Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Humanists hijack 'Trojan Horse' saga to denigrate faith schools


The so-called 'Trojan Horse' plot by extremist Muslims to infiltrate a number of Birmingham's schools is fraught with accusations, counter-accusations, recriminations and complexities. On the one hand, school leaders insist that they are properly educating their students - doing nothing but trying "to meet their spiritual needs as one tool to raise their achievement". On the other, Ofsted say they discovered in some schools evidence of bullying, nepotism, gender segregation, discrimination against non Muslims, racism and misogyny.

Tristram Hunt and Labour are using this bandwagon as evidence that Michael Gove's national programme of academisation is not working; that by severing a school's link to the local authority, he is removing a crucial mechanism for monitoring standards and intervention where necessary. And the British Humanists are using the saga as evidence that faith schools are all divisive, discriminatory and prone to religious manipulation by zealous governors and extremist teachers.

The Church of England's blog doesn't permit comments (which, knowing how much of His Grace's day is occupied with sifting abuse and fielding spam, is understandable). So, with the permission of the Church's communication's team, His Grace reproduces their post on this matter to gauge the tenor of response:

Birmingham, the BHA, Religious Education and Church Schools

The publication of the OFSTED report into 21 schools in Birmingham linked to the so called “Trojan Horse” affair led to a flurry of tweets and comment from the British Humanist Association (BHA) yesterday. The thrust of their contention - that the OFSTED report showed the damage done by the presence of faith schools in the education system – is a shaky attempt to build one of the BHA’s long held aims into the news agenda. The tweeting of a comment from the debate on the report was typical: “Great from @crispinbluntmp - there should be no faith schools, every school should prepare pupils for life in wider British society”.

Unfortunately for the BHA the facts do little to support their claims. The fundamental problem with the BHA’s argument is that none of the schools being looked into in Birmingham are faith schools.

Not one.

Of the 21 Birmingham schools investigated by Ofsted, 8 are Academies and 13 are local authority run. So the BHA’s argument that “the way to stop this kind of thing is to make get rid of faith schools” is not simply misleading, it is so far off the mark as to require special measures.

Perhaps one of the deeper ironies of the BHA’s attempt to hijack this issue for their own aims is that it is a perfect example of using a “Trojan Horse”; using the OFSTED findings as subterfuge for attacking the work of church schools not least in Birmingham itself.

At the same time that the BHA was going into overdrive about the OFSTED report, the Bishop of Chelmsford, Stephen Cottrell, was making his maiden speech in the House of Lords. His theme was education. In his speech Bishop Stephen noted that the diocese of Chelmsford has recently accepted an invitation to be a co-sponsor of the London Design and Engineering University Technical college where in addition to receiving technical and practical training, Religious Education will be given a high priority on the curriculum. The Bishop noted that the trustees of the college recognise that it is “impossible to understand and inhabit the modern world – especially in East London – without a critical appreciation of faith, and even more than this, a mature spiritual, moral, social and cultural worldview. Moreover, good religious education has been shown to be one of the best ways of countering religious extremism.“

In an interview after his speech Stephen Cottrell warmed to this theme saying “RE, perhaps in the past, might have been something which was just of academic interest. Now it’s of practical relevance to actually understand who is my neighbour, how do I love and understand and appreciate my neighbour…One of the things that most obviously contributes to cohesion between people of different cultures and different faiths is proper appreciation and understanding of different faith traditions”

The Church of England educates a million children a day in its schools. Even the BHA, in its more reflective moments, would be hard pressed to describe CofE Schools as hotbeds of religious extremism or indoctrination. The contrast between some of the findings in the recent OFSTED investigation and the experience of those educated at Church of England schools stand in marked contrast. As the former Chief Rabbi, Dr. Jonathan Sacks, wrote of his own experience of Church of England primary and secondary schools: “I went to Christian schools, St Mary’s Church Primary, then Christ’s College Finchley. We Jews were different and a minority. Yet not once was I insulted for my faith.”

The work of Church of England schools in Birmingham is evidence of Stephen Cottrell’s contention that the best way of countering religious extremism is to engage with faith and not banish it. For over a decade some Church of England primary schools in the city have had an almost 100% school roll from Muslim families, serving children from local communities in the inner city. Every Church of England School in the city educates children of all faiths and none. Meanwhile the Church of England’s only secondary school in the city provides an account of excellence and achievement in the midst of challenging circumstances.

St Alban’s Academy is the only state-funded Church of England secondary school in Birmingham and is the nearest secondary school to the city centre. The proportion of students known to be eligible for free school meals is very much higher than the national average. The percentage of students from minority ethnic backgrounds is over four times higher than the national figure and the proportion of those who speak English as an additional language is high. The percentage of students registered by as having special educational needs and/or disabilities is well above the national average.

The School’s most recent OFSTED report – from 2011 – found the school was “outstanding”. The report said “From exceptionally low attainment on entry, students leave with above average attainment and outstanding achievement.” The report further highlights the achievements of the school in providing: “outstanding spiritual, moral, social and cultural development that underpins students’ exemplary behaviour and makes an exceptional contribution to their excellent learning.”

This is the experience of millions of families who have been served by Church of England schools which remains a testament at firm odds with the doctrinaire dogmatism and opportunism of the BHA.

188 Comments:

Blogger Jay Bee said...

Never let a crisis go to waste.

The BHA has seized the opportunity to tar all faiths with the same brush and further their godless agenda. I don't agree that there should be no faith schools but I do agree with them that every school should prepare pupils for life in wider British society. What constitutes “British values” is going to become a subject for lively debate. Indeed, I am not sure that we would all agree on what British society actually is let alone what its values are. Some might say Britishness no longer exists in any meaningful sense having been torn asunder by the stresses of multicultural tension.

The Ofsted reports refer to Birmingham LEA schools which surely have a greater percentage of non-Muslim staff and governors than one would expect to find in Islamic Faith Schools. Bullying, intimidation and marginalisation of the infidel has brought the Trojan Horse scandal to wider attention. What, one dreads to imagine, is being taught and practised in Islamic Faith Schools. Are there deadlier “Trojans” lurking elsewhere?

10 June 2014 at 10:56  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Never thought I'd agree so whole-heartedly with a CofE press release but this one drives so many nails into the coffin of the BHA (& NSS) arguments that it is a joy to read.

The greatest strength of the CofE in our nation is it's education establishments. They really should grandstand them more ... their light shines like a city on a hill.

Alas, no matter how verifiably true the data or how convincingly communicated the arguments, the fact remains that nothing will persuade the fundamentalist bigotry of the BHA & NSS.

10 June 2014 at 10:58  
Blogger Athanasius said...

It would appear that the BHA's attitude is, "give me the boy until he is seven and I will give you the man."

10 June 2014 at 11:07  
Blogger Rasher Bacon said...

Good on the CofE - a simple and well-founded rebuttal of some opportunistic and mean sophistry by the BHA.

It's the sort of thing that should really get the BHA invited onto Newsnight for a few questions from Jezza Paxman. They're inflammatory tactics in a situation that really doesn't need any further stirring.

10 June 2014 at 11:21  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

10 June 2014 at 11:22  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Don't get sidetracked with the BHA's line of attack on 'faith schools'. They have no mandate to operate except to agitate; they dont represent anywhere near a considered majority. However, this is the issue that should have been the focus of the impact of the open door immigration policy of Blair and Nu-Labour. We are at last getting round to many issues that have been kept under wraps for too long.

Islam is a far more pernicious virus in British Society than anything that connects it to our traditional British Value of accommodation of faith schooling and or State schooling and total indoctrination of 'British' kids from a way of doctrines of a life/culture, that should never have been given the oxygen of these Isles.

I am an atheist,brought up in the Orange/Green dichotomy of Liverpool's docklands. As kids we played with Catholic kids but never really understood why we didn't all go as the pals we were to the same schools.

