1. Comment #6891 by Richard Dawkins on November 16, 2006 at 4:54 am

The point is not to abolish Religious Education. There is value in Religious Education, including Comparative Religion (for anthropologists tell us that religion is a ubiquitous human universal) and the King James Bible as literature (there are so many allusions to it in Shakespeare and other English literature). What is wrong -- indeed, arguably a form of mental child abuse -- is the INDOCTRINATION of children into one particular faith, which they are informed is THEIR faith, automatically inherited from their parents.

2. Comment #6906 by Jack Rawlinson on November 16, 2006 at 6:37 am

Richard's right - I think teaching about religion is very valuable. The first part of the petition might give the impression that it's seeking total abolition of religious teaching: "...prohibit the teaching of creationism and other religious mythology". The qualification provided later is better: "Creationism and other religious myths should not be taught as fact..."

Still, I've signed it because I do think faith schools should be abolished.

3. Comment #6907 by Richard Dawkins on November 16, 2006 at 6:38 am

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION EXACTLY AS IT IS!
Oh dear, I did NOT mean my comment to be a taken as a criticism of the petition, or a suggestion that it should be changed. Far from it. I think the petition is GREAT, and I have signed it on the Downing Street Website:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/faithschools/

The petition doesn't call for the abolition of Religious Education, only of Faith Schools. It also calls for the cessation of the teaching of creationism. Both admirable aims, and both completely compatible with my comments.

I wish I could remove my initial comment as being vulnerable to misunderstanding, but it has already elicited replies, so I suppose it is too late. But please DO SIGN the petition, exactly as it is, on the Downing Street website.

4. Comment #6911 by Roy on November 16, 2006 at 6:56 am

I have just signed it. We do not want them, it would be the thin end of the wedge.The thoughts of a "Liberty University" here makes me cringe.
It would be an insult to intelligence.

5. Comment #6913 by Martin on November 16, 2006 at 7:03 am

Signed it.. passed it onto my friends.

I wonder if I'll get flamed by one of them. He's not religious but his wife is and his young daughter is going to a Christian school (she's 5!)... oh well.

6. Comment #6914 by Mike Hall on November 16, 2006 at 7:03 am

Never mind the Middle East - imagine the West where all children are taught objectively about religion! Particularly the USA!

7. Comment #6920 by Martin on November 16, 2006 at 7:31 am

Barry

Schools, like all things vary from one to the other. Just because you weren't indoctrinated doesn't mean that others weren't.

Additionally religious discrimination shouldn't be allowed full stop.

If we had a school that said you couldn't join because you were black, then we'd have riots. But saying you can't join because you don't belong to some religious cult is ok it seems.

8. Comment #6928 by Roy on November 16, 2006 at 7:54 am

I had a friend who used to work with quote :"A couple of really nice young lads" then one particular day one of them said to him "You won't see us for the next few weeks, we are going away on a course, it is to do with our religion" They were in fact, members of the 'Plymouth Brethren' sect.
After they had finished their course and returned to work, my friend said he was utterly horrified. in his words "Roy, I have never seen two people change so much in such a short time, they were like a couple of brainwashed zombies. Gone was the laughing, the joking, the ribbing, they seemed half dead somehow,totally witless"
A little indoctrination is a dangerous thing!
By the way, they will not read our comments on here, they might believe in God but they do not believe in computers....

9. Comment #6932 by Randy Ping on November 16, 2006 at 8:10 am

I wish we could petition like that here in the US. There are schools here that are faith based and they teach that Genesis IS LITERAL fact, that EVolution is lies, that the fossil record is being deliberately misrepresented by some world-wide conspiracy to "destroy Christianity" and out right fraud.
Public secular education where I live, New Orleans, is almost non-existant. We NEED people like Richard over here, unfortunately, too many of our people have been fooled into the idea that 'Political Correctness' means that we must allow this kind of anti-scientific teaching without retort or criticism of any kind. Children in the US get a lifetime of religious indoctrination before any serious science and Evolutionary Theory is taught to them.
I fear that my wife and I will either have to move or homeschool in order to have a child recieve a decent scientific education.
The levels of education in this city is far below average even for the Southern United States in its' requirements and standards.
Richard, I greatly appreciate what you and the RDF are trying to do. I only hope something can be done in the United States before another generation of children is taught that myth is reality and science is only an opinion.

