Faith schools should be open to all, regardless of the parents’ faith or lack of it, according to another one of those registered “charities” that advises on social engineering tactics.
It is the usual MO whereby the government decides what is to be “achieved,” in this case, destroying, particularly, the Christian religion, then uses the “advice” given by a registered ‘charity’ funded by other charities and government departments who they know will spin the case for the government.
It is really like asking yourself a question in the mirror, but the public is hoodwinked into believing that the advice is impartial and provided by experts.
Here is the basic argument from the Runnymede Trust with my comments in italics:
Faith schools should be open to all
Runnymede’s latest report ‘Right to Divide?’ examines how faith schools have responded to the statutory duty to promote community cohesion. It recommends:
1. End selection on the basis of faith
Faith schools should be for the benefit of all in society rather than just some. If faith schools are convinced of their relevance for society, then that should apply equally for all children. With state funding comes an obligation to be relevant and open to all citizens.
The last sentence is completely dishonest. Tax-payers’ pounds are doled out by the billion to specific groups. Pensioners get a Winter fuel payment. I don’t. Hardly all-inclusive, diversity-appreciating equality in action. I can afford to heat my home, so I am not complaining.
2. Children should have a greater say in how they are educated
Children’s rights are as important as parents’ rights. While the debate about faith schools is characterized by discussions of parental choice of education, there is little discussion about children’s voice.
And if the child wants to be in a school in which his faith is valued? I bet they weren’t thinking along these lines. Of course the social engineers are trying hard to diminish parental rights by all means, so it is unsurprising that the ‘authorities’ would rather strike up discussions with children and ignore their parents, especially if they can coerce them into worshipping the new three-in-one of equality, diversity and choice.
3. RE should be part of the core national curriculum
Provision for learning about religion is too often poor in schools without a religious character. Provision for learning about religions beyond that of the sponsoring faith in faith schools is also inadequate.
The sweetener. Their side of the bargain is that faith will be given greater significance in state schools, although they don’t say it – just imply it – however, they want a variety of religions to be taught in all schools.
This is only natural in the new world order as it will have the desired effect of diluting faith and therefore its influence corporately and the empowerment that faith gives to individuals to enable them to tackle authority when it goes bad and it is going very bad.
The Almighty gives me wisdom to notice what is going on and the strength to oppose it in some manner at least.
4. Faith schools should also serve the most disadvantaged
Despite histories based on challenging poverty and inequality, and high-level pronouncements that suggest a mission to serve the most disadvantaged in society, faith schools educate a disproportionately small number of young people at the lowest end of the socio-economic scale.
So, for example, Christian couples with a good work ethic and who encourage their children intellectually, spiritually and morally should be penalised simply because “inequality” exists.
Why are faith schools expected to raise people out of poverty by accepting non-believers en masse? New Labour has allegedly been improving the lot of disadvantaged people for over eleven years.
This is a red herring. Like Nero, degenerate rulers will blame everyone but themselves. Good parents seem to be getting tarnished as a danger to society because they don’t spend twenty pounds a night down the pub but would rather give their children a good start in life by being there for them and providing for them.
This is unwelcome behaviour from our masters’ point of view because there are fewer opportunities for their ‘system’ to interfere. Good parents are less likely to be caught in the likes of the benefits and social services trap and the ‘justice’ system.
What must our rulers do? Why, get them into the ‘sexual health’ system: guaranteed to make your child more likely to have sexual relations and have treatment and ‘advice’ behind your back.
What use are faith schools to them? Teaching children to wait until they are married before having sex? That won’t help their friends in the abortion industry.
5. Faith schools must value all young people
People cherish facets of their identities beyond their faith, and these also need to be the focus of learning in faith schools – and valued within them. Similarly, religious identities should be more highly valued within schools that don’t have a religious character.
That’s right. Don’t dare be identified by your faith! Naturally, we humans are multi-faceted by design, but not always in the way the government likes. This is nothing but social engineering in an attempt to make us all alike and all subservient to those who set themselves up as our masters.
The sweetener again is that faith will be “more highly valued” in state schools.
And I’m a monkey’s uncle. Faith will mean whatever they want it to mean.
6. If these recommendations are acted upon, faith should continue to play an important role in our education system
Faith schools should remain a significant and important part of our education system, offering diversity in the schooling system as a means of improving standards, offering choice to parents and developing effective responses to local, national and global challenges in education.
This is a fine piece of doublethink. Parents can have ‘choice’ by being denied the type of school they want. They can have ‘diversity’ even though they don’t want it and ‘local, national and global challenges in education’ can be addressed, whatever that means. It means whatever they want it to.
Page six of the “Right to Divide? Faith Schools and Community Cohesion” report offers further insight to the real agenda:
“Teaching about democracy and citizenship within institutions that are autocratic only serves to demonstrate to young people the double standards of adults. If young people are to develop the ability for critical thinking and selfdetermination, in opposition to absolutist thought and closed approaches to difference, developing appropriate democratic dialogue within schools is necessary.”
This says to me that children will be taught about the politics and morals of a decaying society, to despise the values of their family by accusing them of being hypocrites, in other words, they want children to grow up believing that you cannot serve God and mammon. They are correct, but they want us serving mammon by seeking to reprogramme children and short-circuiting their conscience.
As for state schools encouraging “critical thinking”. Do me a favour.
By the way, government lackeys:
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Matthew 18:6