We had teachers who had served or endured the violence WW2. The Catholics had the same but their schools had pictures and spooky statues, nuns and priests as well as teachers. It didn't make sense to me then and doesn't now.

We we all British and still proud of that.

There was no big problem until the Muslims crashed the scene and started to dominate our lives with their endless petulant demands for entitlement to live here, in the same manner and culture they just left in dusty villages of the tribal areas of the two Pakistans.

Stuff big Atheism and Stuff Islam at one and the same time.

10 June 2014 at 11:22  
Blogger Ars Hendrik said...

Excellent – well done the CofE communications team for an exquisite skewering of the BHI's nonsense.

'Perhaps one of the deeper ironies of the BHA’s attempt to hijack this issue for their own aims is that it is a perfect example of using a “Trojan Horse”…' This sentence alone must have been a joy to write, definitely worth a lunchtime round at the Coach and Horses.

10 June 2014 at 11:33  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Bishop Stephen’s woolly liberalism leads him to the belief that ‘good religious education has been shown to be one of the best ways of countering religious extremism.’

Let’s put that to the test. In 2002, the very well-educated Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, at the time ‘the highest-ranking cleric in the Sunni Muslim world’, sermonized that Jews were ‘the enemies of Allah, descendants of apes and pigs.’ Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, also very well-educated and in charge of Islam’s holiest mosque, describes Jews as ‘the scum of the human race’, among other things.

The mysterious process by which a ‘proper appreciation and understanding’ of Islam’s extremism will ‘contribute to cohesion’ is clear only to the terminally woolly-minded. God save us from them.

10 June 2014 at 12:13  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

'Britishness' is being redefined throughout the UK in PHSE lessons by 11-13 year olds who have absolutely no knowledge of the Bill of Rights, the Act of Union and the Act of Succession.All they know of Magna Carta is that it is an obsolete document that is interesting but irrelevant.I have withdrawn all my children from these lessons; I do not want British to be redefined and demeaned any more than I wanted 'Marriage' to be. Such a shame - Britishness transcends nationalities and stands for a true commonwealth but quite frankly,if Britishness comes to stand for injustice and anti-Christ (aka Sharia) I have no choice but to reidentify myself as English.

10 June 2014 at 12:40  
Blogger Lucy Mullen said...

"So far off the mark as to require special measures"

Brilliant!

10 June 2014 at 12:40  
Blogger Father David said...

Well again it all depends on what Mr. Gove means by "British Values"; knowing the history of this island I cannot conceive that these values cannot but be influenced by the Christian religion.
I have just spent the entire morning in our local CofE Voluntary Aided School, taking the Assembly and then participating in a "Blink Visit" looking at the R. E. curriculum. I must say how deeply impressed I was by the knowledge and the depth of reflection displayed by the children who were interviewed. Without any shadow of doubt Church Schools with a Christian ethos are by far among the best schools that we have in this country.

10 June 2014 at 12:53  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

But C of E schools can only sustain that Christian ethos if Christianity is taught as the one and only truth. I am finding our C of E school is compromising in the name of 'tolerance and acceptance and loving everybody etc etc' so that the children think they can choose to lead a 'Christian' lifestyle for no other reason than that it is a nice lifestyle to lead and God actually wouldn't mind if you chose any other lifestyle.

10 June 2014 at 13:04  
Blogger David Hussell said...

I knew that C of E schools were good, but until I read this I had no idea as to just how good some of those schools really are.

This all looks likes like a classic own goal by the secular fundamentalists to me - a priceless blunder. They made their mistake no doubt because they were, in haste, rushing to capture the headlines whilst the issue was hot and newsworthy.

The only point that Blair got right is that the big issue of the 21st C is, and will continue to be religion - it is certainly not disappearing even in the post-Christian west. How strangely disconnected the intolerant secularists are from human nature.

10 June 2014 at 13:13  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

The Christian ethos excludes bullying which is why Dr Sacks never suffered anti-semitism at his C of E school....yet we have Welby proactively rolling out an anti-homophobic bullying campaign to all C of E schools. This is totally unnecessary and savours of an ulterior motive to me.

10 June 2014 at 13:25  
Blogger Guy Jones said...

@ Busy Mum

Your suspicions are correct with regard to the anti-homophobia campaign. First, identify a problem which does not exist. Then, on the pretext of giving support to 'victims' of this bullying grant access to the schools some very unpleasant characters (promoters of sexual deviancy) with very twisted ideas about human sexuality.

10 June 2014 at 13:44  
Blogger IanCad said...

Johnny Rottenborough @ 12:13

Boy! Do you ever have this right!

Pussyfooting isn't going to cut it.

Our liberal society is making a huge mistake with the kid gloves.

Education that is influenced by Boko Haram, ISIS, or the al-Nusra Front must be excised from our schools. Madrassas are fine in the backward lands that encourage such.

But in our country? No way!

Why, why, why don't more parents - or groups thereof - homeschool?

It's still legal here but the Eurocrats hate it. Won't be long
before it's outlawed.
Get it while you can.

10 June 2014 at 13:46  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

IanCad - you will be pleased to know I have just begun home-schooling one of my children - I am not exaggerating when I say I feel as though I have rescued my child from a lunatic asylum - and this wasn't a sink school - oh no - one of the very very best state schools in the UK. And I felt obliged to get out.

Guy Jones - thanks for confirming - but all teachers do is say 'But we have to do this, but we have to do that'...drives me mad....don't they know what being a free Brit is??!

10 June 2014 at 13:59  
Blogger Jay Bee said...

Busy Mum

don't they know what being a free Brit is??!

Not if they want to keep their jobs.

10 June 2014 at 14:23  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

JayBee - exactly - I can see it in their eyes sometimes - especially the older ones - they are terribly afraid. The younger ones simply do not know what being a free Brit is; to them I am just an awkward, pesky parent who presumes that God knows better than the Government.

10 June 2014 at 14:30  
Blogger Len said...

The Humanist agenda is becoming glaringly apparent as it identifies 'the problem' then supplies' the solution'..which the humanists proudly present....
We have lost so many liberties so many rights that we have to question what our national identity is and do we actually have one any more?.
Political Correctness has created a surreal sense of reality where thoughts are guided and channeled into 'the right way' of thinking....

10 June 2014 at 14:49  
Blogger Guy Jones said...

A quotation for you Busy Mum

Suicide and harassment claims are a Trojan Horse to get educators to open doors for homosexual activists.

'The Homosexual Agenda' by Alan Sears & Craig Osten

10 June 2014 at 15:03  
Blogger Nick said...

Busy Mum

We need parents to reclaim their children back from the state. This government is doing evrything it can to relegate parents to the role of breeders and feeders, leaving the state to indoctrinate them with contrived notions of equality and multi-culturalism.

Unfortunately, many parents are probably happy to do that as they don't like spending too much time engaging with their children in a meaningful manner if that gets in the way of their careers or their social life. It is ironic that Christian values, which helped found our state education system, can now only be taught by taking our children out of those schools and teaching them at home.

10 June 2014 at 15:15  
Blogger Anton Beiderbeck said...

LOL. Birmingham. LOL again.

10 June 2014 at 15:18  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ IanCad (13:46)—The way things are going, it won’t be our country for much longer. Between 2001 and 2011, the Muslim population increased from 3 to 4·8 per cent. A 60 per cent increase (if my arithmetic is correct) when the indigenous population isn’t even holding steady.

10 June 2014 at 15:34  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Trojan Horse?-Zinoview letter comes to mind.

10 June 2014 at 15:42  
Blogger Guy Jones said...

@ Nick

Which is why Ed Balls was so desperate to get the Badman recommendations put into law. He has threatened to do this if put in power again.

On the continent 'Schulpflict' and its variants renders home-schooling impossible under the guise of preventing 'parallel' societies.

10 June 2014 at 15:54  
Blogger Guy Jones said...

@ JR

Abortion, immigration and homosexuality: All designed to eliminate Western civilisation.

