Do what the majority of British people want;Okay, so what are your views on dealing with something like this?
Shame of Britain's Muslim schools: Secret filming shows pupils beaten | Daily Mail Online
Taxpayers' cash should not be used to fund faith schools, say voters
Labour wants talks on teaching of religion as poll shows 58% of the public urge abolition or axing of state funds
Labour is calling for cross-party talks on how religious education is conducted and monitored in the state sector as a special poll for the Observer shows widespread concerns about the use of taxpayers' money to fund faith schools in a multicultural Britain.
The survey by Opinium shows that 58% of voters now believe faith schools, which can give priority to applications from pupils of their faith and are free to teach only about their own religion, should not be funded by the state or should be abolished.
Of those with concerns, 70% said the taxpayer should not be funding the promotion of religion in schools, 60% said such schools promoted division and segregation, and 41% said they were contrary to the promotion of a multicultural society. Fewer than one in three (30%) said they had no objections to faith schools being funded by the state.
Labour supports the continuation of state-funded faith schools and shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt said he saw them as "an important part of the educational landscape". But he said the recent controversy in Birmingham, where six non-faith schools have been put into special measures and a further five criticised following allegations of a plot by hardline Muslims to infiltrate them, had raised important questions about the relationship between education and religion in a multicultural society....
Taxpayers' cash should not be used to fund faith schools, say voters | Education | The Observer
How many pupils go to government funded faith based schools that it would be such a big deal?If the states withdrew funding to religious based schools in this country, the education dept would have to either buy all the schools anyway and run them as govt schools, or build a massive amount of infrastructure to cope with the fact that the religious schools couldn't afford to operate and all the kids currently in them would need schools.
In short, probably won't happen whether it should or shouldn't because it'd be a massive logistical nightmare.
In Australia there's **** loads if we're including Catholic schools. There'd be one Catholic school for every two state schools in some areas I reckon. And in the bigger cities there's a lot of Anglican and other protestant schools as well.How many pupils go to government funded faith based schools that it would be such a big deal?
Pope Francis: 'Evolution Is Not Inconsistent With The Notion Of Creation'
VATICAN CITY (RNS) Pope Francis on Monday (Oct. 27) waded into the controversial debate over the origins of human life, saying the big bang theory did not contradict the role of a divine creator, but even required it.
The pope was addressing the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which gathered at the Vatican to discuss “Evolving Concepts of Nature.”
“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,” Francis said.
“He created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment.”
Francis said the beginning of the world was not “a work of chaos” but created from a principle of love. He said sometimes competing beliefs in creation and evolution could co-exist.
“God is not a divine being or a magician, but the Creator who brought everything to life,” the pope said. “Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”
Unlike much of evangelical Protestantism in the U.S., Catholic teaching traditionally has not been at odds with evolution. In 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed there was no opposition between evolution and Catholic doctrine. In 1996, St. John Paul II endorsed Pius’ statement.
Some wondered if Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI wanted to change that when he and some acolytes seemed to endorse the theory of intelligent design, the idea that the world is too complex to have evolved according to Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection. Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn of Vienna, a close associate of Benedict, penned a widely noticed 2005 op-ed in The New York Times that said “Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense — an unguided, unplanned process … is not.”
Giovanni Bignami, a professor and president of Italy’s National Institute for Astrophysics, welcomed Francis’ comments, saying he had buried the “pseudo theories” of creationists.
“The pope’s statement is significant,” Bignami told Italian news agency Adnkronos. “We are the direct descendents from the Big Bang that created the universe. Evolution came from creation.”
Giulio Giorello, professor of the philosophy of science at Milan’s University degli Studi, said he believed Francis was “trying to reduce the emotion of dispute or presumed disputes” with science.
Francis made his speech while unveiling a bust in honor of Benedict, his predecessor, at the Vatican.
“Benedict XVI was a great pope: great for the power and penetration of his intellect, great for his significant contribution to theology, great for his love of the church and of human beings, great for his virtue and piety,” he said.
Pope Francis: 'Evolution Is Not Inconsistent With The Notion Of Creation'
i don't really trust this pope as a lot of atheists seem to do…from what i heard, he was a very conservative leader of the church in argentina and it is clear that he is trying to overhaul his image and the image of the catholic church to bring in more members especially from groups that the church had formerly opposed…you don't have to dig deep to figure out that there is nothing liberal or modern about what he preaches...This is nice, but to be consistent the Pope would have to say that God is equally responsible for both the failures and successes in evolutionary biology. Also, as an omnipotent genetic engineer he would also have to be equally responsible for both Congenital Blindness and perfect vision.
Unfortunately, the Pope's pronouncement creates just as many philosophical problems as it solves if one is to continue with the idea that God is all caring and all benevolent. Of course, if God has all the capricious characteristics of a god like Zeus then there are no philosophical problems, or apparent inconsistencies to contend with. Perhaps the ancient Greeks got the nature of God correct in the first place?
I made a long post but am deleting now RedHill. I suggested in it that Atheists shouldn't be allowed to critique God by calling him capricious because it is illogical to critique something that doesn't exist and is imaginary.Any cursory reading of the Old Testament reveals that God is indeed capricious.
I recommend these books highly to people who are interested in the nature and character of God in the Judeo/Christian texts:
A History of God - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
God: A Biography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia