大象传媒

I'm not surprised none of the bombers went to an all-Muslim school. They might not be good for integration, but which is more likely to produce extremists: 600 Muslims or 1 Muslim among 599 others with no one to relate to spiritually?
Kelly's probably right - for once.

These so called "faith schools" or religious schools for thats what they are, are the first step in creating a separation in society, creating the "differences" and setting the dogma for confrontation in later life that we see now all over the UK and the world in general. Schools should be for the education of our children, religion should be totally separate from this. If all children were educated together like this there would be less "religion" and more tolerance in society and not the medievil mess we have today.

Well being as the extremists say its US and UK foreign policy and there is no way Bush and Blair are going to acknowledge that your doomed before you start.

Listening to Ruth Kelly dismissing the foreign policy cause is laughable and will get the government no where.

US and UK supported vast destruction in Lebanon and their going to say this is not a cause of extremism ?

Then the talk of Faith schols is even more laughable.

We need to vote these people out of power and then send them to another planet.

I was educated in an excellent state school with people of different social backgrounds and free from charge and religion in italy. (by the way, we studied academic subject). I am very grateful to them. The path that this government is taking on education is frightening. I wouldn't want children in this country, because I wouldn't want them to go to faith school, or having to pay 10000 拢 per year to a private school to have an undecent level of education, lady Diana or prince Haryy style. In the continent we pay more taxes, but at least we have free (in every sense) state education. The education system is fundamental in avoiding social exclusion. This government is making worse politics than Thatcher. But of course Kelly won't say a words on this, because she is from Opus Dei, who run schools and colleges to convert and tying with upper classes. Poeple here should wake up and look at what they are missing with this competitive and materialistic society: the gain is social exclusion, crime, and finaly religious extremism.
NO THANKS.

To suggest that church schools, especially primary ones, do not help integration is laughable. There have been church schools for centuries before people even worried about 'integration'. The issue ought to be should muslims be allowed state schooling for muslim only schools. On that matter I would say no. It is a minority faith in the United Kingdom that should receive no support in its claims for state finding for its schools.

Faith Schools - newsnight-24th August. A most interesting discussion but why is it that there is no mention of the many Jewish schools? Why does the debate always centre around Muslim and sometimes Christian schools and yet this important sector of our community is ignored?

Religion has no place in the state apparatus period, but the provision of state schools has always been a rediculous notion when trying to create societal unity.

Once again, Ruth Kelly gets put in charge of a project and the nature of looking at the negative influence of religion mysteriously gets forgotten about. Surely some co-incidence.

It is high time to modernise our school system and make it totally secular, where all are treated equally. Parents are at liberty to bring up their children within their own faith in their home life and after-school activities. Kelly and Blair's argument of "choice" is mis-guided, if schools were divided on a racial basis there would be an outcry, yet religion is pandered to. The only way to achieve an atmosphere of understanding and mutual respect is to integrate children from day 1. Note that all religions start educating their children from birth as this is when children's minds are at their most absorbent, so lets start encouraging mutual respect and understanding from the first day of a child's education. If we fail to do this, we will breed intolerance, suspicion, prejudice and mistrust - a perfect example is Northern Ireland, let us learn from past mistakes or we are all heading for more heartache!

"but the provision of state schools has always been a rediculous notion when trying to create societal unity."

explain please? where do we make our friends, and we get in touch with people other than our family or social ethnic religious political background if not at school?

this is in itself obvious: school means culture and knowledge, and culture is ultimately what defeat racism and prejudice.

Look at Lebanon or Egypt, where the social services are provided by religious militants, what kind of situation they are in.
whos should provide eductaion? Eton for the (super) rich ones, and charities to all the others??
state school work extremely well in the continent

The debate entirely missed the point. I live in a highly integrated area, and to the end of nursery level all faiths are happily educated together. Aged three, in order to enter the highly-rated schools ( which we surely want to be equally accessible to all faiths if we are to produce an INTEGRATED society with well-educated leaders, teachers, and doctors from all faiths) applicants have to prove regular attendance at the local parish church.

As non-Christians, we don't feel integrated, or that we have a choice. Any sense of integration that was so brilliantly fostered by the Sure Start nursery system, will end when all the muslims, jews, atheists and those opposed on principle to being forced to display of faith in exchange for education will have to take their chances in schools that have slipped off the bottom of every league table, and all the white bread Christians or those with parents prepared to get out of bed and go to the Marylebone Parish Church Express Service at 9.30 on a Sunday morning and fake it take their place at the best state schools in the area. How can the Canon allege that he welcomes all faiths at faith schools, when there are six children applying for every place and priority is given to practising Christians proven by a note from the priest?

The weight of disappointment on the shoulders of bright child who happens to wear a veil trying to get the best state education available in Westminster might be measured against the weight of a rucksackful of explosives.

This is why Faith Schools should be part of the integration debate.

I despair if the government do not stop this divisive existence of faith schools (of any faith). i am sure many are excellent teaching establishments, but please, is it so hard to recognise the glaringly obvious? let our children of all colours, cultures and backgrounds mix together in the class and in the playground so they grow up not ignorant but knowledgeable of each others diversity but crucially also what they have in common. to separate children for any reason, including religion is divisive. from there it is a short step to a 'them against us' mentality, suspicions, mistrust and misunderstanding between people who really are not that different!this is crucially important, it is shaping the future cohesion of our community in Britain. forget terrorism for a minute, this is just common sense for a community to be in touch with each other

"That is why in America, there has been a proposal to separate schol from state and have the schools compete for excellent students."

congratulations, and who decide who are the excellent studients? and where do excellent student come from? At what age you select an excellent student? (families, areas, I mean) who run the schools? Bill Gates? Please leave the US sytem where it is, in the US. There is no need of competition in school, only of quality. What a silly idea.
One more thing, my teachers were working for the states they were really good, even if they were not so well paid. The state school in the US are very well known to be a mess, as the health services as well. We have seen during Katrina what a wonderful society that one is..
Your ideas are simply dangerous.

Enoch Powell predicted this outcome in the 60's. He was then the object of scorn and ridicule. No one listened then and no one is listening now. He will prove prophetic.

Whether faith schools, or no faith schools, religious belief will still be protected and divisive. Societies have for millennia 鈥渢aught鈥� theism, both inside and outside schools, to people when they are most suggestible i.e. when they are children.

What is needed is protection for children against their suggestibility, not by schools 鈥渢eaching鈥� secularism, but by having lessons designed to inculcate the exercise of critical judgement.

Theism only survives because people apply less critical thought to religion than they do when they question whether their tea is too hot to drink.

The issue of faith schools is a red herring. There are a large number of schools around my home which are defacto Muslim schools because virtually no white people and very few non-Muslims live in the area. Out of 11 primary schools with a mile of my home there are only around 50 white kids in a total school population of over 4,000 kids, the vast majority being of Pakistani origin and having English as a second language if at all.

How does Ruth Kelly intend to break up ghettos like this?

And before anyone starts talking about 'deprived' neighbourhoods, it is important to realise that many tens of millions of regeneration money have already been poured into these areas, but they just become magnets of poverty from Pakistan, since there is a constant flow of new husbands and wives from that part of the world.

Pouring money into ghettos is not a solution, and Bradford proves that better than any other city in the country. All that happens is that the ghetto grows.

Half a century ago, no one questioned the fact that the "Leitkultur" of England involved adherence, however wishy-washily, to the Church of England. Minorities, such as Catholics and Jews were tolerated. There were not enough Muslims to even think about.

First: "Leitkultur". This does not mean "culture light" as in "Cola Light" but the guiding culture of the nation. C of E schools were part of that guiding culture in England. Since schooling has become more secular, this is no longer the case. Something must fill the vacuum, otherwise we get all faiths, on an equal footing regarding numbers of adherents, vying for cultural supremacy. That causes instability.

Faith schools carry on. But in the present inflamed climate of opinion, Muslim faith schools are singled out for censure. We have to ask ourselves seriously whether the existence of, for instance, concepts such as "taqiyya", "dhimmi", "caliphate", "sharia" and "the Ummah" within Islam make the teachings of Muslim faith schools different to those of Christian and Jewish ones. (If you don't know what these Arabic words mean, do a bit of Googling or Wikipedia study.) Does Islamic proselytising differ from Christian missionary work? It's not as simple as "all faith schools are equal". Maybe we need a situation where "all faith schools are equal, but some are more equal than others". This, to preserve the coherence of the nation.

What does the team think?

I guess saying that "faith" schools were excluded from the Commission's remit was Ruth Kelly's way to ensure no one talked about anything else! As a child of Northern Ireland, where almost all schools are church ones, and the few secular ones have been so oversubscribed, so much in demand that it has been decided to open no more (Yes, not much reported outside the province, but true), she well knows how controversial and divisive they are. So much for New Labour finding the best ideas and making them available to us all; rather the opposite.

I thought it was hilarious how Ruth Kelly, fresh from being Education Secretary, suggested that schools of different religions playing each other in competitive sports would be a way to foster cooperation and understanding. That and "twinning". And how most reporters ignored the obvious idiocity of the idea that sports teams of different religions would bring communities together. The two football clubs of Glasgow and their forever warring supporters for example. Rather the best idea for promoting sectarian loyalty.

She is terribly transparent, isn't she? Or is that just to me, from my first school days a non-believing child of nominally Christian parents in state schools where Christianity was taught and expected to be on everyone's lips, very unlike in the US. Not an integrating experience.

It makes me wonder how it must be to a gay or lesbian child in a Catholic or Muslim school, or an Evangelical one. Pretty hellish I imagine.

But the issues that are allowed the Commission, and the other restrictions on how they are allowed to consider them, are controversial too. Perhaps more so, and are largely being ignored to now. Including by Newsnight.

Why, for example, restrict consideration of the interactions and integration of "communities" only to ethnic / religious ones? In the most non-religious and inter-marrying society in Europe? Isn't interaction with the non-religious majority of any importance? Or, worse, the everyday women, or the lesbians and gay men whose lives are so objectionable to the leaders of some of these communities?

This concentration on "communities", which is just another part of the faulty way the UK government has always approached "multiculturalism", since it replaced integration as the official aim, ignores those of us who don't have places of worship, "leaders", community centres, etc., that can be easliy listed for something like a Commission to visit. But exercises like this Commission will be either meaningless or mischievous unless the whole population, and the multiple ways society is changing, are considered. But maybe it is just another initiative for appearances sake bacause they have no better idea.

Jenny,

Your statement about "almost all schools are church ones" is simply not true. State schools in Northern Ireland do not have an affiliation to any one church or denomination.

Whenever Ruth Kelly makes a speech ..about whatsoever ... my eyes glaze over & the mind shuts down!.... sorry Mrs Kelly I don't believe a word you say to us.. also betting you don't believe it either!!

The issue will not go away if and when Ruth Kelly resigns or gets kicked out. She is patently insincere and opportunist. But she's not the only one.

The British nation has got to define clearly what it wants with regard to integration - and create some policies to stick to.

As Islam is clearly attractive to some and is now a big minority in Britain, both the government and the rest of us have got to make some clear decisions about what we actually want. Britain cannot go on with a situation where Muslims vacillate on the knife-edge between integration into British society, which is fairly secular, and adherence to the idea of the Ummah - i.e. Muslims first. These two ideas ideas: the sovereign nation state, and an international brotherhood which comes before all else, are incompatible.

The Left has let us down. Firstly, they have sidled in a rightwards direction and ended up as that screamingly middle-class excrescence New Labour. Secondly, they have tried to square the circle between left-wing values and norms, all painstakingly built up over two centuries and: a Muslim intolerance of gays and many of our Western values; a clear difference in the status of women to that subscribed to by feminists and others; a blurring between the boundaries of state and religion; a blurring of loyalties between national values and international ones.

The time will come when Britain must define itself, before the BNP does it for us. It is dangerous to let things slide forever. And yet no one wants a dictatorial, centralised government, telling us what to do. This is a quandary.

