http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2937/Launch+of+Hindu+state+school.aspx

Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
project.

The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
temporary classrooms.

The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.

Steve Greene wrote:
> http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2937/Launch+of+Hindu+state+school.aspx
> 
> Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
> ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
> project.
> 
> The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
> reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
> temporary classrooms.
> 
> The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
> state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.

Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in 
the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 04:19:48 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
 wrote:

>Steve Greene wrote:
>> http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2937/Launch+of+Hindu+state+school.aspx
>> 
>> Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
>> ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
>> project.
>> 
>> The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
>> reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
>> temporary classrooms.
>> 
>> The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
>> state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.

>Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in 
>the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.

I'm not sure about Kali, the worshippers of that demon have not been
averse to a bit of thuggery throughout the ages.

I went to a school called Saint Joseph's and was brought up in the
cult of the Virgin worshippers. I can't see it being much different to
being educated in a Hindu or Muslim or Mormon or Lutheran heresy or
whatever environment. Personally I would have preferred to have gone
to a Rastafarian school as I consider a good puff of Ganja is much
preferable to a glass of plonk.

If you are going to allow one superstition to run a school, you have
to allow them all. The problem arises in having religious schools at
all. You either allow them all or ban them all and have secular
schools. In the absence of the Rastafarian alternative, I would go for
schools being secular.

Svenne

On Jun 7, 4:19 am, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Steve Greene wrote:
> >http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2...
>
> > Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
> > ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
> > project.
>
> > The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
> > reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
> > temporary classrooms.
>
> > The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
> > state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
>
> Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in
> the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.

That's not really the point - unless we should replace the Rule of Law
with raw pragmatism?

Svenne wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 04:19:48 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
>  wrote:
> 
>> Steve Greene wrote:
>>> http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2937/Launch+of+Hindu+state+school.aspx
>>>
>>> Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
>>> ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
>>> project.
>>>
>>> The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
>>> reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
>>> temporary classrooms.
>>>
>>> The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
>>> state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
> 
>> Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in 
>> the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.
> 
> I'm not sure about Kali, the worshippers of that demon have not been
> averse to a bit of thuggery throughout the ages.
> 
> I went to a school called Saint Joseph's and was brought up in the
> cult of the Virgin worshippers. I can't see it being much different to
> being educated in a Hindu or Muslim or Mormon or Lutheran heresy or
> whatever environment. Personally I would have preferred to have gone
> to a Rastafarian school as I consider a good puff of Ganja is much
> preferable to a glass of plonk.
> 
> If you are going to allow one superstition to run a school, you have
> to allow them all. The problem arises in having religious schools at
> all. You either allow them all or ban them all and have secular
> schools. In the absence of the Rastafarian alternative, I would go for
> schools being secular.

So would I.
There should be no state support for any religious schooling.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

From  Dirk Bruere at NeoPax , in uk.politics.misc on
Sat, 07 Jun 2008 04:19:48 +0100 : 

>Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in 
>the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.
>
>-- 
>Dirk

Still, you better watch out for that Shiva -- known as the creator and
destroyer.  Krishna is mostly a trickster that loves to hear his name, but
is sometimes mean.  Kali?  I have no idea.  Is that a nom de plume for
Brahma?

FACE

FACE wrote:
> From  Dirk Bruere at NeoPax , in uk.politics.misc on
> Sat, 07 Jun 2008 04:19:48 +0100 : 
> 
>> Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in 
>> the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.
>>
>> -- 
>> Dirk
> 
> Still, you better watch out for that Shiva -- known as the creator and
> destroyer.  Krishna is mostly a trickster that loves to hear his name, but
> is sometimes mean.  Kali?  I have no idea.  Is that a nom de plume for
> Brahma?

No - Kali is the bad one.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

On 7 Jun, 19:02, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax  wrote:

> FACE wrote:

> > Still, you better watch out for that Shiva -- known as the creator and
> > destroyer.  Krishna is mostly a trickster that loves to hear his name, but
> > is sometimes mean.  Kali?  I have no idea.  Is that a nom de plume for
> > Brahma?

> No - Kali is the bad one.

Like I said earlier, Kali devotees are not averse to a little
thuggery.

Svenne

On Jun 7, 3:09 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Svenne wrote:
> > On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 04:19:48 퍝, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> >  wrote:
>
> >> Steve Greene wrote:
> >>>http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2..> >>> Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
> >>> ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
> >>> project.
>
> >>> The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
> >>> reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
> >>> temporary classrooms.
>
> >>> The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
> >>> state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
>
> >> Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in
> >> the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.
>
> > I'm not sure about Kali, the worshippers of that demon have not been
> > averse to a bit of thuggery throughout the ages.
>
> > I went to a school called Saint Joseph's and was brought up in the
> > cult of the Virgin worshippers. I can't see it being much different to
> > being educated in a Hindu or Muslim or Mormon or Lutheran heresy or
> > whatever environment. Personally I would have preferred to have gone
> > to a Rastafarian school as I consider a good puff of Ganja is much
> > preferable to a glass of plonk.
>
> > If you are going to allow one superstition to run a school, you have
> > to allow them all. The problem arises in having religious schools at
> > all. You either allow them all or ban them all and have secular
> > schools. In the absence of the Rastafarian alternative, I would go for
> > schools being secular.
>
> So would I.
> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.

Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?

These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
any measure used. These are the schools that cause parents to engage
in all sorts of manipulations to secure entry for their charges.

Perhaps it might be better that parents be given a completely free
option regarding educational provision and a voucher to help or
provide funding of the school of their choice.

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 7, 3:09 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> wrote:
>> Svenne wrote:
>>> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 04:19:48 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Steve Greene wrote:
>>>>> http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2...
>>>>> Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
>>>>> ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
>>>>> project.
>>>>> The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
>>>>> reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
>>>>> temporary classrooms.
>>>>> The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
>>>>> state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
>>>> Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in
>>>> the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.
>>> I'm not sure about Kali, the worshippers of that demon have not been
>>> averse to a bit of thuggery throughout the ages.
>>> I went to a school called Saint Joseph's and was brought up in the
>>> cult of the Virgin worshippers. I can't see it being much different to
>>> being educated in a Hindu or Muslim or Mormon or Lutheran heresy or
>>> whatever environment. Personally I would have preferred to have gone
>>> to a Rastafarian school as I consider a good puff of Ganja is much
>>> preferable to a glass of plonk.
>>> If you are going to allow one superstition to run a school, you have
>>> to allow them all. The problem arises in having religious schools at
>>> all. You either allow them all or ban them all and have secular
>>> schools. In the absence of the Rastafarian alternative, I would go for
>>> schools being secular.
>> So would I.
>> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
> 
> Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?

Because religious schooling is ultimately divisive.

> These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
> any measure used. These are the schools that cause parents to engage
> in all sorts of manipulations to secure entry for their charges.
> 
> Perhaps it might be better that parents be given a completely free
> option regarding educational provision and a voucher to help or
> provide funding of the school of their choice.

Or maybe there should be no private schools, with all schools receiving 
state funding according to their popularity with parents. The better 
they are, the more money they get.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

From  Dirk Bruere at NeoPax , in uk.politics.misc on
Sat, 07 Jun 2008 17:40:30 +0100 : 

>> Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?
>
>Because religious schooling is ultimately divisive.

Would you describe yourself as a new-age one-worlder or just a
run-of-the-mill socialist?

FACE

On Jun 7, 5:40 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Mel Rowing wrote:

> >> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>
> > Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?
>
> Because religious schooling is ultimately divisive.

No divisiveness results from ignorance and low standards of education
not from the best.

