don't think its an argument that would stand up in this current climate.
      • thumb
        Jul 28 2011: Well I'm in France: I like it here, and there's not much adjustment I have to make, except speaking the language, but that's fine as it's one of the attractions for me.
        Don't let anything be taboo. It is the hiding of opinions that lets them fester, or fails to let them shine. Speak your truth. You're in good company here :)
        • thumb
          Jul 28 2011: I'm currently in Spain, and I feel the exact same way! :)
          And its not a taboo for me, but I'm just trying to approach the argument without bringing the subject of faith into it too much, as that would give religious groups something more to combat! Most of western society knows indoctrination is wrong, but has done and will probably continue to do nothing about it for a long time.
          I feel the segregation argument has less soft spots and is harder to ignore.
  • thumb
    Jul 27 2011: I agree with you and yet there is a balance of following the laws on the country in most things and keeping your home countries original ideas. What we are finding in california is that after about the 3rd generation most immigrants are truly americanized and enjoy the benefits of living like americans. It is the first and 2nd generations that cling to the old country ways so strongly. In history many immigrants banded together for self protection and survival. Let me site early america when the Italian people came over they ended up living in poor neighborhoods because that is where they could afford the rent. Same with the Irish and the French who moved to Canada. It is survival instinct and the you look like me actions that developed these areas. In San Francisco the Chinese took over areas that were not the best and made them their own. Yet, when I worked with them I was accepted and they were very american in thought and actions after the 3rd generation. Assimilation takes time if I understand your underlying thoughts correctly. It is the same in education and all areas of any society.
    • thumb
      Jul 28 2011: With single faith schools integration after the 3rd generation is a lot less likely to happen because their communities are not encouraged to open up. It can continue for many generations.
  • thumb
    Jul 27 2011: I am confused do your children not attend government schools?
    • thumb
      Jul 28 2011: Sorry, I was talking in a hypothetical sense. I don't have children, I'm 22!
  • thumb
    Jul 26 2011: We are all interconnected at the primary level of quantum physics so we can connect with that good at the quantum level. If we control our instincts we are free to choose how we respond to anything. The idea here is there is a choice not a reaction. I hope you have never been cut off in high speed traffic but if you have then you have felt the instinct to survive and were not paranoid at all. That is the primitive instinct I am talking about. It kick adrenalin into gear and shuts off the thinking mind and we go into reactive mode. I hope you have never had to experience this but on the freeways where I live it is a daily event and I could react with road rage, or I can just let it go and hope this person causes another no harm with the dangerous driving habits.
    I guess I have a more mystical view of life than others and maybe it seems confusing and contradictory but I have chosen to follow the Celtic church and the ideas that God creates in every person a core of goodness that is covered by some of the choices we make.
    I can look for that goodness in all people and welcome them as they are and allow them to grow spiritually towards their fulfillment at the proper time. I cannot and will not force it. I will share my ideas and hope they spark ideas in others.
    Schools and people will always be in separate communities because of the very premise of my argument that if you look like me you are acceptable and if you are different you are not.
    I teach school and have many many students of different ideas and thoughts and some accept me as I am at the beginning and some do not and that is OK. We are not all ment to be the same or we would be clones and that would be terribly boring. We could not have the conversation we are having at this time. Viva la difference
    • thumb
      Jul 27 2011: 1) "Good" or "Bad" do not exist at the quantum level. They are human ideas.
      2) We experience instincts everyday, they keep us alive, they tell us when to eat. We are animals that have evolved to a different state of sentience. We must not aim to be rid of our instincts; they make us who we are. With a 'survival instinct' we as a species would not be around for long. The survival instinct does not prevent us from being open minded, tolerant, caring beings.

      I agree, we will always have certain pockets of communities that will not want to mix with the outside world, and we will always have people who don't get along. BUT these separate communities can still be part of and understand society as a whole. I am not suggesting these things as something to rid our societies of religious groups and cultural communities; I believe that a multicultural society is a healthy one. I am not saying 'get rid of faith schools' to get rid of faith, or to get rid of the religious communities. I am saying get rid of faith schools so that my children are in an environment where they can mix with kids of all faiths, all backgrounds, all cultures. I want that for all children in all schools!
  • thumb
    Jul 26 2011: Your reply is insightful and has some good questions. May I say that you are working from the idea of thinking. These primitive ideas come not from good thoughtful works like yours but from instant first moment reactions that all of us have. You are in fact proving my point by controlling yours as you stated at the beginning of your post. You could be a force for even more good by helping others control theirs and show them the way to freedom of thought that controls impulses. Cultures are already separated and need to stay separated for the beauty of each one to shine. I would not ask a person from France to leave that culture behind and become and american. My first Judo teacher was from France and we had a wonderful time together blending our cultures and sharing our differences. I have friends from the Irish culture, African culture, Philippino culture, and Mexican culture and they are different and yet we share these differences in celebration. The world view change is to accept each culture for the inherent good it gives and make allowances for the negative it has also. Fascism is alive and well in every culture wheather it is european, american, african, or what ever.
    • thumb
      Jul 27 2011: The beauty of all the individual cultures in the world is a good argument against complete globalisation, and I think its a valid point. We would not want to lose all of the beautiful traditions that are on this planet.
      But.. (and this is a BIG but..) if someone moves country, they must accept the culture of the country. Your examples are great; people from different cultures mixing and enjoying the new and different ideas and backgrounds. This is something I love about life, and I believe my own life would feel very dull without it.