10. Comment #6933 by Phil K on November 16, 2006 at 8:12 am

Signed it, but my worry is that there's a number of these petitions on the web at the moment. (I remember signing one a few weeks ago). It would be useful for somebody to spend a bit of time getting all the signatories in one place.

11. Comment #6934 by Zaphod on November 16, 2006 at 8:14 am

Signed it, wouldn't it be great if it made a difference.

12. Comment #6935 by Basil on November 16, 2006 at 8:21 am

Can't sign as not a UK citizen. That said, despite attending a Catholic school in Ireland, my experience of RE was quite a positive one. The teacher was not discernibly faithful at all. In fact, the class usually descended into a sociology free-for-all. Either that or a rather frank contraception Q&A. I can only imagine mine was not a typical experience!

PS It's an honour to have you on these boards, Professor. Thanks for sharing so much of your US trip. Doubtless you've gathered enough anecdotes for a follow-up volume!

13. Comment #6947 by Anonymous on November 16, 2006 at 9:06 am

Although the deadline has past they still appear to be allowing you to sign, so get in quick!

14. Comment #6948 by Jonathan Dore on November 16, 2006 at 9:11 am

Sadly, when I tried to sign, I found I couldn't since, even as a UK citizen, it won't allow you to sign if you don't have a UK or dependent territories address (I'm in Canada). I've emailed the site administrator to point out the anomaly.

15. Comment #6954 by Diplo on November 16, 2006 at 10:33 am

I think there are really three separate issues here:

1. Faith Schools. Simply, they should be banned, for the obvious reason that they exacerbate and, indeed, cause social division, bigotry and intolerance. They shouldn't exist simply to allow parents a convenient way of indoctrinating their children by proxy.

2. Religious Education. Teaching about religion is fine and, in fact, is necessary. Until such time as people stop believing in gods then children should be given a dispassionate overview of the beliefs of all major religions. Enlightened discussion about the existence of God, morality and ethics should be encouraged.

3. Teaching Religion as Scientific Fact. This should never, ever happen. This kind of wilful indoctrination of children with fallacious views is, as Richard recognises, tantamount to child abuse. It is also counterproductive to the government's supposed aim of promoting science in the UK and counterproductive to society as a whole.

16. Comment #6958 by Anonymous on November 16, 2006 at 11:00 am

If we ignore this, we will have school science trips to places like this
http://www.benettontalk.com/2006/11/the_creationist_museum_follies.html

17. Comment #6969 by Steven Mading on November 16, 2006 at 12:00 pm

I'd like to point out to my fellow Americans who speak of wanting to do something similar here with our faith-based schools, that I believe there is a large, signifigant difference between what this UK issue is about and what we see here in the US. The UK faith-based schools this petition talks about, as I think I've heard, are government-supported schools that are part of the government's official school system. In the US there do exist faith based schools but all of them are owned and run and funded by private citizens and churches, not by the government. (I wanted to use the terms "private school" and "public school", but those terms have opposite meaning between the UK and the USA, so that would have added confusion.)

Therefore, because of that crucial difference, there is no parallel here in the US. This UK faith-based school petition is telling the government what to do with its schools owned by the public, run by public funds. By contrast, a USA one would be telling private citizens what to do with their own private schools, and thus it would be a lot harder to justify it.

I wish the UK well in getting this changed.

18. Comment #6976 by Randy Ping on November 16, 2006 at 12:36 pm

Steven, I'd like to point out to you that Bush's "Faith Based Initiatives" and school voucher programs ARE being used to funnel government funds to Faith Schools.

You wanna see a horrible example of how this is undermining the public school system, come look at The New Orleans public schools, both pre- and post- Katrina.

I think the best route would be to require rewal academic standards for science in them.

19. Comment #7002 by Aussie on November 16, 2006 at 2:46 pm

Interesting development here in Australia. Our PM, Johnny Howard, is pushing ahead with a scheme to introduce, and fund from the public purse, a system of school "Chaplains" to "counsel" students. Each school can nominate whatever religion they wish their own "Chaplain" to be. The peculiar thing is that it will not be possible to appoint professionally qualified secular counsellors as they are banned from the scheme.