Every piece of research ever done shows that children do better the
more involved their parents become in their education. That
involvement includes the choice of school. It also includes the wish
by some parents that there children should be educated in accordance
with the faith to which the family subscribes. It further includes,
probably for a lot more parents,  a wish that their child's school
should be conducted within the framework of some prescribed moral
ethos rather than a more nebulous agenda.

> > These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
> > any measure used. These are the schools that cause parents to engage
> > in all sorts of manipulations to secure entry for their charges.
>
> > Perhaps it might be better that parents be given a completely free
> > option regarding educational provision and a voucher to help or
> > provide funding of the school of their choice.
>
> Or maybe there should be no private schools, with all schools receiving
> state funding according to their popularity with parents. The better
> they are, the more money they get.

Why this obsession with compulsion? First if private schools were
abolished then very soon I suspect you would see Harrow II,Eton II,
Marlborough II, Rugby II  all the others opening on the continent of
Europe.

This again conflicts with that traditional right and freedom of
parents to raise their children in the manner they think appropriate.
The injustice comes not so much that private education is the
perogative of the exceptionally wealthy (actually that's not
necessarily the case) but that such persons through the tax system
have to pay twice for educational provision.

If, on the other hand, the parents of every child of school age were
in receipt of a voucher the this could be set aside school fees. This
would m move any more families in the private provision bracket.

Obviously this would be a fillip for the private sector that would
need to expand in order to cope. It would also be a fillip for the
state sector which would need to compete harder in order to hang on to
a group that is likely to include many of its more able pupils.

Just one last thing. It must not be assumed that all faith schools are
in the private (independent) sector. Most are in fact in the
maintained and aided sectors and do therefore receive state funding.

FACE wrote:
> From  Dirk Bruere at NeoPax , in uk.politics.misc on
> Sat, 07 Jun 2008 17:40:30 +0100 : 
> 
>>> Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?
>> Because religious schooling is ultimately divisive.
> 
> Would you describe yourself as a new-age one-worlder or just a
> run-of-the-mill socialist?

http://theconsensus.org/uk/introduction/index.html
We are Libertarian at the personal level because we believe that 
consenting adults should be free, amongst themselves, to indulge in 
whatever beliefs or activities they like providing they do not directly 
harm other members of society.

We are Green because we consider Nature and Earth to be sacred. We 
intend to minimise the damage we are doing and if possible repair and 
restore the world, establishing a balance between other life and our 
technological civilisation, utilising fully renewable resources.

We are technophiles because we believe that the only realistic way 
forward short of global disaster is by applying new sciences and 
technologies to our most pressing problems, coupled with the political 
will to abandon old and damaging technologies.

We are globalists in the sense that we believe our most pressing 
problems need to be solved on a global scale through mutual co-operation 
between nations - not through military adventure or neo-imperialism.

We are nationalists in that we believe that every major cultural group 
should have its own homeland and live under laws of its own choosing and 
in its own way. Also that the independent nation state is the last line 
of defence for the common people against exploitation by unrestrained 
Global Capitalism. We are 'inclusive nationalists' in that we believe 
that all of our citizens have equal rights and are equally welcome 
irrespective of race. So if you are looking for nationalists who are not 
racists, sexists or into euphemisms such as 'traditional values', here 
we are. Our nationalism is a celebration of our future, not the past.

As for elements from the Left, we believe our citizens should regard 
themselves as being members of the same family, entitled to whatever 
help is required to make the best of the lives of every member and to 
expect a contribution from every member. And that a responsibility of 
government is to try to ensure that our society is fair.

 From the Right we believe in individual responsibility to balance 
individual rights and that less government is best government – that 
governments should regulate, but not act as an employer or wealth 
producer. We believe in the impartial and firm application of the Law to 
protect our citizenry and their Rights, as well as a strong volunteer 
military geared towards self defence.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 7, 5:40 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> wrote:
>> Mel Rowing wrote:
> 
>>>> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>>> Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?
>> Because religious schooling is ultimately divisive.
> 
> No divisiveness results from ignorance and low standards of education
> not from the best.
> 
> Every piece of research ever done shows that children do better the
> more involved their parents become in their education. That
> involvement includes the choice of school. It also includes the wish
> by some parents that there children should be educated in accordance
> with the faith to which the family subscribes. It further includes,
> probably for a lot more parents,  a wish that their child's school
> should be conducted within the framework of some prescribed moral
> ethos rather than a more nebulous agenda.
> 
>>> These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
>>> any measure used. These are the schools that cause parents to engage
>>> in all sorts of manipulations to secure entry for their charges.
>>> Perhaps it might be better that parents be given a completely free
>>> option regarding educational provision and a voucher to help or
>>> provide funding of the school of their choice.
>> Or maybe there should be no private schools, with all schools receiving
>> state funding according to their popularity with parents. The better
>> they are, the more money they get.
> 
> Why this obsession with compulsion? First if private schools were
> abolished then very soon I suspect you would see Harrow II,Eton II,
> Marlborough II, Rugby II + all the others opening on the continent of
> Europe.
> 
> This again conflicts with that traditional right and freedom of
> parents to raise their children in the manner they think appropriate.
> The injustice comes not so much that private education is the
> perogative of the exceptionally wealthy (actually that's not
> necessarily the case) but that such persons through the tax system
> have to pay twice for educational provision.
> 
> If, on the other hand, the parents of every child of school age were
> in receipt of a voucher the this could be set aside school fees. This
> would m move any more families in the private provision bracket.
> 
> Obviously this would be a fillip for the private sector that would
> need to expand in order to cope. It would also be a fillip for the
> state sector which would need to compete harder in order to hang on to
> a group that is likely to include many of its more able pupils.
> 
> Just one last thing. It must not be assumed that all faith schools are
> in the private (independent) sector. Most are in fact in the
> maintained and aided sectors and do therefore receive state funding.

Northern Ireland

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

In article , Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
 writes
>> If you are going to allow one superstition to run a school, you have
>> to allow them all. The problem arises in having religious schools at
>> all. You either allow them all or ban them all and have secular
>> schools. In the absence of the Rastafarian alternative, I would go for
>> schools being secular.
>
>So would I.
>There should be no state support for any religious schooling.

Agreed, fairy tale belief systems have no place in a modern society,
especially in education, divisive in the extreme, and I mean EXTREME.

Mike

-- 
Michael Swift           We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.      
Kirkheaton              We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.    
Yorkshire                                       Halvard Lange

In article , Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
 writes
>Or maybe there should be no private schools, with all schools receiving 
>state funding according to their popularity with parents. The better 
>they are, the more money they get.

Or maybe every school should be of equal excellence, they should be
available to children who live in proximity to the school so hordes of
4x4's don't clog up the roads and children who live across from the
school gates can attend there and not have to travel 5 miles to the next
available one as happens where I live.

Mike

-- 
Michael Swift           We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.      
Kirkheaton              We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.    
Yorkshire                                       Halvard Lange

Steve Greene wrote:
> http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2937/Launch+of+Hindu+state+school.aspx
> 
> Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
> ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
> project.
> 
> The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
> reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
> temporary classrooms.
> 
> The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
> state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.

Oh joy, more division.

Joy division.

On Jun 7, 8:32 pm, Michael Swift  wrote:

> >There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>
> Agreed, fairy tale belief systems have no place in a modern society,
> especially in education, divisive in the extreme, and I mean EXTREME.

No the real extremeists are those who seek to deny others freedom of
belief and worship.

People who subscribe to the various religions pay their taxes just as
those who subscribe to none. Why should they be prevented from
bringing up their children according to their beliefs and their own
wishes.

Children are gifted to parents not the state.

Cork Soaker wrote:
> Steve Greene wrote:
>> http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2937/Launch+of+Hindu+state+school.aspx 
>>
>>
>> Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
>> ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
>> project.
>>
>> The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
>> reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
>> temporary classrooms.
>>
>> The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
>> state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
> 
> Oh joy, more division.
> 
> Joy division.

I prefer "True Faith" by New Order

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

On Jun 7, 8:04 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Mel Rowing wrote:
> > On Jun 7, 5:40 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> > wrote:
> >> Mel Rowing wrote:
>
> >>>> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
> >>> Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?> >> Because religious schooling is ultimately divisive.
>
> > No divisiveness results from ignorance and low standards of education
> > not from the best.
>
> > Every piece of research ever done shows that children do better the
> > more involved their parents become in their education. That
> > involvement includes the choice of school. It also includes the wish
> > by some parents that there children should be educated in accordance
> > with the faith to which the family subscribes. It further includes,
> > probably for a lot more parents,  a wish that their child's school
> > should be conducted within the framework of some prescribed moral
> > ethos rather than a more nebulous agenda.
>
> >>> These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
> >>> any measure used. These are the schools that cause parents to engage
> >>> in all sorts of manipulations to secure entry for their charges.
> >>> Perhaps it might be better that parents be given a completely free
> >>> option regarding educational provision and a voucher to help or
> >>> provide funding of the school of their choice.
> >> Or maybe there should be no private schools, with all schools receiving> >> state funding according to their popularity with parents. The better
> >> they are, the more money they get.
>
> > Why this obsession with compulsion? First if private schools were
> > abolished then very soon I suspect you would see Harrow II,Eton II,
> > Marlborough II, Rugby II  all the others opening on the continent of
> > Europe.
>
> > This again conflicts with that traditional right and freedom of
> > parents to raise their children in the manner they think appropriate.
> > The injustice comes not so much that private education is the
> > perogative of the exceptionally wealthy (actually that's not
> > necessarily the case) but that such persons through the tax system
> > have to pay twice for educational provision.
>
> > If, on the other hand, the parents of every child of school age were
> > in receipt of a voucher the this could be set aside school fees. This
> > would m move any more families in the private provision bracket.
>
> > Obviously this would be a fillip for the private sector that would
> > need to expand in order to cope. It would also be a fillip for the
> > state sector which would need to compete harder in order to hang on to
> > a group that is likely to include many of its more able pupils.
>
> > Just one last thing. It must not be assumed that all faith schools are
> > in the private (independent) sector. Most are in fact in the
> > maintained and aided sectors and do therefore receive state funding.
>
> Northern Ireland

And ?

Michael Swift wrote:
> In article , Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
>  writes
>>> If you are going to allow one superstition to run a school, you have
>>> to allow them all. The problem arises in having religious schools at
>>> all. You either allow them all or ban them all and have secular
>>> schools. In the absence of the Rastafarian alternative, I would go for
>>> schools being secular.
>> So would I.
>> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
> 
> Agreed, fairy tale belief systems have no place in a modern society,
> especially in education, divisive in the extreme, and I mean EXTREME.
> 
> Mike
> 


It's the 21st century and we're still encouraging the teaching of fairy 
tales as "fact".  It's appalling.

On Jun 7, 9:25 pm, Cork Soaker <Thunderb...@Hardy.invalid> wrote:
> Michael Swift wrote:
> > In article , Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> >  writes
> >>> If you are going to allow one superstition to run a school, you have
> >>> to allow them all. The problem arises in having religious schools at
> >>> all. You either allow them all or ban them all and have secular
> >>> schools. In the absence of the Rastafarian alternative, I would go for> >>> schools being secular.
> >> So would I.
> >> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>
> > Agreed, fairy tale belief systems have no place in a modern society,
> > especially in education, divisive in the extreme, and I mean EXTREME.
>
> > Mike
>
> It's the 21st century and we're still encouraging the teaching of fairy
> tales as "fact".  It's appalling.

Just as some encourage belief in socialism,  others capitalism, some
vegetarianism, some veganism, perhaps liberalism, humanism?  and other
isms. They are all beliefs. Each has its own doctrine.

You can "prove" none of them.

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 7, 8:04 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> wrote:
>> Mel Rowing wrote:
>>> On Jun 7, 5:40 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Mel Rowing wrote:
>>>>>> There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>>>>> Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay taxes?
>>>> Because religious schooling is ultimately divisive.
>>> No divisiveness results from ignorance and low standards of education
>>> not from the best.
>>> Every piece of research ever done shows that children do better the
>>> more involved their parents become in their education. That
>>> involvement includes the choice of school. It also includes the wish
>>> by some parents that there children should be educated in accordance
>>> with the faith to which the family subscribes. It further includes,
>>> probably for a lot more parents,  a wish that their child's school
>>> should be conducted within the framework of some prescribed moral
>>> ethos rather than a more nebulous agenda.
>>>>> These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
>>>>> any measure used. These are the schools that cause parents to engage
>>>>> in all sorts of manipulations to secure entry for their charges.
>>>>> Perhaps it might be better that parents be given a completely free
>>>>> option regarding educational provision and a voucher to help or
>>>>> provide funding of the school of their choice.
>>>> Or maybe there should be no private schools, with all schools receiving
>>>> state funding according to their popularity with parents. The better
>>>> they are, the more money they get.
>>> Why this obsession with compulsion? First if private schools were
>>> abolished then very soon I suspect you would see Harrow II,Eton II,
>>> Marlborough II, Rugby II + all the others opening on the continent of
>>> Europe.
>>> This again conflicts with that traditional right and freedom of
>>> parents to raise their children in the manner they think appropriate.
>>> The injustice comes not so much that private education is the
>>> perogative of the exceptionally wealthy (actually that's not
>>> necessarily the case) but that such persons through the tax system
>>> have to pay twice for educational provision.
>>> If, on the other hand, the parents of every child of school age were
>>> in receipt of a voucher the this could be set aside school fees. This
>>> would m move any more families in the private provision bracket.
>>> Obviously this would be a fillip for the private sector that would
>>> need to expand in order to cope. It would also be a fillip for the
>>> state sector which would need to compete harder in order to hang on to
>>> a group that is likely to include many of its more able pupils.
>>> Just one last thing. It must not be assumed that all faith schools are
>>> in the private (independent) sector. Most are in fact in the
>>> maintained and aided sectors and do therefore receive state funding.
>> Northern Ireland
> 
> And ?

The problem with Islam in the country could be vastly worse than that. 
And segregated schools play a huge role.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

In article <d186d141-156f-4baa-91fd-95b52fac506d@k37g2000hsf.googlegroup
s.com>, Mel Rowing  writes
>> >There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>>
>> Agreed, fairy tale belief systems have no place in a modern society,
>> especially in education, divisive in the extreme, and I mean EXTREME.
>
>No the real extremeists are those who seek to deny others freedom of 
>belief and worship.
>
Indeed, I agree with you, state indoctrination denies the right to free
thinking and faith schools are the root cause of this extremism.

>People who subscribe to the various religions pay their taxes just as 
>those who subscribe to none. Why should they be prevented from bringing 
>up their children according to their beliefs and their own wishes.
>
Again I agree, if they want indoctrination then they should pay not the
state.

>Children are gifted to parents not the state.

You've just blown your previous arguments.

Mike

-- 
Michael Swift           We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.      
Kirkheaton              We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.    
Yorkshire                                       Halvard Lange

On Jun 6, 7:19 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Steve Greene wrote:
> >http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2...
>
> > Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
> > ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
> > project.
>
> > The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
> > reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
> > temporary classrooms.
>
> > The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
> > state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
>
> Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in
> the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.

I do.

They are pretty inventive when they get upset and they don't seem to
like British people very much.