What would you do to improve matters? Ban all faith schools? Stop subsidising them? Only allow them for certain religions? Suggestions, please.

Few appear to care, in our neo-agnostic society in England at least whether, for instance, "15% of our town is Jewish" or "that whole suburb is Christian". But Islam makes people worry. Solutions, please. Integration is surely better than the growth of any inward-looking sector of the population that shuns the rest of us, and feels just that little bit superior. How do we proceed?

I don麓t know what the dynamics of such a policy would be.... what worries me is that extemists are just as clever as liberals. In the German media it was recently reported that the neo-nazis were producing rock and rap music with a facist theme to be distributed by hand in school playgrounds in order to lure children to their cause, what is to say that similar material could not run rife
in a single faith school.

It is important to have a clear identity and know who you are in life but I think this is becuase state schools have no clear identity of their own. It is very important to young people to feel wanted and part of something bigger, something they will be a part of for the rest of their lives, public schools provide this, despite my quabbles I still consider myself an Old Ipswichian and
always will be despite having a rough time to some extent, but we are a unit. Faith schools could provide this clarity, especially if we see the introducation of old boys clubs in state schools.

I think the main problem with this kind of action is that of type casting.

Taking the German example again. German children are streamed from the age of eleven, they all do different exams depending on ability and it is actually extremely difficult for someone from a lowly school (as they are seen over here) to go to university although it is possible. I think this is predudice and terrible.

However, it may actually produce more confidence in one麓s own idenentity. A lot of people who I know who went to a school with lower academic expectations identify themselves as "rebels" whereas the those who went to Grammar school see themselves as "leaders".

I have always seen such social typecasting as a negative thing before. As an English teacher for adults I am constantly having to tell people not to make the excuse that they "can麓t learn anything" becuase they went to Hauptschule, but maybe for some people this is part of their
identity, it麓s just as an important of some people麓s happiness to say "I麓m dumb" as for someone else to want to be "the best". Even though the down side of it is people may accept these groupings without being true to what they really are.

This is very simplified but perhaps the same is important to some people to say "I麓m a muslim, so be careful" as "I麓m a christian and I love everyone". This doesn麓t mean that people can麓t live in harmony. Maybe single faith schools could help produce stable group identities
for people that society will find more digestable. Rather than politicias being very careful not to produce any sort of identity it should be embraced.

Just wanted to make it clear that I deplore descrimination, where identity leads to descrimination against other people it can be a problem.

Can麓t figure out whether they are two sides of the same coin however, maybe someone out there could help?

Integration must start in childhood when very often lifelong friends are made regardless of colour or religion. It is the adults who draw attention to any differences by excluding them from each other. Children see each other as human beings.

Jen,

You must not have any children...

Ceejay - I do have children plus grandchildren who live in West Yorkshire where there is a high multi cultural society.

Jen mentions that she has children plus grandchildren who live in West Yorkshire where there is a high multi cultural society.

The reality about places like Bradford is that it is regarded by outsiders as multicultural but the reality is that it is highly polarised where virtual apartheid exists.

Integration in such places is impossible now because the ghettos are so big and foolish ideas like linking schools is no answer. What would be the point of that anyway? To be integrated you have to be living side by side with people not in seperate communities.

In any case wasn't Mohammed Siddique Khan a perfect example of an well integrated Muslim many of whose schoolfriends were white?

So, after a century in which atheists and the antireligious butchered and ruined lives, produced not just the moral wilderness of communism and naziism but also capitalism, and built enormous weapons that killed tens of millions of people, whilst producing social workers who stood aside whilst society crumbled and integration that put people at each others throats, we should all blame religion? For goodness sake. Schools that teach humility, community, and the historical tradition within which an individual can root themselves and lift beyond slushy lazy ethics-lite into a moral tradition must be better than the present ones. If children are to be thrown together and--this is what will happen--encouraged to avoid all notion of meaning in case it offends someone else's delusions, they will have no limits, no respect for anything, and no identity to hold on to. They will become violent and prey to sexualised tabloid culture and the more spiritual ones will hate the society and attack it. The future will be one of hive media minds and bullying...hang on...hmmmmmm.

ceejay replied: Jenny, Your statement about "almost all schools are church ones" is simply not true. State schools in Northern Ireland do not have an affiliation to any one church or denomination.