Even more interesting is that Johnny appears not to be particularly religious himself, unlike Tony or George, but he obviously cynically sees a vote in appealing to the broad religious right whether they be Christians, Jews or Muslims.

I thought that here in Australia we were being spared the worst of the excesses of the religious mania sweeping the rest of the world. But now I see both our major parties desperately positioning themselves to capture the "Christian" vote.

When will this madness stop.

20. Comment #7005 by IANVS on November 16, 2006 at 2:52 pm

Richard, initiate such a petition in the States, & Jerry Falwell & Pat Robertson will call for the invasion of Britain.

21. Comment #7025 by Aussie on November 16, 2006 at 5:45 pm

Peter,

Thanks. That was a good article. I always felt the whole idea was unconstitutional.

I think that it is also unworkable. Imagine a school which is fairly evenly divided between Catholics, Protestants and Muslims. How could all parties reasonably be expected to come to a consensus on the religious affiliation of their school "Chaplain". This is a recipe for open conflict.

22. Comment #7028 by Aussie on November 16, 2006 at 6:06 pm

I wish Richard Dawkins would come over here to Oz as part of his book promotion tour and as a bonus he could catch up with his old mate Robyn Williams.

Prophylactic readings from TGD would go a long way in preventing us also slipping into the Dark Ages that appear to be engulfing the rest of the world.

23. Comment #7029 by john_mcc on November 16, 2006 at 6:17 pm

Sectarian Apartheid has no place in Education. I went to a catholic school. As a child I was segregated from my neighbouring children who lived in the same street as me. My brother was bullied by them after school (For some reason I never was), but still I barely even knew the other children who lived in my local area when I was growing up. As an adult people who do not know me or my opinions make assumptions on what my opinions are likely to be on Northern Irish politics, and even which of Glasgow's 2 biggest football teams I am certain to support, and in both cases they would be wrong.

I was lucky enough to have had an extremely good Chemistry teacher when I was at school. He was a man who had a great passion both for his subject as well as for our education. He was not a catholic. It was only in later years that I realised that his chances of promotion within that school was exactly zero just because of this totally irrelevant fact, and that is just wrong. Faith Schools reserve a great number of senior posts within the eductaion system for the adherants of that particular faith and therefore discriminate against both adherants of different faiths as well as adherants of none. Surely this should be illegal?

The school also tried it's hardest to be a taxpayer-funded Catholic factory. The priests in the surrounding parishes were all regular visitors and that we knew all of them by name and by sight is an indication of how much access they had to try and indoctrinate us. Even more insidious were the devout teachers taking time out from their useful subjects to talk about religion - Can anyone really assert that there is not a possibility of a case of Inappropriate Authority going on when a teacher who normally teaches a proper subject is promoting a particular Faith in a different class?

On the plus side, they did teach Evolution as a fact - even in RE classes. I can only actually remember one one hour class on comparative religions in RE - on Islam, Judaism, Hinduism and all of the Protestant versions of Christianity - all of them in that one class - versus 234525125255 different classes on Catholicism. I might be mistaken though and dozed through some others that have since slipped my mind, since even I am inclined to doubt that they can have been that negligent about teaching what other fellow citizens of this country believe.

I signed the petition in case anyone was wondering.

24. Comment #7032 by Aussie on November 16, 2006 at 6:50 pm

My oldest and closest friend was a "Catholic child" while I was a "Protestant child". He naturally went to a Catholic school and I went to a State school. I learned to regard him as somehow inherently inferior to "us" - a form of untermensch. I assume his attitude to me was reciprocated as a result of the "facts" that he was taught. The insidiousness of the indoctrination has caused this irrational attitude of mine to persist into adult life - impervious to any attempt at intellectual purging. And yet he is still my oldest and closest friend. I have just had to learn to live with the subliminal prejudice in much the same way as many people do who suffer from a constant ringing in the ears.

We used to go together to a dance run by his Church and it was great fun until the Catholic Intelligence Agency received a clandistine report that a protestant was attending the dance. One day we rolled up as usual to go in but a Priest barred my way preventing me from entering because he said I was not a Catholic. My friend was allowed in but not me. So that was the end of that.

Years later my friend drifted away from the Catholic Church and became a notorious and extremely successful womaniser - much to my envy. He admitted that this behaviour was somewhat inconsistent with his beliefs but proudly announced that his one concession to his religion was that he never used contraception.

How ludicrous can you get!

25. Comment #7037 by Anonymous on November 16, 2006 at 7:18 pm

26. Comment #7132 by Skeptic Jim on November 17, 2006 at 9:24 am

Aussie,

Dr Dawkins has been to Australia a number of times. But you're right. Someone needs to drop a reality check in the face of our idiot prime minister.

27. Comment #7135 by MB on November 17, 2006 at 9:45 am

There's also a slightly different petition available:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/nofaithinschools/

28. Comment #7212 by Jonathan Dore on November 17, 2006 at 5:34 pm

Emme: Yes, it does just apply to state schools.

Following up my earlier post on this thread, the .gov.uk site administrator responded very quickly to my request to enable Brits living outside the UK and dependent territories to sign the petition. I've now done so successfully, so if there are any more of you out there moved to do so, sign away!

29. Comment #7219 by Martha on November 17, 2006 at 6:18 pm

Billy Sands and the other dumb asses on this string think that religious "schools also lead to segregation and intolerance." Apparently the irony is lost on them as they attempt to abolish free expression and force everyone to think and study like they do.

The truth is that normal people in this world are trapped between religous fanatics on one hand and atheist fanatics on the other. Both groups are on a jihad to cram their righteous views down the throats of other people by force of law. What all of them, religious and atheist alike, need to do is go home, study the value of the First Amendment to the US Constitution, read something like www.quaqua.org/history.htm that talks about the evils of compulsory education for all of society, and then buggar off the rest of us so we can run our own lives and educations as we see fit.

30. Comment #7322 by Martha on November 18, 2006 at 8:16 am

John Bolch claims to be for "promoting tolerance, reason and free expression." But by definition, tolerance means allowing others to live, think, and learn in ways different from your own. Free expression means allowing other people to express and study ideas that other people consider incorrect, without fear of force or retribution. And reasoning is an exercise that derives conclusions from premises that are always, at some level, suppositional.

John's position, stated plainly, is "I will allow tolerance and free expression for people who think, learn, and reason in a manner meeting with my own approval. All other people shall be imprisoned, deprived of parental custody, fined, and/or otherwise sanctioned by police force if they refuse to comply with John's metaphysical view of the world."

Reason is a gradual, incremental, patient exercise in persuasion, not a campaign of brute force. This kind of militant atheism merely reinforces the militant religionist's image of the atheist boogyman.

31. Comment #7346 by saneatheist on November 18, 2006 at 9:30 am

I have just come across this video which I think was made in the early 90s, my apoligies if most of you have already seen it.
It lasts 1hr 50min, and they do labour some points a bit, but I still watched it twice.
I think it should be compulsive viewing for every class of 11 year olds.
The idea of the bible being the word of god, is compltely blown out of the water.
For those who haven't seen it, enjoy.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6410112404402873027&q=naked+truth
_________________

32. Comment #7366 by john_mcc on November 18, 2006 at 11:44 am

I've signed both petitions, but have yet to recieve the email to click the link in it for either of them.

33. Comment #7529 by Martha on November 18, 2006 at 5:54 pm

McGlashan, please do not give me a lecture about Americans by relying upon your own bigoted stereotype about them. As pocked with injustice and mistakes as American history may be, and it certainly is, America's history hardly overshadows the bloodletting in the UK and Europe (or other places in the world) over the centuries. And by the way, without the stupid Americans, you would be speaking German right now.

But perhaps that would suit you. Your aproach, not mine, is much closer to the Nazi Germany approach to education. In fact, if you read www.quaqua.org/nazi.htm, a very good page on a very good web site that is not my own, you will see your coercive approaches are very similar to the Nazis and the Kulturekampf. I hate to tell you this, but your idea has already been tried before.

By the way, when it comes to free speech, my tolerance runs to Communists, Nazis, racists, greenies, worshippers of the pink unicorn, Republicans, Democrats, and yes, even you. I would never presume to step between you and any child you might have, despite the possible benefit of starving the child of your influence, unless you were physically or sexually abusing the child.