New Dehli Riots
http://www.gendercide.org/case_kashmir_punjab.html

Gujarat Riots

http://www.onlinevolunteers.org/gujarat/events/women_meet.htm
`
`In these genocidal attacks women and children were the main targets.
As
`the Citizen's Initiative report, The Survivors Speak, put it "Among
the
`women surviving in relief camps are many who have suffered the most
`bestial forms of sexual violence - including rape, gang rape, mass
rape,
`stripping, insertion of objects into their body, and molestations. A
`majority of rape victims have been burnt alive". The extent of
sexual
`violence and brutality witnessed during the carnage in Gujarat since
the
`28th of February is likened by many to the horrors of the post-
Partition
`riots in 1947."

South Asia Solidarity Group
293-299 Kentish Town Road London NW5 2TJ.
==
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/137/11.0.html

"Staines and his sons, ages 8 and 10, were sleeping in their Jeep
outside a church in the Orissa town of Manoharpur when a mob, led by
Dara Singh, attacked the vehicle, dousing it with gasoline and
setting
it ablaze. "Justice has been done!" some shouted. "The Christians
have
been cremated in Hindu fashion." According to some eyewitnesses, the
mob kept the fire going for more than an hour, threatening would-be
rescuers."
==
"Hindu fundamentalists chanting "Victory to Hannuman," a Hindu god,
burned missionary Graham Staines and his two sons, ages 8 and 10,
to death while they slept in their Jeep."
==
From: "Neil Kashmiri - Hindu Sikh" 
Subject: Re: The flight to India: the jobs Britain stole from the
Asian
subcontinent 200 years ago are now being returned
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 21:50:27 -0000
Message-ID: <bol5s1$loa$1@merki.connect.com.au>


=I hope India does not allow these bastards [Brits] to migrate to
India !
=The time is coming when reverse migration will take place. Perhaps
in
=India we can get our own version of skinheads and kick the Brits in
the
=head, they are so proud of doing that to others!

==

From kris...@ntlworld.com Fri Jun  7 14:41:37 2002
Message-ID: 
From: krishan 
=
=
= What do you call a white honky english barbarian doing a job?
= ASSLICKER
=
= krishan

==

From: "Marcus Aurelius" 
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.islam,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.i­­
ndian,soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Muslim family attacked in Perth
Date: 20 Dec 2005 20:01:07 -0800
Message-ID: 

= The "moderate" whites is an oxymoron.
= Genocidal instincts are hidden in
= the DNA of all those who spread out from europe and butchered the
= peoples of the rest of the world.

==
http://tinyurl.com/cudyl
= Here is how shylockian whites use "aid":"

http://tinyurl.com/7nw4b
= The bloodsucking shylocks of the world are not Jews
= but the whites of  the "west".

==

http://tinyurl.com/hs8xm

= MOST white females are quite hot and pleasant to look at from
= the
= outside (nice eye candy, hot bodies and hot faces), but they are
= "dirty" from the inside, i.e. - diseased from within, because of
= their
= slut behaviour in all aspects of their social life/behaviour.

==

==
From: use...@mantra.com SPIT.ON.A.BRIT www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai
Maharaj)
Subject: Re: playboy runs british immigration dept. (was: Re: No
nudes?
Playboy alters look for India)
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 09:42:45 GMT
Organization: Mantra Corporation
Message-ID: <20060103lIokU8373oDUWu@CdaU>

= I see that nothing has changed with
= these Brits <spit>; Brit colonial
= terrorists have spread their criminality,
= sexual perversions, disease, death and
= filth throughout the world for centuries.
=
=         SPIT ON A BRIT, PURIFY A BRIT
==

From: "Dr.Sahib.Pandit.Shri.Shri.Rainam Ji Maharaj Ji Ustad"

Subject: Re: Brits<spit> seeking our destruction
Date: 11 Jan 2006 02:21:50 -0800 >
=
= The Brits <spit> are a race of thugs,looters and
= mass murderers.
==

Etc etc.

Regards,
Max

> --
> Dirk
>
> http://www.transcendence.me.uk/- Transcendence UK
> Remote Viewing classes in London

"Max Muir"  wrote in message 
news:498c6343-a02b-417c-b669-633bdc2663c3@c19g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 6, 7:19 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Steve Greene wrote:
> >http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2...
>
> > Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
> > ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
> > project.
>
> > The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
> > reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
> > temporary classrooms.
>
> > The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
> > state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
>
> Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in
> the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.

I do.

They are pretty inventive when they get upset and they don't seem to
like British people very much.

New Dehli Riots
http://www.gendercide.org/case_kashmir_punjab.html

Gujarat Riots

http://www.onlinevolunteers.org/gujarat/events/women_meet.htm
`

The UK Hindu community have specifically distanced themselves from the 
Hindutva political movements in India,  who are the nasty ones here.


-- 
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time,  like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

On Jun 7, 8:18 am, tvaerska...@aol.com wrote:
> On 7 Jun, 19:02, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax  wrote:
>
> > FACE wrote:
> > > Still, you better watch out for that Shiva -- known as the creator and> > > destroyer.  Krishna is mostly a trickster that loves to hear his name, but
> > > is sometimes mean.  Kali?  I have no idea.  Is that a nom de plume for
> > > Brahma?
> > No - Kali is the bad one.
>
> Like I said earlier, Kali devotees are not averse to a little
> thuggery.
>
> Svenne

Maybe you saw the promotion of Ramesh Kallidai to the
Integration and Cohesion Commission.

"Ramesh Kallidai, secretary general of the
 Hindu Forum of Britain, who has been appointed
 one of the thirteen Commissioners of Integration
 and Cohesion at the launch by Ruth Kelly on
 Thursday 24 August has said that he is hopeful
 the independent Commission will make a real
 difference to the community agenda in Britain."

http://www.hfb.org.uk/Default.aspx?sID=45&cID=160&ctID=11&lID=0

You may recall that Kallidai is the gentleman
who tried to bollix the Royal Mail because they
released a stamp based on an Indian painting
showing one the Magi adoring the infant Christ
with a Caste mark.

Of the painting that so offends British Hindus
like Kallidai...
==

'Clearly no one had told Kallidai that this much-
 illustrated painting was once the prized possession
 of the great Maratha statesman and Hindu nationalist
 hero Nana Phadnavis (1742-1800), who included it
 with his most highly valued artworks in his own
 muraqqa (albums); nor that it now hangs, much
 admired, in the Chhatrapati Shivaji Museum in
 Mumbai, a city controlled by the Hindu nationalist
 Shiv Sena, none of whose citizens ever seems to
 have viewed the painting with anything except
 pleasure.'

New Statesman Christmas Essay
by William Dalrymple

==

The Royal Mail offered a humble apology and
Kallidai's threats won the admiration of Indian
newspapers, one of whom compared Kallidai's plan
to Gandhi's struggle against the British Raj.

http://tinyurl.com/a5cex
__________________________________________________

Brit Hindus revive Bapu's non-violent resistance

RASHMEE ROSHAN LALL

[ Wednesday, November 02, 2005 06:16:41 pmTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
LONDON: British Hindus are to take the politics of Gandhian non-
violent
resistance to a new level by sending thousands of unstamped letters
to
the country's postal department to "clog up the system".
It is part of an ingenious protest against Royal Mail's
refusal to withdraw one of this year's controversial new
mother and child Christmas stamps depicting a Hindu couple
worshipping the Baby Jesus.
__________________________________________________


I doubt this would please Kallidai.  Gandhi was
assassinated by a Hindu Nationalist because of his
conciliatory position towards Muslims.  If you
check out Hindu Nationalist Websites like
www.HinduUnity.com you'll see that the assassin of
Gandhi is venerated, not Gandhi himself.

