Would you baptise your child - school

I never did, my wife never did, my son never did. We all went to faith schools of one denomination or another. Neither my Son or myself are Christened/Baptised although my Wife is Catholic.

It would be interesting to know what percentage do select this way.

Were you in the catchment area or were you trying to get into schools outside of your area?
 
All the more reason to ban faith schools, our children attended local C of E primary right through to senior level without ever a mention of babtism.

sounds to me like the head teacher is overstepping the mark because he/she is obviously religious and as usual wants to force it upon others.
Would I relent and allow my kids to be baptised by a bloke dressed up in in a frock whilst chanting medieval garbage ?

never, and I would definitely seek further advice on this
 
Is it though Dolph? We don't know. I could make an argument that said it wasn't and one that said it was, and without testing it fully we'd never know.

I personally believe that for us to deal with the problem of families where nobody works, having kids who have kids in their teens, and where nobody ever will work... If we allow them to be excluded from good schools, and we force them all together then the problem will continue. Even if we exclude them simply by requiring a couple of hours effort, that could be enough to separate the kids of good parents from the kids of bad parents.
 
Not by faith however, by social/education standards yes, solely on belief, not really.

Absolutely, but that is, in part at least, what religious schools are actually doing, because they were not subject to the same equality of outcome pressures as most comprehensives.
 
Is it though Dolph? We don't know. I could make an argument that said it wasn't and one that said it was, and without testing it fully we'd never know.

I personally believe that for us to deal with the problem of families where nobody works, having kids who have kids in their teens, and where nobody ever will work... If we allow them to be excluded from good schools, and we force them all together then the problem will continue. Even if we exclude them simply by requiring a couple of hours effort, that could be enough to separate the kids of good parents from the kids of bad parents.

The grammar school system was far more successful at giving those people opportunities than the current setup is, that's measureable by comparing those areas that still have grammar schools with those who do not.
 
Double standards much? Ban them but it was ok for your kids?

I've already explained this twice bunny. We can disagree (and we should) disagree with "faith" schools and vote for politicians who will get rid of them.

However it's not reasonable to single out your own kids for less than the best education you can get them.
 
Absolutely, but that is, in part at least, what religious schools are actually doing, because they were not subject to the same equality of outcome pressures as most comprehensives.


I actually agree with schools being able to select on ability, that way public money can be better targeted to those schools with a predominance of underachievement easier and more effectively.
 
The grammar school system was far more successful at giving those people opportunities than the current setup is, that's measureable by comparing those areas that still have grammar schools with those who do not.

I believe it is, yes. And I'd far sooner see them than white elephant ultra expensive acadmies or selective "faith" schools.
 
I've already explained this twice bunny. We can disagree (and we should) disagree with "faith" schools and vote for politicians who will get rid of them.

However it's not reasonable to single out your own kids for less than the best education you can get them.

Sorry who what now? You have already explained twice a double standard preceded set by a poster other than yourself?

Its like attending a fox hunt for the thrill of the chase, spearing the fox through the eye ball, then shouting 'Rabble rabble rabble ban fox hunting!'
 
Sorry who what now? You have already explained twice a double standard preceded set by a poster other than yourself?

Thats like attending a fox hunt for the thrill of the chase, spearing the fox through the eye ball, then shouting 'Rabble rabble rabble ban fox hunting!'

No, it just simply isn't.

It's like this though....

No parents let their kids walk to primary school. When I was a kid we all walked, it was safe. Now that nobody walks to primary school the roads get blocked, it's more dangerous for kids because of cars, it's unhealthy, it's time consuming. It'd be better if kids walked to school again. But I'm not going to send mine and have her be the only kid walking to school. Instead I'm going to keep dropping her off by car, but at the same time try to get it changed for everybody.
 
I actually agree with schools being able to select on ability, that way public money can be better targeted to those schools with a predominance of underachievement easier and more effectively.

Indeed, while ensuring that the underperformance and underachievement in those areas doesn't damage the education of others who are performing or performing highly already.

I'm also a strong believer that not everyone is suited to academic study, and we should stop trying to make it appear they are by reducing standards until everyone passes, because in the real world, employers don't make the same allowances. We need to be teaching people to excel at what they can do and want to do, rather than trying to fit them all into the same box.
 
I went to a C of E primary school (like you, best around), I was never baptised...

From what I'm told it went something like this:

Headteacher: So he is baptised I assume?
My dear Mother: Err mm hmm! (looking guilty)
Headteacher: (looking suspicious) You're positive?
My dear Mother: (now VERY sheepish and about to crack horribly) /nods weakly
Headteacher: (now with a big grin) OK then, excellent!

So the moral of the story is, as a blaspheming atheist with no morals... is it a possibility you could... circumvent the silly ritualistic requirement? I always assumed there was a register somewhere, but I certainly went to a school with that requirement and I have most definitely never been baptised!
 
I'm also a strong believer that not everyone is suited to academic study, and we should stop trying to make it appear they are by reducing standards until everyone passes, because in the real world, employers don't make the same allowances. We need to be teaching people to excel at what they can do and want to do, rather than trying to fit them all into the same box.

Well said that man.

I'm guessing that this is not the case for the OP then, which would make it different scenarios.

No he is thinking of moving hence the suggestion to move into the catchment area of the CoE school he is interested in and avoiding all the associated shenanigans he would otherwise have to go through.
 
Indeed, while ensuring that the underperformance and underachievement in those areas doesn't damage the education of others who are performing or performing highly already.

I'm also a strong believer that not everyone is suited to academic study, and we should stop trying to make it appear they are by reducing standards until everyone passes, because in the real world, employers don't make the same allowances. We need to be teaching people to excel at what they can do and want to do, rather than trying to fit them all into the same box.

Absolutely, craftsmen schools, engineering schools, trades schools, all supported by public/private initiatives.
 
Back
Top Bottom