What I said would properly be quoted as "where almost all schools are church ones, and the few secular ones have been so oversubscribed..." The vast majority of schools there are either Roman Catholic or Protestant and most are state funded. Protestantism having many sects direct affiliation with any one church is less usual than with Roman Catholic schools.

The issue is that the sectarian schools and relative lack of secular schools has not assisted the integration of the communities there, and yet it seems to be a model that the government is choosing to follow.

JPseudonym - My family do not live in Bradford but I recently read excellent extracts from the book by George Alaghia "A Home from Home" where he mentioned about Bradford being a prime example consisting of two entirely different communities. It is all very sad. We must respect each others cultures while at the same time getting along - and I still am emphatic that this should start in childhood with examples of tolerance and kindness set by the adults of both cultures. Treat others in the same way we would want to be treated ourselves.

Jen - whilst I am aware that George Alaghia has mentioned Bradford in his book, I doubt whether he has spent more than five minutes in the place and will have no appreciation of how things have developed. Bradford is way past redemption, because the 'ghetto' has been allowed to grow unchecked. It is now over 30 sq miles in size and growing rapidly with birth rates in certain areas being on a par with Pakistan, which is not really surprising given that 75% of Pakistani marriages involve importing an uneducated, non-English speaking spouse from Pakistan - usually Kashmir. That is the source of poverty, not lack of funding which is often cited as the cause of deprivation, isolation, alienation and lack of education and training. Inner city Bradford (ie the ghetto) has had more regeneration money poured in than any other part of the country and it has not made one iota of difference because this funding just attracts more poverty. The place is still a ghetto, where only one group of people feel as though they belong.

To Ray Scott,

The arguement with not alowing headress is that it is speaks for school uniform. The women in my family all speak for it becuase you are never in competition with each other over what you wear.

The problem is that there is a great diversity of what we English people see as English that there wasn麓t even when I was at primary school in London in the eighties.

Many people are in between what is traditionally regarded as English and their traditional culture. I know for example that Turks in Germany are seen as Turks whereas in Turkey they are regarded as German Turks. Many cultures see English second generationist as different to them, whilst in the West we regard them as being of their own nationality.

When someone has a multiple identity (not necessarialy nationality) it can mean that they use the strength of knowledge of both cultures to futher themselves or it can lead to problems of not clearly belonging to anything, of being the constant outsider. I consider myself to have taken on in part a German personality because I am in part German educated.

The question is am I an Englishman in a German overcoat, an Englishman, or a true mixture of the two?

What muslim people must surley question when they take off their headress for school is am I fully Pakistani?, am I English-Pakistani, do I only think I am English or Pakistani? as well as am I a true Muslim or only partly a muslim? It is really confusing for people not because the predudice from other English people but from others of the same nationality and religion, who regard themselves as superior advocates of the Pakistani/Muslim identity eg. those who live in Pakistan themselves.

In the same way I麓m sure there would be a few people in my school that would call me a Nazi for being a fan of the Germans and that my second football team is Germany, whoops shouldn麓t have said that, does mean that my second team actually win though. Likewise some Germans complain that my written language is not as good as a native speaker and would never regard me as ethnic German even if I changed my nationality. It麓s a toughy.

The formation and futhering of a unique and solid English Muslim/Jewish/Siekh identity is paramount to creating a stable individual that uses his cross cultural knowledge to his best advantage.

You and I made the choice later on to experience these things, young muslims in England face are confronted with identity questions every single day I am certain of it.

Hugh Waldock says:-

"The formation and futhering of a unique and solid English Muslim/Jewish/Siekh identity is paramount to creating a stable individual that uses his cross cultural knowledge to his best advantage."

If you welcome someone as a guest into your home, what right does that guest have to demand that you make changes in your daily routine to accommodate him?