I'm sure you are aware that our Royal Mail doesn't
just transport Christmas card; it carries medical
supplies (for cows, not just people), cheques,
legal mail, contact lenses, and lots of other
traffic on which it is not an exaggeration to say
lives depend.

Now, when a British person interferes with the
Royal Mail the penalties are quite severe.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/southern_counties/3161526.stm
"The penalty for interfering with Royal Mail is quite severe."
Thank you, PC Manning.

http://www.religiouswatch.com/nw05d.htm
==
"Hindus are being urged to attempt to clog up
 the postal service after the Royal Mail refused
 to withdraw a supposedly "offensive" Christmas
 stamp. Ramesh Kallidai, the head nutter of the
 Hindu Forum of Britain, has asked its members,
 and members of other Hindu groups, to send
 unstamped protest letters to Royal Mail's headquarters."

"He said he hoped this would cause a logistical
 nightmare worse than withdrawing the stamp.
 The group, Britain's largest Hindu body, is also
 planning a mass protest outside the headquarters."
==

Yet, Kallidai's plot to bollix the Royal Mail has
won him an apology from the Royal Mail, withdrawal
of the stamp, and promotion to the inner cadre of
our government's race advisors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramesh_Kallidai

Accordingly then, I feel HMG is decided to use its special
policy of feeding crocodiles in the hope that
they will devour us last.  Contemptible isn't it?

Regards,
Max

On Jun 7, 3:17 pm, "William Black" 
wrote:
> "Max Muir"  wrote in message
>
> news:498c6343-a02b-417c-b669-633bdc2663c3@c19g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 6, 7:19 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Steve Greene wrote:
> > >http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/a9652f62b499397ed08a17bc937c2..> > > Britain's first Hindu state school is being launched with a religious
> > > ceremony to mark the start of building work on the controversial
> > > project.
>
> > > The Krishna-Avanti Primary School will open its doors to the first
> > > reception class in September, but children will spend a year in
> > > temporary classrooms.
>
> > > The school, in Edgware, north-west London, will be the first
> > > state-funded primary for Hindus in the country.
>
> > Somehow I don't think any of their graduates will be bombing London in
> > the name of Shiva, Kali, Krishna etc etc.
>
> I do.
>
> They are pretty inventive when they get upset and they don't seem to
> like British people very much.
>
> New Dehli Riotshttp://www.gendercide.org/case_kashmir_punjab.html
>
> Gujarat Riots
>
> http://www.onlinevolunteers.org/gujarat/events/women_meet.htm
> `
>
> The UK Hindu community have specifically distanced themselves from the
> Hindutva political movements in India,  who are the nasty ones here.

Hi William,

It makes sense that they've tried to do that.

http://www.awaazsaw.org/awaaz_faq.htm
"The RSS is a secretive, hate-driven cult inspired by Fascist and Nazi
ideologies. In its branch meetings, RSS members pray to its first two
leaders (who both admired Fascism) and not to Hindu deities. The HSS
UK is a branch of the Indian RSS. Its members show allegiance to the
ideology of the RSS and the founder and second leader of the Indian
RSS."

http://www.awaazsaw.org/ibf/appendix9.htm
Vishwa Hindu Parishad UK (VHPUK)
"UK branch of the Indian VHP, also closely associated with HSS UK.
Works to promote VHP aims and goals in the UK. Closely linked to the
Indian VHP’s international section."

http://www.awaazsaw.org/ibf/appendix1.htm

It disturbs and saddens me to see not only HMG sucking up to
extremists again.
It seems as if while they are positively paranoid to prevent an iota
of that wicked
British nationalism showing its ugly face again, they boost and reward
the
expression of foreign nationalism as a matter of course.

= Prison officers who wore a St George's Cross tie-pin to work have
been
= ticked off amid claims the flag could be "misinterpreted" as a
racist
= symbol.

= Police tell man to put away his "racist" England flag

Etc etc.

It we are going to be a multiculture why foster one type of
Nationalism and
suppress another?  You might argue the 'wogs out' agenda of the BNP is
wicked and ugly, but it is the same agenda of the Hindu Nationalists:
i.e.,
eject unwanted foreigners (Muslims and Christians) from the Homeland
to found a Hindu-only state.

Regards,
Max

"Max Muir"  wrote in message 
news:d4676330-7907-46b7-b848-9fc8dc39e3b1@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 7, 3:17 pm, "William Black" 
wrote:

> I do.
>
> They are pretty inventive when they get upset and they don't seem to
> like British people very much.
>
> New Dehli Riotshttp://www.gendercide.org/case_kashmir_punjab.html
>
> Gujarat Riots
>
> http://www.onlinevolunteers.org/gujarat/events/women_meet.htm
> `
>
> The UK Hindu community have specifically distanced themselves from the
> Hindutva political movements in India,  who are the nasty ones here.

Hi William,

It makes sense that they've tried to do that.


"The RSS is a secretive, hate-driven cult inspired by Fascist and Nazi
ideologies.

-----------------------------------

You don't have to tell me about the RSS and the BJP and Shiv Sena and all 
the rest.  I live for part of the year in India.

----------------------------------

It disturbs and saddens me to see not only HMG sucking up to
extremists again.

---------------------------------

That's my problem as well.

There are perfectly reasonable Muslims in the Sufi community here,  the vast 
majority of the HIndu community don't believe this nonsense either.

-------------------------------

It seems as if while they are positively paranoid to prevent an iota
of that wicked
British nationalism showing its ugly face again, they boost and reward
the
expression of foreign nationalism as a matter of course.

--------------------------------

It seems to be a Labour Party thing.

They do keep backing the wrong horse as well.

They went to great lengths to placate the Muslim community in London for the 
mayoral election not realising that the London Muslims are now well 
outnumbered by the law abiding Hindus and Sikhs.  The Tories didn't make 
that mistake,  mainly because their candidate is married to a Sikh lady...


-- 
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time,  like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

On 8 Jun, 02:29, Max Muir  wrote:
> On Jun 7, 8:18 am, tvaerska...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > On 7 Jun, 19:02, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax  wrote:
>
> > > FACE wrote:
> > > > Still, you better watch out for that Shiva -- known as the creator and
> > > > destroyer.  Krishna is mostly a trickster that loves to hear his name, but
> > > > is sometimes mean.  Kali?  I have no idea.  Is that a nom de plume for
> > > > Brahma?
> > > No - Kali is the bad one.

> > Like I said earlier, Kali devotees are not averse to a little
> > thuggery.

> Maybe you saw the promotion of Ramesh Kallidai to the
> Integration and Cohesion Commission.

I'd worry if he starts wearing a yellow scarf.

Svenne

Mel Rowing  wrote:

>On Jun 7, 9:25 pm, Cork Soaker <Thunderb...@Hardy.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> It's the 21st century and we're still encouraging the teaching of fairy
>> tales as "fact".  It's appalling.
>
>Just as some encourage belief in socialism,  others capitalism, some
>vegetarianism, some veganism, perhaps liberalism, humanism?  and other
>isms. They are all beliefs. Each has its own doctrine.
>
>You can "prove" none of them.

Society exists. Capital exists. Vegetables exist.
Compare with "theism".

[fu - uk.legal]

-- 
Sleepalot   aa #1385

On Jun 8, 9:13 am, Sleepalot  wrote:
> Mel Rowing  wrote:
> >On Jun 7, 9:25 pm, Cork Soaker <Thunderb...@Hardy.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> It's the 21st century and we're still encouraging the teaching of fairy> >> tales as "fact".  It's appalling.
>
> >Just as some encourage belief in socialism,  others capitalism, some
> >vegetarianism, some veganism, perhaps liberalism, humanitarianism?  and other
> >isms. They are all beliefs. Each has its own doctrine.
>
> >You can "prove" none of them.
>
> Society exists. Capital exists. Vegetables exist.
> Compare with "theism".

Society predates socialism which owes its philospophy to Marx along
with others. It's antithesis capitalism owes its origins to people
like  Adam Smith. Vegetarianism/Veganism goes way back its roots being
in fact religious/ancient philosophy. Liberalism - Mill?
Humanitarianism probably has its origins in atheism and can be seen as
a response to the moral vaccum left when the religious dimension is
abandoned.

Whatever the case they all rest on belief, on blind faith, just like
religions. There is nobody anywhere that can sit down and argue any of
these ideologies from first principles through a process of logic.

We would not seek to condemn or belittle any adherents to any of the
above ideologies. There does however appear to be a element of society
that seems to go out of its way to condemn and ridicule religions of
whatever form.

If you want to ponder over existance then you will be aware that many
of the best minds in the world in whatever field,past or present, hold/
have held deeply religious views. This in itself does not argue any
case for or against religion in general. It does illustrate the place
of belief and ideoology in our lives. Despite what some of us would
like to believe, we are not completely or perhaps even predominently
logical beings.

On Jun 7, 10:51 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Mel Rowing wrote:

> > And ?
>
> The problem with Islam in the country could be vastly worse than that.
> And segregated schools play a huge role.

I would agree there certainly would be a problem if we were to treat
muslims fundamentally different to adherents to other faiths.

So, why should muslims (or any others) not be allowed to establish
failth schools?

I fancy you forward this as a reason why the state should insist and
impose secular education on everybody.

The problem with that is that the various churches, religions and
charities have been in the education business a lot longer than the
state and thus far at least as, if not more, successfully.

On Jun 8, 9:13 am, Sleepalot  wrote:
> Mel Rowing  wrote:
> >On Jun 7, 9:25 pm, Cork Soaker <Thunderb...@Hardy.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> It's the 21st century and we're still encouraging the teaching of fairy> >> tales as "fact".  It's appalling.
>
> >Just as some encourage belief in socialism,  others capitalism, some
> >vegetarianism, some veganism, perhaps liberalism, humanitariansm?  and other
> >isms. They are all beliefs. Each has its own doctrine.
>
> >You can "prove" none of them.
>
> Society exists. Capital exists. Vegetables exist.
> Compare with "theism".

Society predates socialism that is a philosophy based on the thinking
of Marx and a few others.Its antithesis capitalism centres on old
ideas brought together by people such as Adam Smith and John Mill.
Liberalism has classic roots in ancient Rome and Athens. Vegetarianism/
veganism in ancient religions and humanitarianism can be seen as a
response to atheism.

Just like all religions they are all ideologies based on blind faith.
Nobody can sit down and logically work out justifications for them
from first principles. Nobody has to.

The point is that nobody, I hope, would seek to ridicule anybody on
the basis of an adherence to any of the above. We practice tolerance.

With the "theisms" this is not so invariably the case. If you really
want to ponder over existance then you should be aware that many of
the finest minds in whatever field, hold/held deep seated religious
belief.

This does not of course either support or otherwise the case for
religion. It does illustrate that, contrary to what many people would
like or claim to believe, we are not creatures of total logic or even
predominently so.

On 2008-06-08, Mel Rowing  wrote:
> On Jun 7, 10:51 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> wrote:
>> Mel Rowing wrote:
>
>> > And ?
>>
>> The problem with Islam in the country could be vastly worse than that.
>> And segregated schools play a huge role.
>
> I would agree there certainly would be a problem if we were to treat
> muslims fundamentally different to adherents to other faiths.
>
> So, why should muslims (or any others) not be allowed to establish
> failth schools?
>
> I fancy you forward this as a reason why the state should insist and
> impose secular education on everybody.

So what if he does? Much as I hate to support "bonkers" Bruere, that's the only
logical, rational way. Rather than funding schools run by ever more bizarre
religions, the State should not be funding religious schools at all.

> The problem with that is that the various churches, religions and
> charities have been in the education business a lot longer

So what? Human beings have been dying of infectious diseases for a long time,
too - would you want those back as well?

> than the
> state and thus far at least as, if not more, successfully.

Only if you spell education "indoctrination".

-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On 2008-06-07, Mel Rowing  wrote:
> On Jun 7, 8:32 pm, Michael Swift  wrote:
>
>> >There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>>
>> Agreed, fairy tale belief systems have no place in a modern society,
>> especially in education, divisive in the extreme, and I mean EXTREME.
>
> No the real extremeists are those who seek to deny others freedom of
> belief and worship.

Nobody wants to do that.

> People who subscribe to the various religions pay their taxes just as
> those who subscribe to none. Why should they be prevented from
> bringing up their children according to their beliefs and their own
> wishes.

They shouldn't. But using your own argument, why should you get my taxes to do
it? I believe "your" religion to be a dangerous cult and want no part of it. If
you want to brainwash your children into belief in fairy stories, do it with
your own money and time.

>
> Children are gifted to parents not the state.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On Jun 8, 11:36 am, Huge <H...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2008-06-08, Mel Rowing  wrote:

> >> > And ?
>
> >> The problem with Islam in the country could be vastly worse than that.
> >> And segregated schools play a huge role.
>
> > I would agree there certainly would be a problem if we were to treat
> > muslims fundamentally different to adherents to other faiths.
>
> > So, why should muslims (or any others) not be allowed to establish
> > failth schools?
>
> > I fancy you forward this as a reason why the state should insist and
> > impose secular education on everybody.
>
> So what if he does? Much as I hate to support "bonkers" Bruere, that's the only
> logical, rational way. Rather than funding schools run by ever more bizarre
> religions, the State should not be funding religious schools at all.

What bizarre religions?

The one's that I have in mind have been around for millenia and have
millions if not billions of adherents. They are only bizarre to you
and those in similar mind.

You should also be aware that religious bodies that support or
maintain schools do so through very worldly material support that
relieves you the tax payer of that burden.

I have already addressed this point in my original intervantion. For
your convenience, I paste it here:

" > There should be no state support for any religious schooling.

Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay
taxes?

These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
any measure used. These are the schools that cause parents to engage
in all sorts of manipulations to secure entry for their charges. "

In short, as I understand the notion of liberal democracy, it is the
state that is supposed to facilitate the desires and ambitions of its
citizens and not the other way round. Subject to the imperatives of
law and order where there exists broad consensus the individual is
free to do as he damn well pleases and this includes raising his own
children and deciding what type and which school he sends his children
to.

There is no state imposed atheism in this country. That characteristic
of other more authoritarian regimes.

> > The problem with that is that the various churches, religions and
> > charities have been in the education business a lot longer
>
> So what? Human beings have been dying of infectious diseases for a long time,
> too - would you want those back as well?
>
> > than the
> > state and thus far at least as, if not more, successfully.
>
> Only if you spell education "indoctrination".

I refer you to my original intervention.

Of late our government has not been making representations to our more
prestigious universtities that they are not taking enough new students
from the independent sector. It would appear that those from the state
sector are under represented. Similarly the  government is not putting
pressure on the independent schools sector because it is failing to
maintain standards. Their complaint, despite the fact that the
independent sector saves the state some £2bn? worth of educational
funding, is that the independent sector does not provide sufficient
public access to the expertise and facilities that they possess.

On 2008-06-08, Mel Rowing  wrote:
> On Jun 8, 11:36 am, Huge <H...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2008-06-08, Mel Rowing  wrote:
>
>> >> > And ?
>>
>> >> The problem with Islam in the country could be vastly worse than that.
>> >> And segregated schools play a huge role.
>>
>> > I would agree there certainly would be a problem if we were to treat
>> > muslims fundamentally different to adherents to other faiths.
>>
>> > So, why should muslims (or any others) not be allowed to establish
>> > failth schools?
>>
>> > I fancy you forward this as a reason why the state should insist and
>> > impose secular education on everybody.
>>
>> So what if he does? Much as I hate to support "bonkers" Bruere, that's the only
>> logical, rational way. Rather than funding schools run by ever more bizarre
>> religions, the State should not be funding religious schools at all.
>
> What bizarre religions?