There is a movement that might provide an answer here:

http://bit.ly/1o9RiOp

10 June 2014 at 15:57  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

All - many thanks - re home schooling, if I am forbidden to do it, the only choice I will have is to tell my children that they have been lied to all day. I daresay the Muslims already do that via the madrassahs. When the Christians are forced to do it too, well, what a lovely feeling of 'community cohesion' there will be in our schools:)
Yes, many parents only too happy to yield up their children to the state but an equal number who are totally ignorant of what is going on.I am sure the big push on academic standards is to disguise the huge drop in morality; keep the parents happy with good results in Maths and English and they won't realise what's happening to their children's souls.

10 June 2014 at 16:05  
Blogger David Hussell said...

We certainly do need parents to reclaim their children from the state and reassert that they alone have the first claim on offering values to their children.

Well done Busy Mum !

It would be excellent if a movement for homeschooling could start up on a significant scale to reassert this right, rescuing the children from the indoctrination and painful PC of the schools, particularly the state ones, sadly.

I am even more disillusioned with Welby after his latest move, as mentioned on an earlier post. What does he think he is doing ? If bullying is a problem than tackle all forms and expressions of it, not just for one group, which can only be a thinly veiled pretext for another agenda.

10 June 2014 at 16:33  
Blogger IanCad said...

Congratulations! Busy Mum.

May God grant you the persistence and fortitude to continue in your great endeavour.

I've known several families in the US who have struggled with the challenge and most of them stuck with it. Certainly the ones who shared the task with like minded groups of other parents did.

One of the many bonuses of homeschooling is that the mums are well prepared to re-enter the job market when the birds are flown.

Oh! that there were more of you.
The education industry needs a real kick in the teeth.

10 June 2014 at 16:58  
Blogger IanCad said...

Johnny R @ 15:34

Again, you are so right.

Our girls are being trained not to breed.

I have two young relatives.
One has degree in history from UCL. The other in international development!!!??? from SOAS.

One works in a travel agency the younger in a dental appointments website.

No hope of marrying. Good Lord! neither can scarcely boil an egg.

There are millions like them. All will leave it too late.

They are so smart! They think that Mr. Right will come along just when they want; Ideally, just before they are no longer able to breed.
Then they will raise the most perfect brats the world has ever seen.

Gotta have a drink!

10 June 2014 at 17:12  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I'm really looking forward to a public debate about British Values.

10 June 2014 at 17:39  
Blogger starcourse said...

Excellent article.

But if we get a Labour Government they will probably abolish all Faith Schools.

10 June 2014 at 17:43  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

How baffling to the adherents of the Religion of Peace who only wish to do their children right at school. What we call Islamic extremism is mere Islam in action to them !

What’s so interesting about the goings on in Birmingham is that the government is taking such a hard line with these de facto Islamist schools. One can understand this approach being used in allied occupied Afghanistan, but here we are talking about British nationals, who happen to be muslims, being told not to interfere with the schooling of their own children. Very curious if you think about it. It is after all, the raison d’être for faith schools, at least the Christian or Jewish variety. To wit, it being appreciated that there is merit in it for society as well as the individual in bringing up a child in either of these two faiths, whatever the British Humanist Association people think.

So the PM extols them instead to adopt ‘British values’.

Now that’s an even bigger mission for him than ramming through Gay marriage. Where do these values fit in with Islam ? Are they not the very antithesis of what Islam is and desires ? Fortunately as it happens this time, we have Cameron who is quite obtuse as a communicator, having no finesse about him whatsoever. He’s now giving it straight (as opposed to ‘bent’ - cf SSM) from the hip.

Today, we bury multiculturalism. It had been ill for some time. It was left to OFSTED to switch off the ventilator, and in accordance with Islamic tradition, the body was put in the ground same day. The politicians that promoted the multicultural ideal are no longer politicians of influence. They are in disgrace, retired, or themselves deservedly dead. The rest of the waverers in the House will, through their inherent and all controlling own self interest, follow the PM’s lead.

Something good has happened this week. Something very good indeed.

10 June 2014 at 18:08  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

Now, what are we to do about the dejected. The immigrants who came to the UK who were passively informed by word and deed that they could bring their ethnic baggage with them, including the dirty items, and dress in it.

They came here as colonists. At the very least, we did nothing to dissuade them that was not the case. Now we are telling them that all along they were really migrating to the British way of life. That is going to disappoint. In fact, it is a miss-selling scandal of the highest order, is it not ? We are telling them now that their combined faith and way of life, Islam, is incompatible with the reality that is where they find themselves – Britain and the British.

These people have been duped then. Not all of them are going to be happy living among the kaffir in a free and tolerant Western society. Some are going to be angry about it, especially the second generation children, by all accounts, and we don’t want angry muslims about, now do we ? So, the UK is thus under an obligation to right this wrong where possible. No better way can this be achieved than by supported repatriation of the volunteering muslim back to his country of origin, or some other Islamic paradise of their choosing.

Let’s make people happy again, what !

10 June 2014 at 18:09  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

One does have a feeling that the initiative to de-Islamify we are witnessing goes far beyond the invigorations of mere Ministers of the Crown. It does occur that it comes from a much higher power, the establishment that is. Often said to be the people who own Britain, even if they can’t directly govern it. We are talking here, amongst others, of the secret services, the armed services, the higher civil service, and indeed, the Sovereign’s wishes. It would be beyond belief that HM would not have made her feelings known on say, the call to arms that young muslim men in this country have answered to go and fight in Syria. And, worse still, having defied death, are returned as experienced civil war fighters.

The Inspector does find Cameron easy to read. His abilities extend to little more than can be observed in an office manager, and it seems rather obvious that his call to Britishness this instance is him obeying an instruction to raise it.

Anyway, whomever it is behind it, it is not the stuff of the rabble who form this government. No time for it now, you see. There’s going to be 11 months of electioneering in due course, and elections are the Achilles heel of our self serving politicians. They don’t like that at all as it will consume their time and cause great uncertainty for their future. Still, as one said earlier, we should all rejoice that multiculturalism is now dead. But, here’s a cynical thought, we will only be sure when a bank holiday is named after an Islamic feast day. A leaf out of Adolph Hitler’s cunning there. He gave the German trade unions their long campaigned for additional day, then abolished the unions the following day. Heh, now that’s what I call sublime…





10 June 2014 at 18:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "Very curious if you think about it. It is after all, the raison d’être for faith schools, at least the Christian or Jewish variety."

Actually, that was my first take on it too. A poster was mentioned on Radio4 the other day in the context of this story, apparently saying (iirc) imams, parents and teachers need to work together to counter Western immorality. The implication was that this was related to religious extremism yet that's a common enough refrain here too. That Muslims want to indoctrinate children through schools according to Muslim religious, political, and social values is hardly surprising. That's what having faith schools is all about at the end of the day.

10 June 2014 at 18:34  
Blogger Uncle Brian said...

IanCad

One has degree in history from UCL. The other in international development!!!??? from SOAS.

Since around the time Edward Said published his book on orientalism, I thought we were supposed to have stopped using the O-word. And yet there it still stands, at the very heart of the progressive School of Oriental and African Studies. Has SOAS been given a special exemption from political correctness, and, if so, by whom? I think we should be told.

10 June 2014 at 18:39  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Guy Jones (15:57)—Homosexuality we’re stuck with but if immigration were put into reverse (good to see the Inspector expressing his support) and the long-suffering indigenes began to feel this was once again their country, I think the birth rate would recover pretty smartish.

10 June 2014 at 18:46  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I ate at an oriental restaurant in Edinburgh the other day. That's what it said over the door anyway.

10 June 2014 at 18:47  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

Well done DanJ0. One would like to take you further down that road, but we both know you won’t come. Not while you attribute the same merit or lack of it to the Islamic faith as you do to Christianity or Judaism. Your liberal leanings would never allow the distinctions between the faiths that a sane man would insist on. However, to be fair to you, you can keep your sanity. We’ll say that you won’t admit to allowing yourself to distinguish, at least not out loud.