It is disingenuous for you to say you do not support forcible abolishment of religion. If it is true that children ought not to suffer the impositions of their parents through "indoctrination," but be freed from their parents and intolerant religious influences, that rationale logically extends to schools and all other settings where children are raised. If religion should not be "forced" upon children in private or home schools, how can it simultaneously be appropriate to "force" such views upon children at church? Why can't you acknowledge the obvious, which is that if your approach was actually employed, it would purge all metaphysical views besides your own from the general population within one generation?

34. Comment #7675 by Martha on November 19, 2006 at 2:56 am

"No one is suggesting that children should not be taught that such mythologies exist, just that children be free to make up their own minds, when they are mature enough to do so."

John, "free to make up their own mind" necessarily requires meaningful exposure to multiple viewpoints. Teaching someone about a "mythology" presents a straw man, not bona fide debate (in much the same way that one does not go to an Evangelical Christian to accurately understand the thinking of atheists). Moreover, since you are really against discussion of religion at any level of education, except perhaps in a caricatured fashion, your pretense of open-mindedness is disingenuous.

This "freedom to make up one's mind" already exists for virtually all children as they mature in our modern society. For many children, it occurs in college; for others, when they leave home; for others, from business or the school of hard knocks; for others, from the television, internet, or other media.

Remember that it is possible for a tyrant to have many scientifically-accurate ideas. In the end, that only makes his oppression more efficient.

35. Comment #7741 by Anonymous on November 19, 2006 at 8:53 am

McGlashan, this is not "a question of state funding that is the difference," because you oppose diverse points of view in education even in an entirely private-funded home education situation. You want to tell people what they can do on their own time, in the privacy of their own homes, and with their own money.

I am afraid the German analogy does hold, because they democratically elected leaders to purge Jews, Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Gypsies from education in much the way you propose to do with them now because of their backward religious views. And you have it precisely backward about my stance on Nazis--people (including you) have a right to express hateful ideas, but they do not have a right to act on those ideas to implement an extermination. You have a right to advocate cultural genocide against religious people, but not to carry it out.

As I have some Scottish ancestry myself, I hardly need to be convinced of the many contributions of Scottish culture. But in any case, my travels have convinced me that people ought not to be stereotyped by nationality, and that there are reasonable, likeable, productive people to be found everywhere (though not in entirely equal numbers).

You also told Emma "This petition is about using democracy, that is not force. These schools do case seperation and trouble. They are not good for harmony." This is a rather dangerous position for an atheist to take, since most voters dislike atheists and have in the past been inclined to take away an atheist's children (which used to happen, http://www.quaqua.org/hurd.htm, which is why Quaqua decries oppressing athiests as part of its defense of parental liberty for all). Remember that from the perspective of the majority in most nations, it is the minority atheists who are causing the "separation and trouble" and should be suppressed through the very tactics you would now use to oppress others.

36. Comment #7766 by Anonymous on November 19, 2006 at 10:31 am

John Bolch, the issue is not whether some expression is more valuable or truthful than others, the issue is whether society will allow any person or group to have control over what is said and taught. What is the "final word" in science or medicine often is overturned based upon the efforts of some poor wretch who labors under the persecution of the scientific or educational (or religious) establishment. Science is very useful, but it cannot operate wholly upon "proven facts," only educated suppositions.

If you are not really against discussion of religion at any level of education, as you claim, please tell us when and where you would allow us to discuss it.

"With respect, I wonder whether you are falling into the trap of equating atheism with religious belief, in the sense that 'my religion is atheism'." No, I am saying that you are falling into the trap of assuming that any person can truly educate oneself about the world without considering different worldviews with an open mind and from original sources and bona fide advocates.

"In any event, the petition is not proposing that children be brought up as atheists, or 'oppressed' in any way, quite the opposite." How so? School is where children learn. And obviously, no law is of value if it lacks enforcement mechanisms to sanction noncompliance, and the sanctions would have to be brutal indeed to overcome the fierce resistance of religious dissenters.