All of them. But my point was that if the State is prepared to fund religious
schools, then why should not the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster have
one? Scientology? Rastas/ Shamanists? Wiccans? Should they all receive my money?

> The one's that I have in mind have been around for millenia 

So what? So have coproliths.

> and have
> millions if not billions of adherents.

The "Eat shit. 60,000,000 flies can't be wrong" argument holds no water with me,
I'm afraid.

> They are only bizarre to you
> and those in similar mind.

Normally referred to as "rational".

> You should also be aware that religious bodies that support or
> maintain schools do so through very worldly material support that
> relieves you the tax payer of that burden.

Huh? State religious schools are funded by the taxpayer.

> I have already addressed this point in my original intervantion. For
> your convenience, I paste it here:
>
> " > There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>
> Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay
> taxes?

Can't you add up? Do you know what "hypothecation" means?

> These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
> any measure used.

http://www.learning-together.org.uk/docs/quotesPerf.htm

"Estelle Morris: . . . . With respect to faith schools, I am not aware of
anything in the Ofsted report that particularly highlights the performance of
faith schools. I have never made the argument that faith schools are by nature
higher performers than schools that are not faith schools, and I will not make
that argument when I speak later on the amendment to the Education Bill dealing
with that subject. The argument is a different one. I have always said that I
think that faith schools are confident in their value base, and there is often a
natural link between school and home that stands them in good stead. Equally, I
have always said that schools which do not have a faith base often have a strong
value base and similar links between home and school. Later, perhaps we can
explore more thoroughly than we should now some of the issues raised by my hon.
Friend."

[Commons Hansard, 5/2/02, col 767]

IOW, you're mistaken at best and lying at worst.

> In short, as I understand the notion of liberal democracy, it is the
> state that is supposed to facilitate the desires and ambitions of its
> citizens

Tell that to those engaged in the shooting sports.

> and not the other way round. Subject to the imperatives of
> law and order where there exists broad consensus the individual is
> free to do as he damn well pleases and this includes raising his own
> children and deciding what type and which school he sends his children
> to.

Oh, I agree. But that does not include inveigling the State to confiscate my
earnings and spend them on brainwashing children in bonkers fairy stories.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On Jun 8, 3:05 pm, Huge <H...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2008-06-08, Mel Rowing  wrote:

> >> Much as I hate to support "bonkers" Bruere, that's the only
> >> logical, rational way. Rather than funding schools run by ever more bizarre
> >> religions, the State should not be funding religious schools at all.
>
> > What bizarre religions?
>
> All of them. But my point was that if the State is prepared to fund religious
> schools, then why should not the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster have
> one? Scientology? Rastas/ Shamanists? Wiccans? Should they all receive my
> money?

With a couple of caveats.

First provided that the organisation concerned makes it’s financial
and/or material contribution towards the maintenance of the school.
This is the “as now is” situation.

Second is that the school itself can attract and maintain the support
of sufficient numbers of parents through the attendance of the
children in order to maintain its viability.

You are not the only payer of taxes. Parents who willingly and
intentionally send their children to voluntary aided and voluntary
controlled schools every day pay their taxes too. In the case of most
of these schools the voluntary component is a church, religion or
sect.

> The "Eat shit. 60,000,000 flies can't be wrong" argument holds no water with me,
> I'm afraid.

That fact doesn’t invalidate it one jot!

> > They are only bizarre to you
> > and those in similar mind.
>
> Normally referred to as "rational".

Perhaps, but only by self definition!

> > You should also be aware that religious bodies that support or
> > maintain schools do so through very worldly material support that
> > relieves you the tax payer of that burden.
>
> Huh? State religious schools are funded by the taxpayer.

I think you should be aware as to what constitutes a voluntary state
school.

Voluntary schools

There are two types of voluntary schools:-

controlled
aided.

Voluntary controlled schools

A voluntary controlled school can also be called a religious or faith
school.

In a voluntary controlled school:

the land and buildings are owned by a charity, often a religious
organisation such as a church

the charity appoints some of the members of the governing body, but
the local education authority is responsible for running the school

the school is funded by the local education authority (Education and
Library Board in Northern Ireland)

the local education authority employs the staff

the local education authority provides support services

the pupils have to follow the national curriculum

the admissions policy is usually determined and administered by the
local education authority.

Voluntary aided schools

Voluntary aided schools are usually called religious schools or faith
schools. In a voluntary aided school:-

the land and buildings are normally owned by a charity, often a
religious organisation such as a church, but the governing body is
responsible for running the school

the school is funded partly by the local education authority
(Education and Library Board in Northern Ireland), partly by the
governing body and partly by the charity

the governing body employs the staff

the local education authority provides support services

the pupils have to follow the national curriculum

the admissions policy is determined and administered by the governors
in consultation with the local education authority and other relevant
schools in the area.

http://tinyurl.com/5uqk5e

> > I have already addressed this point in my original intervantion. For
> > your convenience, I paste it here:
>
> > " > There should be no state support for any religious schooling.
>
> > Why? Don't parents who send their children to faith schools pay
> > taxes?
>
> Can't you add up? Do you know what "hypothecation" means?

Of course I do and if I didn’t I certainly would by now! I fail to see
its relevance here.

> > These are the schools that are oversubscribed, that perform best by
> > any measure used.
>
> http://www.learning-together.org.uk/docs/quotesPerf.htm
>
> "Estelle Morris: . . . . With respect to faith schools, I am not aware of
> anything in the Ofsted report that particularly highlights the performance of
> faith schools. I have never made the argument that faith schools are by nature
> higher performers than schools that are not faith schools, and I will not make
> that argument when I speak later on the amendment to the Education Bill dealing
> with that subject. The argument is a different one. I have always said that I
> think that faith schools are confident in their value base, and there is often a
> natural link between school and home that stands them in good stead. Equally, I
> have always said that schools which do not have a faith base often have a strong
> value base and similar links between home and school. Later, perhaps we can
> explore more thoroughly than we should now some of the issues raised by my hon.
> Friend."
>
> [Commons Hansard, 5/2/02, col 767]
>
> IOW, you're mistaken at best and lying at worst.



 Ms Morris is in effect stating the blindingly obvious.

There is no good reason why a faith school should perform any better
than a non-Faith school. At the same time I would suggest that if she
analyses other data provided by OFSTED she will find that faith
schools are poorly represented amongst the lists of “failing” schools”More important is her alternative argument to the implied proposition
that I will endeavour to simplify.

There are good non-faith schools, of course there are and a good
school is a good school faith or not.

However, there is a tendency in faith schools to place higher emphasis
and insistence on conventional moral values. That does not I hope
imply that other schools are centres of anarchy. Most are not. In
individual cases there may be little or no difference in this
respect.  However, where there are, there will be less emphasis and
the school may well be more accommodating and indeed tolerant with
respect to certain behaviours. Indeed, because of the social
circumstances of the children in its care it May well have to be.

Conscientious parents are conscious of this which brings me to Ms
Morris’ second point with regard to the strength of links between home
and school which is the primary reason why I might attempt to
manipulate the system so as to ensure that my child ended up in a
favoured school that attracted pupils rather than merely took what a
given catchment area offered.