10 June 2014 at 18:56  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "Not while you attribute the same merit or lack of it to the Islamic faith as you do to Christianity or Judaism."

Which of course I don't other than in the minds of fecktards, liars, and other assorted misfits.

10 June 2014 at 19:02  
Blogger John Malcolmson said...

DanJO

You state (not verbatim but as good as) that faith schools are all about indoctrinating children with the religious, political and social values of a particular religion.

Can you tell us what the religious, political and social values that C of E schools teach are that are so much at variance with the "British values" which seem to be such a hot topic at the moment? Perhaps it would help if you started by giving us your own definition of "British values".

10 June 2014 at 19:03  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

DanJo

That Muslims want to indoctrinate children through schools according to Muslim religious, political, and social values is hardly surprising.

If that is so, then why the hell did they come here in the first place knowing it wasn't the scrubby dusty shit-hole they left behind.

You know, when the Inspector leaves out queer-bashing he sounds quite erudite!

Is he related to Enoch Powell I wonder?

10 June 2014 at 19:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

JM: "Perhaps it would help if you started by giving us your own definition of "British values"."

Oh how lovely, I've attracted one of those "us" people. Should we try to out-condescend each other now? Or should I adopt the offered role of outlier to your self-assigned everyman?

I don't think defining a set of British Values will result in anything other than some vague and trite sentiments, hence my comment earlier about looking forwards to the public debate.

"Can you tell us what the religious, political and social values that C of E schools teach are that are so much at variance with the "British values" which seem to be such a hot topic at the moment?"

Are CofE schools faith schools? Blimey, who knew?

10 June 2014 at 19:35  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...


Touched a raw nerve did we DanJ0. That was some yelp at 19:02 !

You’ve never fully explained why you have it in for faith schools in general, at least, to this man’s satisfaction. By what authority do you take it upon yourself to have a say in the schooling of other peoples children ? It ‘s rather like telling someone what to wear, is it not ?

10 June 2014 at 19:35  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught: "If that is so, then why the hell did they come here in the first place knowing it wasn't the scrubby dusty shit-hole they left behind."

For the weather perhaps? Actually, they were invited initially to fill workforce shortages so presumably it was financial at that point. It's probably still for that reason to an extent, but also probably because it's stable and secure here. That doesn't mean they wouldn't want to keep their own culture even if it hasn't resulted in a land of milk and honey back home. Why do (or did) Brits move to the coastal areas of Spain? By observation, it was hardly for the local culture given that many people have tried to creat a Little England over there.

10 June 2014 at 19:42  
Blogger Mike Stallard said...

First the Muslims wrecked air travel. Then they wrecked the entire Middle East. Now they are wrecking our education system.

I ask - what have they created in return?

10 June 2014 at 19:45  
Blogger Mike Stallard said...

First the Muslims wrecked air travel. Then they wrecked the entire Middle East. Now they are wrecking our education system.

I ask - what have they created in return?

10 June 2014 at 19:45  
Blogger Mike Stallard said...

First the Muslims wrecked air travel. Then they wrecked the entire Middle East. Now they are wrecking our education system.

I ask - what have they created in return?

10 June 2014 at 19:45  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "Touched a raw nerve did we DanJ0. That was some yelp at 19:02 !"

Hardly, I just grow weary of the constant lies and misrepresentations. I often wonder why people like you and Len and Phil bother.

"By what authority do you take it upon yourself to have a say in the schooling of other peoples children ? It ‘s rather like telling someone what to wear, is it not ?"

I have to pay taxes, and I have a vote, is the pithy answer to your question. We're all interconnected to some extent, and school is ultimately about creating workers of one sort or another.

10 June 2014 at 19:48  
Blogger Jay Bee said...

It is now being reported that books have been found at the Islamic Olive Tree Primary School in Luton suggesting that stoning and lashing individuals were proper punishments for misbehaviour.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-27761075

"We are the victims of the extreme politics of Michael Gove whose ignorance of Islam is matched by his hostility. Many Muslims will feel alienated and victims of state Islamophobia."

And no doubt the local non-Muslims will feel marginalized and victims of school sponsored Islamofacism.

10 June 2014 at 19:55  
Blogger David Hussell said...

British values. Let us not be naive.

The danger here is that we are seeing not a substantive, significant deep change at Government level but mere pre-election froth on the surface.

If the now all so indignant senior politicians are determined to make the teaching of "British values" compulsory in schools a number of things would have to be put into place, and each one involves a lot of time and work.

First and foremost those values would have to be set out clearly, more or less defined. Secondly these would have to be woven into all the relevant curricula, particularly in subjects like History, Citizenship, English and so on. Standardised rules regarding the mixing of the sexes etc would be required. All this would take a lot of time, time that this coalition does not have. Such work could only progress on a broad front involving many different agencies, academics, unions etc etc.

Finally for something this broad, to ensure its survival into the long term, it would have to enlist general cross party support, a very difficult thing to achieve given that education has long been a party political battlefield for decades.

I would be delighted if we were witnessing the death of the, as the Inspector rightly says, "sickly creature" multiculturalism, which is a recipe for deep disaster in the long term, but I smell political expediency in the air of Westminster, not a strong commitment to rethink the whole complex web of relationships between those of immigrant descent, and the host culture, as expressed through the educational system. I would be happy to be wrong on that.
But even the first step, the definition of something as slippery as "British values" would require a huge national debate of enormous purposes, and I see no sign of it, at all.

10 June 2014 at 19:56  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

We all pay tax DanJ0, even parents who send their children to faith schools. As for “school is ultimately about creating workers of one sort or another.”, well, what can one say, apart from Comrade Kommissar, we salute you !

Now answer the question !!!

10 June 2014 at 19:59  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "We all pay tax DanJ0, even parents who send their children to faith schools."

And your point there is?

"Now answer the question !!!"

I had to go back and look for it, as I thought I already had answered it. Even so, I don't jump to commands from the likes of you, so jog on.

10 June 2014 at 20:07  
Blogger IanCad said...

Well noted Uncle Brian.

There is a perjorative association with the word. Never thought of it.
If this gets out they'll have to change the name.

SSFPS?

"School of Superior and First Persons Studies."

Well? It's a start.

Danjo

You have a point. However, in the pursuit of purse, pride holds no place. There is an excellent Indian resturant near the castle that is called The Cavalry Club. I wonder if deep down the owners have a hankering for the return of the romance of The British Empire?

10 June 2014 at 20:22  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Mike Stallard
"I ask - what have they" (Muslims) "created in return?"

Muslim babies?

Danjo
" ... school is ultimately about creating workers of one sort or another."

Really? That one's a bit too utilitarian even for you.

10 June 2014 at 20:27  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ David Hussell (19:56)—Cameron insisted on Muslims embracing British values in his Munich speech of February 2011. Three years on and we’re still waiting. His Grace analysed Cameron’s use of Left and Right in this blog. Definitely worth a look.

10 June 2014 at 20:30  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...


Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. DanJ0 has finished the case for his defence.

It is now down to you to find whether he is or not a true liberal or merely an authoritarian in said disguise whose arbitrary commands must be obeyed. He has failed to demonstrate his detraction for faith schools is based upon any worthwhile objection. In accordance with the recently installed Dreadnaught's law, you must dismiss from your minds any idea that his homosexuality and the church’s stance thereof has any bearing on his position.

You must now retire and contemplate. The law requires me to leave you with this - If you are in any doubt whatsoever, you must find him not guilty of being a liberal.

10 June 2014 at 20:38  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Really? That one's a bit too utilitarian even for you."

*shrug*

Be naïve if you like.

10 June 2014 at 20:52  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: " If you are in any doubt whatsoever, you must find him not guilty of being a liberal."

On the positive side of that nonsense, at least I won't have to put up with loads of abuse about being a liberal from your fellow fecktards. ;)

10 June 2014 at 21:00  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

The interesting thing that I noticed that at least one of these schools was rated outstanding in every category a year ago and as soon as this story broke it is rate inadequate in every category.