The simple answer to that is that technically second generation immigrants are British Citizens. It is our job to care about all of our citizens not just those who have been british for generations.

As fellow citizens we should be looking to care fully for their needs. By labelling them as guests you are automatically distancing them rightly or wrongly from your view of what is a "Standard British Citizen", this distancing effect, as I explained combined wit the distancing of immigrants from citizens in their homelands creates a chrisis of identity, of not being one or the other.

Should we care, which I think was your point is entirely up to you. I personally see it as morally correct to adress this issue but there is also the point that it could contribute to the happiness of the minority communities and thus improve security. To disregard these points is a valid point of view, it麓s just not "nice".

The guest arguement is ridiculous of course becuase when you have guests you do have to take time out to wait on them, don麓t you? At least I always do, take them for a beer, cook them a meal, take them to a museum etc....

Apologies to all for the typos in 40.

Hugh Waldock says:-

"The guest arguement is ridiculous of course becuase when you have guests you do have to take time out to wait on them, don麓t you? At least I always do, take them for a beer, cook them a meal, take them to a museum etc...."

Sorry, but you are not culturally aware...

Take them for a beer?

Erm no - alcohol is forbidden.

Take then for a meal?

Maybe a full English breakfast, or some other traditional English fayre?

Erm no - pigmeat is unclean therefore forbidden.

Maybe some other meat? Is it ritually slaughtered? No.

Sorry - it is forbidden - it must be halal.

Our own Farm Animal Welfare Council has stated that ritual slaughter is cruel and should be banned

but no, our Muslim friends might take offence.

We are constantly left with the tail wagging the dog by doing too much to accomodate people and getting taken advantage of as a result.

I replied to Hugh Waldock's msg #41 yesterday and it has now been removed.

Can someone let me have a copy of it explaining why it has been removed?

I see msg 43 has been restored, so msg 44 no longer makes any sense. Is it possible to remove it?

msg no longer makes any sense

I did not mean necessarialy them, I meant in general when you entertain guests, it麓s just not a very good analogy to use in my opinion, becuase guests of all sorts have to be made welcome, when was the last time your best friend came to visit and you left him to his own devices and simply said "sorry not changing my routine for you, you麓ll have to make your own way around town" that麓s my point.

I don麓t know whether you know but cross cultutral awareness is huge in business, and I teach it, so I am aware of some of the differences that you highlight, but in business "if you want a good deal, you have to make the effort to accomadate your guests. It can make or break a deal" and here the deal is the security of the UK.

Hugh Waldock writes:-

[I don麓t know whether you know but cross cultutral awareness is huge in business, and I teach it, so I am aware of some of the differences that you highlight, but in business "if you want a good deal, you have to make the effort to accomadate your guests. It can make or break a deal" and here the deal is the security of the UK.]

I see, so the 'deal' as you see it is that we give them whatever they want and in return they will provide us with 'security' - ie they won't blow us up.

Too late for that, I'm afraid.

"It can make or break a deal" and here the deal is the security of the UK.]"

So what "efforts" should we make, Mr Waldock?

"I did not mean necessarialy them,"

Well, what then?

What are you prepared to trade away in return for security? Ever heard of Danegeld?

Dear moderators

What happened to my post asking Mr Waldock what accomodations he suggests in order to increase the security of the UK?

Why was my post removed from the MB?

Thank you

The debate about faith schools seems to be missing the central point about education, namely the acquistion of evidence based knowledge. In contrast all religions(and their sects) require the acceptance of unvalidated beliefs and hence are incompatible with the process of education, as well as being socially divisive.

The only policies that could improve social cohesion in this country are to put an immediate moratorium on new faith based schools and to initiate the process of incorporation of all existing such schools into a secular state or private educational environment.

Sincerely

Arthur Rushton

What is all this fuss about Faith Schools,
when the only Gods are man made Gods,

We evolved, and Gods are just Placebos, for the simple minded.

Can a faith school supporter explain to me why a policy of racial segregation in education is wrong, but cultural segregation is OK?