A large or certainly significant element of the pupils in a faith
school are there because that is exactly where their parents want them
to be and often have moved heaven and earth to get them there. The
children come from homes where the question of the children’s
education sits higher up the list of priorities. These parents will
willingly buy the uniform. Will always be present at public events,
will take an interest in what the kids are doing, and will compete for
positions on governing boards and PTA. This enthusiasm diffuses down
to the kids and sideways to the other kids.

In a nutshell it’s why some schools perform better than others.


> > state that is supposed to facilitate the desires and ambitions of its
> > citizens
>
> Tell that to those engaged in the shooting sports.

I used the words “broad consensus” and not “total consensus”.

> > and not the other way round. Subject to the imperatives of
> > law and order where there exists broad consensus the individual is

> > children and deciding what type and which school he sends his children
> > to.
>
> Oh, I agree. But that does not include inveigling the State to confiscate my
> earnings and spend them on brainwashing children in bonkers fairy stories.There’s no “inveigling” about it! The state openly and unashamedly
“confiscates” your earnings. The real injustice comes about when
individuals make their own provision with regard to education yet get
not one penny in relief or assistance.

Likewise with respect to health treatment.

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 8, 3:05 pm, Huge <H...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2008-06-08, Mel Rowing  wrote:
> 
>>>> Much as I hate to support "bonkers" Bruere, that's the only
>>>> logical, rational way. Rather than funding schools run by ever more bizarre
>>>> religions, the State should not be funding religious schools at all.
>>> What bizarre religions?
>> All of them. But my point was that if the State is prepared to fund religious
>> schools, then why should not the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster have
>> one? Scientology? Rastas/ Shamanists? Wiccans? Should they all receive my
>> money?
> 
> With a couple of caveats.
> 
> First provided that the organisation concerned makes it’s financial
> and/or material contribution towards the maintenance of the school.
> This is the “as now is” situation.
> 
> Second is that the school itself can attract and maintain the support
> of sufficient numbers of parents through the attendance of the
> children in order to maintain its viability.
> 
> You are not the only payer of taxes. Parents who willingly and
> intentionally send their children to voluntary aided and voluntary
> controlled schools every day pay their taxes too. In the case of most
> of these schools the voluntary component is a church, religion or
> sect.

The tax argument is a non-sequitur. We all pay taxes towards things we 
do not like or do not get. The state already decides what is in the best 
collective interest.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

On Jun 8, 7:03 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Mel Rowing wrote:

> The tax argument is a non-sequitur. We all pay taxes towards things we
> do not like or do not get. The state already decides what is in the best
> collective interest.

That is of course a point of view.

However, unless and until the state recognises the fundamental right
of parents to rear and provide education for their own children then
we shall continue with an system that can never be totally fair but
can be more unfair than it need be in that it denies access to a
greater number of children to a system that either is or is perceived
to be the best provision available.

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 8, 7:03 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> wrote:
>> Mel Rowing wrote:
> 
>> The tax argument is a non-sequitur. We all pay taxes towards things we
>> do not like or do not get. The state already decides what is in the best
>> collective interest.
> 
> That is of course a point of view.
> 
> However, unless and until the state recognises the fundamental right
> of parents to rear and provide education for their own children then
> we shall continue with an system that can never be totally fair but
> can be more unfair than it need be in that it denies access to a
> greater number of children to a system that either is or is perceived
> to be the best provision available.

You are confusing two issues.
The first is the right of parents to educate their children as they see fit.
The second is who pays for it.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London

On Jun 8, 9:13 am, Sleepalot  wrote:
> Mel Rowing  wrote:
> >On Jun 7, 9:25 pm, Cork Soaker <Thunderb...@Hardy.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> It's the 21st century and we're still encouraging the teaching of fairy> >> tales as "fact".  It's appalling.
>
> >Just as some encourage belief in socialism,  others capitalism, some
> >vegetarianism, some veganism, perhaps liberalism, humanism?  and other
> >isms. They are all beliefs. Each has its own doctrine.

> >You can "prove" none of them.
>
> Society exists. Capital exists. Vegetables exist.
> Compare with "theism".

Society predates socialism or any other ideology. Capitalism its
antithesis owes its origins   to 16th Century thinking later developed
by people like Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill. Liberalism owes its
origins to classical Greece or Rome. Vegetarianism owes its origins to
ancient religious ideas. Humanitarianism can be seen as an atheistic
response to the moral vacuum implied when the validity of religion is
denied.

They are all ideologies. None can be verified through the exercise of
logic from first principles.

Neither can one do the same with any religion which is not based upon
the logical progression of ideas but blind faith in which there is an
insistence within the doctrine.

If you want to ponder over existence then there is little doubt that
some of the finest minds that have or do exist, regardless of field or
discipline, hold deep religious beliefs. Of course this does not in
itself offer either support or otherwise to any religious notion. It
does tell us that perhaps logic and rationality doesn’t answer all
questions and/or much that some would have us believe, we are not
altogether or even predominantly creatures of logic.

On Jun 8, 7:28 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
wrote:
> Mel Rowing wrote:

> You are confusing two issues.
> The first is the right of parents to educate their children as they see fit.
> The second is who pays for it.

There's not the slightest doubt who pays for it and that is taxpayers
in general not religious taxpayers not atheistic taxpayers but
taxpayers in general. This being the case it seems to me that under
the present system any parent who wishes a faith based education for
their child can seek one even if their quest will not necessarily be
successful. Similarly if any parent desires a secular education for
their child then they too will be free to seek it (probably with a
greater chance of success)

It is not appropriate that either group should seek to prescribe for
the other.

On Jun 8, 9:13 am, Sleepalot  wrote:
> Mel Rowing  wrote:
> >On Jun 7, 9:25 pm, Cork Soaker <Thunderb...@Hardy.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> It's the 21st century and we're still encouraging the teaching of fairy> >> tales as "fact".  It's appalling.
>
> >Just as some encourage belief in socialism,  others capitalism, some
> >vegetarianism, some veganism, perhaps liberalism, humanism?  and other
> >isms. They are all beliefs. Each has its own doctrine.

> >You can "prove" none of them.
>
> Society exists. Capital exists. Vegetables exist.
> Compare with "theism".

Society predates socialism or any other ideology. Capitalism its
antithesis owes its origins   to 16th Century thinking later developed
by people like Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill. Liberalism owes its
origins to classical Greece or Rome. Vegetarianism owes its origins to
ancient religious ideas. Humanitarianism can be seen as an atheistic
response to the moral vacuum implied when the validity of religion is
denied.

They are all ideologies. None can be verified through the exercise of
logic from first principles.

Neither can one do the same with any religion which is not based upon
the logical progression of ideas but blind faith in which there is an
insistence within the doctrine.

If you want to ponder over existence then there is little doubt that
some of the finest minds that have or do exist, regardless of field or
discipline, hold deep religious beliefs. Of course this does not in
itself offer either support or otherwise to any religious notion. It
does tell us that perhaps logic and rationality doesn’t answer all
questions and/or much that some would have us believe, we are not
altogether or even predominantly creatures of logic.

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On Jun 8, 7:28 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax 
> wrote:
>> Mel Rowing wrote:
> 
>> You are confusing two issues.
>> The first is the right of parents to educate their children as they see fit.
>> The second is who pays for it.
> 
> There's not the slightest doubt who pays for it and that is taxpayers
> in general not religious taxpayers not atheistic taxpayers but
> taxpayers in general. This being the case it seems to me that under
> the present system any parent who wishes a faith based education for
> their child can seek one even if their quest will not necessarily be
> successful. Similarly if any parent desires a secular education for
> their child then they too will be free to seek it (probably with a
> greater chance of success)
> 
> It is not appropriate that either group should seek to prescribe for
> the other.

It is quite appropriate that one should lobby for, or against, state 
money being used.

-- 
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London