This does not seem even remotely likely to be reasonable

I think that Ofsted have huge questions to answer. Notice that Michael Wilshaw (Head of Ofsted) just read out a prepared statement and would answer no questions.

Note it was not Ofsted that brought this issue to light and since that time we see the glaring inconsistent inspection reports mentioned above

Ofsted missed the bonfire of the quangos and it needs to be wound up ASAP

It is a huge self-serving waste of taxpayers money

Phil






10 June 2014 at 21:45  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

Phil,
OFSTED is the UK's answer to the Gestapo.

What nobody will admit is that there is a huge inequality in schools now. Libs can tell schoolchildren their beliefs that homosexuality is normal but everybody is forbidden to express the belief that it is wrong.With Section 28, it was at least fair as the whole subject was a non-issue in schools; homosexuals/cultural Marxists couldn't tell the children their beliefs whilst we wouldn't tell the children ours.

10 June 2014 at 21:57  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Phil Roberts @ 21.45

Ofsted.

Good point. It suggests, to me, that it, Ofsted, is not fit for purpose. In my experience of a very different part of government, such inspecting regimes are far from objective, rarely have any experience at all of operating successfully in whatever area of activity they are "inspecting"; but are staffed by bossy people of little intelligence, large egos, and with highly developed antennae for sensing the directions of political fashion.

But for a total inversion, from "outstanding" down to "inadequate", in such a short time, if this is in fact the case, or if anything like it, is the case, is to put it mildly, very extreme. In which case it just so reeks of top down political intervention. I cannot take this stuff seriously - I would be happy to believe that this is not pre-election widow dressing of the first order, but at present I shall remain deeply sceptical. I have faith in God, but not these godless politicians.

Busy Mum is doing the right thing - opting out of a school system that shouts - politicisation !

10 June 2014 at 22:13  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Smearing all religions with the Wahhabist Jihafi brush has been a standard tactic since Dawkins' "religion's misguided missiles" letter to the Guardisn after the 9/11 atrocity.

I suspect that as per Andrew Neather's ' rub the right's noses in diversity' revelations, this was all part of the socialist dechristianisation agenda. Ah, but what now?

'There was an old lady that swallowed a fly.......she swallowed a spider to catch the fly....perhaps she'll die'

10 June 2014 at 22:45  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

David Hussell
" ... inspecting regimes are far from objective"

Accepted as they 'inspect' according to a pre-set agenda based on government policy (really the policy of senior civil servants)

"rarely have any experience at all of operating successfully in whatever area of activity they are "inspecting";"

You'll need evidence for that one as its Happy Jack's experience they do have frontline experience. Indeed, the inspecting teams are often made up of seconded practitioners.

"but are staffed by bossy people of little intelligence, large egos, and with highly developed antennae for sensing the directions of political fashion.2

Ummm ... All of them or just those you disagreed with?

Inspection regimes - should they stay or go? On balance, considering the scandals they have unearthed in the public sector concerning the vulnerable, we need objective scrutiny.

In the real world they will peddle whatever agenda the civil servants (a group deserving of closer scrutiny) and their political masters decide. However, don't simply assert all inspectors are without professional credibility, experience or competence.

Jack knows someone, recently retired, who has been asked to consider becoming one!

10 June 2014 at 23:12  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo

"Be naïve if you like."

Happy Jack may have misunderstood you.

Did you mean schools should
ultimately be about creating workers of one sort or another, or that they are?

A Church of England School or a Roman Catholic School, seeks first to prepare a child or young person for life and, on this foundation, determine their particular talents and develop them.

Islam may claim to do this too. However, they instil values in direct contradiction to those of Britain, founded as it is on Christianity.

10 June 2014 at 23:28  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

DanJo

You are fudging the issue.
Why is it the Chinese, Sikhs and Hindus for instance and by no means limited to those examples seem to manage what the Muslims can not? That is to live amongst us yet within their own cultural attachments and cause no particular problem?

The Ugandan Asians 50,000 of them landed en-masse and got on with rebuilding their lives asking nothing but to live safely. First generation Caribbean migrants did indeed fill the post-war gaps in the labour force
and they brought with them a British style based work ethic that has sadly been lost and replaced by their offspring nurtured by an over generous benefits culture.

Muslims simply don't want to integrate; their Islamic 'culture' specifically prohibits it. We are guilty by neglect of ignoring our failure to appreciate the negative effect their freewheeling impact has had on the old Cotton Towns and inner cities where they have created substantial enclaves that has alienated many traditionally British people and received more attention than any other incoming group.

I don't blame any single Muslim, I blame successive governments for allowing Islam to root and spread faster than Japanese Knotweed.

Those Brits in Spain you mention may well hold on to their British identity, so do the Germans and Swedes, but they usually are people who bring with them their own economic support and without them the Costas would be crippled.

11 June 2014 at 00:39  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Dreadnaught, let's not forget the overt discrimination West Indians faced fuelled, to some extent, by the likes of Enoch Powell. And the other groups you've mentioned have survived by looking to their own families and communalities for support.

Yes, all the *positive action* programs and *transcultural* approaches undermined the next generation and gave them a sense of victimhood. The benefits system didn't help either. But, and this is the point, all these groups have encountered overt or covert hostility.

Is it at all possible that the young of the Muslim groups face this too? That a lack of acceptance actually contributes to a sense of alienation from Britishness - whatever this is? That this makes the hate of the Islamists more influential than it might otherwise be?

There are significant and very real differences between Muslims and Christians in worldviews. This is accepted. Maybe the two groups cannot live together. Hands on heart, can we truthfully say we've tried?

In Happy Jack's experience, life is rarely made up of straight "goodies" and "baddies". It all tends to be a little bit more complicated.

11 June 2014 at 01:16  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught:"Why is it the Chinese, Sikhs and Hindus for instance and by no means limited to those examples seem to manage what the Muslims can not? That is to live amongst us yet within their own cultural attachments and cause no particular problem?"

Islam isn't really compatible with our liberal culture, and the culture of some Islamicc immigrant groups is too socially conservative. Don't we all know this?

Also, I think you're underestimating some of the problems of some of the other groups. For example, there's a whole subculture operating in Chinese groups which is kept behind closed doors, disregarding our laws and values.

"Muslims simply don't want to integrate; their Islamic 'culture' specifically prohibits it."

Rather like Hassidic Jews in London then. At the end of the day, why should they? What obligation do they have? We don't have a hetergeneous culture in the UK. If I don't have to conform to social expectations, or the eccentric Ann Widdecombe, then why should they?

"Those Brits in Spain you mention may well hold on to their British identity, so do the Germans and Swedes, but they usually are people who bring with them their own economic support and without them the Costas would be crippled."

Is that the real gripe then? Our Muslim citizens can retain their cultures as long as they pay their way?

11 June 2014 at 03:08  
Blogger Manfarang said...

Mike
"First the Muslims wrecked air travel. Then they wrecked the entire Middle East. Now they are wrecking our education system."
The entire Middle East is not wrecked.If fact increasing numbers of Brits live and work in the Gulf states.There are new airlinea-Quatar and Etihad.
As regards the wrecking of the middle east, the American invasion did a lot to cause that.
The Trojan Horse letter is probably a hoax.

Inspector
Let me guess, you went to a school run by the Christian Brothers?

I am unaware of those running the Chinese takeaways are disregarding the law.
In the orient millions of Chinese are Muslims.They can make it fit with Chinese culture.
Indonesia(world's largest Muslim nation) isn't doing too badly when it comes to democracy. They are doing a better job than the Thais.
Reading the comments it seems there is no shortage of tripe in Britain and it doesn't seem limited to the north of England.

11 June 2014 at 06:24  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

It is funny that there are two types of schools that it seems are now illegal to open

The first is a new Grammar School

This has been the case for 20 years or more

And now

The second is a free Islamic School

Interesting

Phil

11 June 2014 at 08:31  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11 June 2014 at 08:37  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

DanJo

Rather like Hassidic Jews in London then.