      However, what I am saying is that when people move to other countries and expect live in exactly the same way as they did in their own countries, with people who have also moved from their own countries and share their background, you do not get integration. Everyone must remember their roots and be happy to have them, but they must also except and integrate with other cultures if choose to change their country of residence.

      For example, if I went to a country where society said you should never talk to a married woman without her husband's permission, or the law stated that you could not be alone with a woman after 10pm without being married, I would have to respect that.
      If you move to a country where the society says it is totally unacceptable to intimidate someone, or force them to do things against their will, or a law that states that you cannot cover your face whilst in a shop (for security reasons) then you must respect the laws of that country, and at least try to accept and be open to its social norms.
      If you don't want to accept these things, you shouldn't live there. Its about having respect for others and adapting.
  • thumb
    Jul 26 2011: I think a review of the countries that have single faith schools will answer your question. Lets look at England with the language barriers that separate the classes. Let look at the hatred of gypsy.s in England. There in lies the answer to your question. It is all about you look like me and if you do not you are not to be trusted.
    • thumb
      Jul 26 2011: I think I know, and agree with, what you're saying.. could you go into a bit more detail please?
      • thumb
        Jul 26 2011: What applies to the survival instinct of if you look like me I like you and if you do not you are suspicious or maybe dangerous also applies to faith based schools or other organizations. If you were to see me in person you would be suspicious of me. I have gray hair and am 60 years old so I do not look like you at all. You would automatically categorize me as suspicious and a threat is my guess. So if I have a different faith and attend a different school I do not look like you in that aspect and that would cause a suspicion reaction which is really based in survival reaction in the hind brain. It takes great discipline to connect to the goodness that is deep within each person to over come this reaction. That is the same reaction that makes us question faith based schools if we were not raised in them. Survival is strong and necessary but we need to control that instinct to be free to see schools and people as they are and how they can add to our life and our society. Only a few have ever tried to do this on a regular basis and the churches call them Saints and a models we can follow in spiritual development. It means a change in worldview and that is hard at best and most folks just give up. So should faith based schools exist? Yes, they challenge us to over come the primitive instincts in an environment of support and growth. Does that make government schools bad? No they do this also but without the faith in God and the goodness in each person.
        • thumb
          Jul 26 2011: A suspicion of all people far older than myself? That is just ludicrous and absurd.

          If people went to the same school and were class mates cultural suspicions would move towards eradication.

          I fear you may be a person whose concern is keeping the future of his faith intact; this being why you have come up with your rather irrational argument, steeped in poor assumptions (this possibly being why you are able to believe it).

          1) Your guess is extremely wrong. I have no suspicion, unless I were experiencing paranoid episode. But if I did, it would be because of a lack of exposure.
          2) Separating cultures is not the way to bring them together. When kept apart they are far less likely to start to understand each other.
          3) How can one person connect to the goodness in another person if they have no contact with them?
          4) On these points, your argument for faith schools has no basis whatsoever.
          5) 'Control the instinct to be free' is something that does not compute, maybe you could go into that a bit for me?
          6) How can these schools and people you speak of add to our society when they learn to stay separated from it in small, secular communities?
          7) Your idea of 'primitive instincts' is drowning in your earlier assumptions and opinions about 'suspicion', which have no basis and, therefore, render the end of your post invalid and meaningless.

          One thing you seem to be saying is that having faith schools around is good because then we have to try to think differently about people that are different to us. The sad truth is, people don't have this 'discipline' you speak of. Humans, naturally, are creatures of habit and familiarity, not discipline. In this case, we have to change the environment they live in if we want to change anything. Society won't change itself, I'm afraid, and this idea of 'a change in worldview' is starting to sound a bit fascist.
          Stereotypes and 'suspicions' are produced through lack of understanding and empathy. End of.
        • thumb
          Jul 26 2011: P.S. I'm glad I've seen your 'Idea worth spreading' on your profile. Very insightful.