Your approach of cultural cleansing by force of law necessarily has to rest on the same ugly premise that sunk Nazi Germany: it is OK to shove a few Jews into the oven in order to nudge society down the road of progress.

Society, like organisms, best improves through gradual, incremental, practical, free-flowing change.

37. Comment #7834 by Martha on November 19, 2006 at 3:42 pm

I think these three quotes basically summarize this discussion and the petition very well:

"But telling people what to believe is wrong and abusive. If you dont like that, tough."
--McGlashan

Well duh! Talk about ironic self-contradiction. Be polite to people, dumb ass!


"Some times you have to take away certain freedoms for the general good."
--McGlashan

Did you quote that from Hitler, Stalin, or Bush?


"If this makes the signatories 'militant atheists', then so be it."
--John Bolch

So be it. At least you can come to terms with the fact that you are on your own jihad. But then don't complain to the rest of us when religious jihadists retaliate in kind.


"Your weak approach would allow muslims to take away our freedom. Or do you want to be subjected to shia law?. . . . Did bush senior not once say that 'atheists are not patriots?'"
--McGlashan

So do you agree with Bush or not? Isn't your argument about Muslims the very rationale that Bush used to get into Iraq? The problem with men, atheist or religious, is that they get militant and think that they can solve the world overnight by shoving their willie at other people who aren't interested.

38. Comment #7837 by Martha on November 19, 2006 at 3:44 pm

Sorry, I meant four quotes instead of three. . . . there were more juicy bits than I remembered . . .

39. Comment #8472 by Jonny on November 21, 2006 at 10:57 am

I'm a product of a 16 year catholic education and while I enjoyed my school days I refuse to acknowledge that the series of rituals and propaganda that was thrust upon me served any real purpose. I inherited my religion and now I renounce it happily - may all children be granted the freedom of decision in future as not all manage to break free as I did.

40. Comment #13689 by MaineBarnard on December 19, 2006 at 5:37 am

There are stupid ideas in the world - this is just one of them!

Other Comments by MaineBarnard

41. Comment #15350 by tuibguy on December 30, 2006 at 3:39 pm

I wish that I could sign it, but as an American I can only wish that it has the desired effect.

Other Comments by tuibguy

42. Comment #26736 by elfinabout on March 21, 2007 at 12:15 pm

I like the traction this petition is getting - currently 12,055 signatures.

However, has anyone seen this?

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/forfaithschools/

It currently has 14,307 signatures. Why can't we be as bloody organised as those "of faith"?

This is the explanation, by the submitter, Jonathan Curry:

"Faith schools help to ensure that children develop mentally, physically, emotionally, spiritually and morally. As such faith schools ensure children are well placed to choose their own religious, philosophical and ethical beliefs. Schools should be places where children are given a full education, not centres where the spiritual and moral is excluded. Evolution and other scientific theories should not be taught as fact but instead along side other 'faith' views of origins. Supporting faith schools will provide children with a fuller education, parents with the choice of such for their children and help to promote a fully multi-cultural and peaceful society."

I... just don't know where to start with that.


As a reminder, the petition to abolish faith schools is at:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/faithschools/

Other Comments by elfinabout

43. Comment #31412 by robinpclarke on April 12, 2007 at 2:01 pm

I have a serious objection to this petition. I am a committed scientist who believes in evidence, and whose four published (and unchallenged!) theories all are built around a core of natural selection. And no one can be more revolted than myself at the thought of children being taught creationist nonsense as fact.

But people here are making a serious error in calling for banning of promotion of ideas they consider to be wrong. Don't you remember how Socrates was executed for supposedly corrupting minds? While I am sure the creationists are wrong, nevertheless one has to understand that we have to work to the practical political principle that your truth may be anothers' falsehood and vice-versa. The creationists could equally argue for banning evolution as though it were fact.

I therefore reject this petition. I'd also add that Catholic faith schools rarely succeed in indoctrination, not least because they promote questioning of the faith as much as they inhibit it. Indeed Christianity itself has wrongness of of authorities and rightness of lone heretics at its very Gospel core.

I call on all to dump this petition and go instead for one which more reasonably requires that teaching of creationism etc be allowed only in a context of also teaching that evolution and natural selection are the foundation of much modern science and technology.

Other Comments by robinpclarke