Not at all. A sub group within a minority; when did any of them last behead a soldier or blow themselves up here or abroad in pursuance of holy writ? No comparison.

You are insulting all assimilating immigrants in the Country by likening them with the real dangers associated with Islam on Jihad. Ask the people fleeing from Syria, Iraq, Libya,etc etc where the Religion of Peace is busy being Peaceful. The fifth column is already here.

Surely you can recognise the common denominator in all their lives.

Lastly I think you are sidetracking with the Brits in Spain line.

11 June 2014 at 08:38  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

I wonder if their real "crime" was teaching that homosexuality and sex outside of marriage is wrong.

It seems to me that our Christian "faith" schools need to follow their example

After all an inner city school rated outstanding a year ago

Credit where it is due, that was a real achievement

Phil

11 June 2014 at 08:38  
Blogger David Hussell said...

Happy Jack

I speak as I found them, describing the teams that operated in my, Environmental, broad area, of local government. They were not open to reason, but just operated a mindless tick-box sort of culture. Common sense, real achievements and considerations of cost-efficiency and customer requirements were ignored in favour of mindlessly following political agendas. Sorry if you don't like that, but that was what I, as a director of multi-discipline directorate, experienced over too many years.
Those authorities that performed like trained dogs, jumped through all the pointless hoops to please their Westminster governmental masters, were reward with plaudits, whilst those that delivered good, solid, cost-effective services that were not deliberately PC and politically fashionable, were invariably criticised.
During the Labour Government years, Labour controlled local authorities, that often sprayed cash around like confetti, were generally,but not always given big ticks in many of their boxes. It was about politics not serving the taxpaying public. It was a total charade.

Also I have listened to a number of teachers who have very similar opinions of inspecting regimes as myself.

What is needed is for education, its purposes and methods to be taken out of the bear pit of politics as much as is possible, with its interminable, largely destructive debates. Then and only then an Inspecting Body could be created which is as truly objective and professional as is possible. Political dogma and interference, short termism and the lack of strategic long term thinking has been one of the main failings of the UK.

11 June 2014 at 08:48  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

MANZOOR-MOGHAL chairman MuslimForum

The failure to stand up to extremism in state schools exactly matches the disgraceful reluctance for much of the past two decades to tackle hate-preachers such as Abu Hamza, who was treated with kid gloves by the security services before he was finally extradited to the U.S.

The lavish welfare benefits given to Hamza’s family have their equivalence in the taxpayers’ funding for Birmingham schools run by Islamic extremists.

There have been other factors behind the radicals’ success.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2654598/I-fear-Islamic-extremism-schools-just-tip-iceberg-By-MANZOOR-MOGHAL-chairman-Muslim-Forum-warned-10-years-ago-Mail-militants-targeting-schools.html#ixzz34KMDn5OC

11 June 2014 at 12:06  
Blogger David Grey said...

Yes you are right that none of the Trojan Horse schools were faith schools.

The point is, if this can even begin to happen in non faith schools imagine what kind of thing is happening day in day out in schools whose specific aim is to indoctrinate children into the religion that their parents have chosen for them, just like their parents before them.

But yes your grace is right, let's keep segregating children on grounds of religion. Im sure that won't lead to any social problems down the line...

Schools should be a place of unbiased learning where all children of different backgrounds learn to appreciate each other as individuals. How anyone thinks separating children on the grounds of their parents' religion is a good thing is absolutely beyond me.

11 June 2014 at 12:27  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught; "Not at all. A sub group within a minority; when did any of them last behead a soldier or blow themselves up here or abroad in pursuance of holy writ? No comparison."

I haven't made a comparison there. I simply pointed out that they also "don't want to integrate" and that "their [Jewish] 'culture' specifically prohibits it." other than superficially.

"You are insulting all assimilating immigrants in the Country by likening them with the real dangers associated with Islam on Jihad."

I am not likening them at all, of course. I'm just making points about cultural integration, assimilation, and isolation.

"Lastly I think you are sidetracking with the Brits in Spain line."

Except that the inclination to live and socialise with the familiar is much the same, and British people have a long history of doing so in foreign countries. Including the ones the British colonised in the past, imposing our culture, law, and social values on them.

11 June 2014 at 17:13  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

DanJo

Including the ones the British colonised in the past, imposing our culture, law, and social values on them.

Ah! - the sins of the father logic I see; every German still a Nazi,and every Brit an exploiter of the dark skinned people of the world.

Not you usual standard of retort but no matter.

11 June 2014 at 17:30  
Blogger Martin Marprelate said...

Am I the only one who has just a bit of sympathy with the Moslems in this matter?

I'm don't blame them if they don't want their children taught that it's fine to be a homosexual or to have an abortion. I don't blame them if they don't want evolution presented to them as the only possible origin of the universe. The idea that secular education is 'unbiased' is laughable.

My children have long since grown up, but if I had my time over again I would home-school.

11 June 2014 at 17:38  
Blogger John Malcolmson said...

JM: "Perhaps it would help if you started by giving us your own definition of "British values"."

Oh how lovely, I've attracted one of those "us" people. Should we try to out-condescend each other now? Or should I adopt the offered role of outlier to your self-assigned everyman?

Please spare me the sarcasm. I asked you a perfectly reasonable question which you have failed to answer, but then you seem to make a habit of it on here. That speaks volumes. There is absolutely no point in trying to debate with people like you.

11 June 2014 at 18:06  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught: "Ah! - the sins of the father logic I see; every German still a Nazi,and every Brit an exploiter of the dark skinned people of the world."

It's interesting that lots of people here can appeal to history and tradition going forwards, except of course when it doesn't put us the country in a good light and suddenly its off limits.

Bear in mind that our Indian and Pakistani population is settled here mostly because of the historic involvement of the British over in India.

11 June 2014 at 18:13  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

JM: "Please spare me the sarcasm. I asked you a perfectly reasonable question which you have failed to answer, but then you seem to make a habit of it on here. That speaks volumes. There is absolutely no point in trying to debate with people like you."

Oh well, off you go then. Feel free to take your attempts at condescension with you too.

11 June 2014 at 18:15  
Blogger John Malcolmson said...

Just to clarify my last post, it was a response to DanJO at 19:38 on 10/6.

11 June 2014 at 18:16  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dreadnaught: "Not you usual standard of retort but no matter."

You skipped over the rest of the point to get to that afterthought at the end.

11 June 2014 at 18:17  
Blogger John Malcolmson said...

David Hussell 10 June 2014 19:56

"But even the first step, the definition of something as slippery as "British values" would require a huge national debate of enormous purposes, and I see no sign of it, at all."

No, neither do I, David. This begs the question - what is the future for a nation that cannot even decide what its own values are?

11 June 2014 at 18:54  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11 June 2014 at 18:59  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

David Grey wrote:

schools whose specific aim is to indoctrinate children into the religion that their parents have chosen for them

Damn parents thinking they have the right to raise their own children. Why, how is a good secularist going to indoctrinate children with secular ideas if their parents insist on getting in the way like that? Who do they think they are anyways?

I bet there is a human rights violation in there somewhere. It must violate a child's right to an agnostic upbringing. Perhaps a good prosecution is in order.

carl

11 June 2014 at 19:02  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

David Grey. “…schools whose specific aim is to indoctrinate children into the religion that their parents have chosen for them, “

For some reason, this man is far more comfortable with parents ‘indoctrinating’ their children with their values than he would be with them being indoctrinated by the likes of you with yours.

Can’t explain that, but suspect it’s an essential of being human – perhaps YOU can expand as to why your, shall we call it ‘alternative paternalism’, would be superior ? And as this man asked another secularist yesterday, by what authority do you claim a right over other peoples children ?

11 June 2014 at 20:16  
Blogger Sister Julian said...

I spent a good number of years as a Supply Teacher in schools in and around a large ex-mill town in Lancashire. As a practising Christian I was at first surprised, then disappointed and finally resigned to the fact that RE was taught, when it was taught, patchily to say the least. Most teachers found ways to get around the subject, as assemblies were usually about being nice to each other, sharing and before the summer holidays Stranger Danger. There were, of course the work sheets to colour in of the occasional Bible story, or the pillars of Islam. This happened even in C of E schools; I reckon because the majority of staff were not Christian, had no knowledge of the Bible or Christianity, and children brought up without faith. The odd things was that when I asked Infants what they knew about the Christmas story the hands which went up were the Muslim ones.
I havfe to drive past a mosque on my way to choir practice just as the children are coming out of their classes. It's no wonder some of these little ones haven't done their school reading or are tired during the day. 2 hours of class after school is a lot for them to deal with.
Does anyone wish that we Christians had half the commitment to our faith as they have to theirs?

11 June 2014 at 20:39  
Blogger Busy Mum said...

Sister Julian asks 'Does anyone wish that we Christians had half the commitment to our faith as they have to theirs?'

I do, and do I try! But my commitment is regarded with suspicion because it is in effect religious extremism. Committed Christians are labelled as narrow-minded, bigoted, homophobic etc so we cannot be 'true' Christians in the same way as extreme Muslims are not considered to be 'true' Islamists.

11 June 2014 at 22:07  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

Sister Julian

"Does anyone wish that we Christians had half the commitment to our faith as they have to theirs?"

We need the Bible taught as the word of God.

We need to de-feminise the Church. And I don't just mean get rid of the frocks.

We need to defend the unborn from murder

We need to constantly point out not just the myth of Evolution but the Evils that that doctrine gives excuses for.

Finally we need to stand with the Muslims against the secularists and atheists

Don't forget Martin Niemöller's famous statement which perhaps we should now should read as

"First they came for the Muslims"

Phil

11 June 2014 at 22:12  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11 June 2014 at 22:32  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Bear in mind that our Indian and Pakistani population is settled here mostly because of the historic involvement of the British over in India.

Ya don't say! How interesting.

The Indians adopted the British system of justice, work ethic,railway system, and commerce a legacy if you like, left behind by the British in 1947. India is a burgeoning player in the global economy while Pakistan is a basket-case with an atomic bomb.

Whats to blame for that, if not the Islamic culture which stunts its own development, yet we are told its migrants enrich us with their presence in the Country they couldn't wait to get away from.

11 June 2014 at 22:34  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

David Grey

"Schools should be a place of unbiased learning"

LOL

Like secular schools?

Yeah right!

Phil

11 June 2014 at 22:39  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector :"And as this man asked another secularist yesterday, by what authority do you claim a right over other peoples children ?"

And you were told, too.

Perhaps there should be no national curriculum or standards, allowing schools to teach what they will and leaving it up to the market to decide school success. If the result is poorly educated children who need to be carried by the welfare state for the rest of their lives then so be it.

12 June 2014 at 01:07  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Phil :"Finally we need to stand with the Muslims against the secularists and atheists"

Heh. Good luck with that. Of course, it's not secularists or a-theists who are your problem at the end of the day. It's the majority of our population who don't much care for religion or other ideologies and just want to get on with their lives as they see fit.

12 June 2014 at 01:13  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, what you're forgetting is that the majority of the population, of whatever creed, actually believes in stable, loving unions between heterosexual couples for the procreation and rearing of children. They have an instinctive moral code and sense of right and wrong that, thus far, tolerates but does not embrace deviance from this.

Unfortunately, adherence to this code in our ever so *enlightened* and *liberal* times, preaching *self realisation* and avoidance of individual *harm*, is proving more difficult.

A time will come when this will be rectified - one way or another.

12 June 2014 at 02:55  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

Jack

what you're forgetting is that the majority of the population, of whatever creed, actually believes in stable, loving unions between heterosexual couples for the procreation and rearing of children

They do? According to whom? Because you certainly can't prove that by behavior. In fact, I would argue that exactly the opposite is true. Specifically, that adults today are ready, willing, and able to sacrifice their children for the sake of self-interest. That's why divorce. That's why cohabitation. That's why illegitimacy. That's why abortion. Adults don't care.

carl

12 June 2014 at 03:33  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I see the morphing from the Happy Jack ID back to the Dodo one is pretty much complete now. That comment is loaded with the usual goads, irrespective of the thread topic, and I see there's one in the thread above which I haven't even commented on yet. How nostalgic.

12 June 2014 at 06:19  
Blogger Gnostic said...

The secular argument misses the target because those schools are not faith schools. I attended both Alston Primary (a first class establishment with a successful 11 plus rate) and Saltley (then one of Birmingham's best grammar schools) in the sixties when education actually educated kids rather than indoctrinating them. The schools weren't faith schools then, either.

The Labour argument against Gove is lies on very shaky ground because the problem didn't spontaneously arise in 2010. It stems back longer than that. For example Saltley school employed one of the Islamic extremists convicted and jailed for the plot to behead a muslim in the British Army. This extremist was employed at the school during a Labour government and quite happily spread his nasty zealotry to pupils and staff before he was caught. Strange that this little snippet isn't mentioned by Gove's Labour critics.

Isn't convenient memory a wonderful thing...


12 June 2014 at 07:50  
Blogger David Grey said...

Phil Roberts

Do you know what secular means?

Hint - it's not what the Christian lobby have been telling you.

Once you have looked up the definition you will see that that's what secular schools would do: teach equally about all religions and let the child make his or her own mind up.

Carl Jacobs

Why don't you think a child should be allowed to make its own choice as regards its religious beliefs?

12 June 2014 at 12:16  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

David Grey

I will respond to your question as completely as I am able. But I would ask you to answer one question so that I may know how to answer.

Do you have children?

carl

12 June 2014 at 12:38  
Blogger David Grey said...

I dont see how my own family is relevant to your answer but not yet no.

12 June 2014 at 12:49  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

David Grey

No, I am not surprised you don't see the relevance. I expected you to say 'No' because your question betrays an abstract understanding of parenthood. You have never raised a child, and therefore you don't understand what that entails.

In the first place, your question is founded on a faulty premise. I do not believe I can choose a religion for my children. Each man must eventually confront God on his own. The best I could do is produce an external conformity and then only for a time. But I cannot generate authentic faith in my kids. I am herald. I am not the Giver of Life. So the direct answer is "My children will make their own choice whether I like it or not."

Parents receive children as self-willed self-centered creatures and are charged with the responsibility of turning them into functioning adults. We teach them. We correct them. We discipline them. We punish them. In a single phrase, we conform them to an image. We don't say to them "What would you like right and wrong to be?". We teach them right from wrong and hold them accountable so that they will internalize the standard. Ultimately we desire that they will come to choose good and reject evil within themselves and not just because we say so. One might even call this process indoctrination. I never asked my children about lying and cheating and stealing. I told them. I willfully conformed them - indoctrinated them - because that was my responsibility. Eventually they leave my charge and become responsible for their own decisions. I can't live their lives for them. But I have a positive responsibility to point the way.

(continued)

12 June 2014 at 13:40  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

David Grey

I likewise have a positive responsibility to teach my children about God - who is there, who is very real, and who is not silent. Just as I didn't ask my children whether they wanted to tell the truth or not, I didn't ask them whether they wanted to learn about God or not. They needed to learn, and it was my responsibility to teach them. It is in fact my most important obligation as a parent. Why? Because that is ultimately my greatest desire for them - to know and love God. Now, again, I cannot produce this outcome. But it is my responsibility to point the way. I am not interested in protecting their autonomous choice. I am interested in encouraging the right choice.

Children are not autonomous little creatures who come to the world with perfect freedom to choose their own way. They come requiring indoctrination and we freely indoctrinate them. We can't help it. They learn by imitation. If you teach your children nothing about God, you will have indoctrinated them just as surely as I did. You will have simply chosen a different image to which you desire they be conformed.

carl

12 June 2014 at 13:55  
Blogger Sister Julian said...

Phil Roberts:
I couldn't agree more! If there are no decent male role models we are in deep trouble. My personal faith is very strong - enough to see me through numerous difficulties; without God in my life I probably wouldn't still be here. I long to hear sermons which speak the Truth without any fear. I long to be able to share my faith with friends and church friends. But without the Order of Saint Cuthbert, where at cell meetings we can share our faith and get to grips with God's truth I would be very lonely indeed. Here God speaks to us in visions and prophecies and we understand that we are pinpoints of light in an increasingly world. We pray that there will be more such pockets of light and grieve for those who have no opportunity to meet the God of Love and His Son. We desperately need more faithful teachers of God's Word who are fearless. It is good to know that so many of His Grace's correspondents are of the same mind.

12 June 2014 at 18:20  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Carl, Happy Jack said the majority of the population believes in stable, loving unions between men and women for the raising children. He didn't say they acted on this belief.

This instinctive moral code and sense of right and wrong is suffocated in our *enlightened* and *liberal* times. The culture no longer supports or reinforces it. A sense of duty, fidelity is so 1920's, and shame is such a negative, harmful 'feeling'. We have to be tolerant and forgiving in 2014.

12 June 2014 at 18:49  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "This instinctive moral code and sense of right and wrong is suffocated in our *enlightened* and *liberal* times. The culture no longer supports or reinforces it."

Only you could write something as conflicted and nonsensical as that. Lol.

12 June 2014 at 18:53  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

12 June 2014 at 18:57  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Sister J: "I couldn't agree more! If there are no decent male role models we are in deep trouble."

I'm happy to be one as I'm lovely really. In fact, I've actually been asked quite often if I'm a male model.

12 June 2014 at 19:12  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

It's called a conscience Danjo, implanted in all of us by our Creator. We all have one.

As for being mistaken for a male model, well ........ ROFL. Diabetes Type 2 warnings, is it?

12 June 2014 at 19:34  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "It's called a conscience Danjo, implanted in all of us by our Creator. We all have one."

That wasn't what had me laughing at you, Dodo. I'm sure it makes sense in your own mind anyway.

12 June 2014 at 19:37  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

My sense of right and wrong is clearly suffocated by the freedom I have and the insights I have about it, and so it needs society to reinforce it for me so that it's not suffocated any more. Marvellous.

12 June 2014 at 19:42  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, are you being obtuse this evening?

Believe what you want. Jack contends yours and others sense of right and wrong, implanted by God to integrate the passions and the will, damaged anyway, has been further warped by a culture that tells us what we are doing is acceptable so long as nobody is *harmed*.

Not marvellous at all.

12 June 2014 at 21:19  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Suffocated by our freedom ... needs to be reinforced. Brilliant.

12 June 2014 at 21:45  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

“Suffocated by freedom” yet still willing to put the pillow over the mouth of Christian faith schools. What an arse you are DanJ0...


12 June 2014 at 21:51  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Inspector: "“Suffocated by freedom” yet still willing to put the pillow over the mouth of Christian faith schools. What an arse you are DanJ0..."

You're still sore about last Sunday, I see.

12 June 2014 at 21:55  
Blogger Inspector General in Ordinary said...

You’re no liberal DanJ0. Just a rather nasty anti Christian and homosexual narcissist, as we’ll as a denier of your heritage.


12 June 2014 at 22:35  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

12 June 2014 at 23:03  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

If only we could think of a way for you to avoid being humiliated like that again, Inspector.

But wait! I think I have it ... ah no, it's slipped my mind again.

I'm sure it will come to me again. In the meantime, enjoy your alcohol etc.

12 June 2014 at 23:07  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, being a slave to a particular passion and permitted to act on it, is not freedom. It manifests itself it so many destructive ways. And when freedom from restraint gets a grip on a society, and damaging behaviour is proclaimed as a good, then individual misery is multiplied and becomes self reinforcing.

12 June 2014 at 23:18  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Danjo, being a slave to a particular passion and permitted to act on it, is not freedom."

Hey, look at that word permitted there.

"And when freedom from restraint gets a grip on a society, and damaging behaviour is proclaimed as a good, then individual misery is multiplied and becomes self reinforcing."

And look at the word restraint there.

No goosesteps now, Dodo.

12 June 2014 at 23:24  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Whatever can the poor sap mean by "a slave to a particular passion"? Surely not sex? Afterall, there's no history of an obsession there to date.

12 June 2014 at 23:27  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Oh-oh, I beginning to think he's on about homosexual sex in particular. Because homosexuals are slaves to sex, unlike heterosexuals who just enjoy it. Heh.

12 June 2014 at 23:29  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Hey, this is beginning to ring a bell here. I don't think anyone will have noticed this yet but I think Dodo may be trying to pursue me one on one about liberalism and homosexuality. Who would have thought that likely? I mean, that's not happened in, oh, a day or two. And to be fair it's only been going on for three years or so at that frequency. Nothing, really, in the scheme of things.

12 June 2014 at 23:34  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack asks if bitchiness, provocation and attempts to demean others, are all you have in your locker?

We're social as well as spiritual creatures. People seek approval from their peers. And, to some extent, 'reality' is a social construct. That's why parents are so critical in forming the character and values of children. Permission is given in formal and informal ways for behaviour. And restraint is external as well as internal.

All pretty basic stuff really which someone who studied philosophy as an undergraduate should know.

13 June 2014 at 00:21  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo :", Happy Jack asks if bitchiness, provocation and attempts to demean others, are all you have in your locker?"

followed by:

"All pretty basic stuff really which someone who studied philosophy as an undergraduate should know."

Heh.I don't suppose stuff like that really registers with other people. It was actually your doing that which gave me certainty that it was truly you at the keyboard when you were lying about your identity again, you know. It's like when you were quietly but constantly goading the blog owner some time ago, it's under the radar stuff trying to chip away without being too obvious. You're actually a fairly sophisticated troll, I'll give you that, though I find it pretty odd given that you're an old man. The demographic for that is normally troubled teenage boys. I think the Internet is a fascinating place, especially forms, chatrooms, and the like.

13 June 2014 at 06:28  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I'll see you on another thread, Dodo, where no doubt you'll be wanting to talk with me about, well, liberalism and homosexuality again. That is, your poor understanding of liberalism, and the boilerplate Roman Catholic view of homosexuality. Oh how I'll be looking forward to that.

13 June 2014 at 06:34  
Blogger David Grey said...

Carl

Teaching children societal norms like not killing and stealing is entirely different from feeding them your own personal idealogical preferences such as religious, political or vegetarian motivations.

Give your own child a blinkered one dimensional upbringing if you like but the state shouldnt pay for schools to do this to children for you.

13 June 2014 at 12:17  
Blogger David Grey said...

Look at all those millions of muslims who have been hidden from the one true Christian God on account of their parents telling their child Islam is the true religion.

Maybe if those children had a choice they would become Christians and be saved, have u thought of that?

Of course, muslims could say the same thing about children forcefed christianity.

It really is laughable how religion just goes on down the ages as one parent tells the child what to believe and he tells his child and so on and so on. Thats why you have 'Christian countries' and 'Muslim Countries'. Religion is inherited.

13 June 2014 at 12:22  
Blogger David Grey said...

Of course, if children were taught to stop and think and be sceptical religion would die out in a generation. So i completely understand why you lot want to indoctrinate them.

A child is naive and gullbile, an adult is not.

Adults arent going to fall for grand claims with no evidence are they lol. I'll repeat that - NO EVIDENCE.

you lot really are hilarious.

i just saw a unicorn outside. it said send me a fiver and you won't die.

Cos thats really what youre all afraid of right? Youre still the little child scared to die that mum and dad told not to worry cos God exists and you go to heaven.

If there was no afterlife preached in the bible im sure youd all be a lot more sceptical haha

13 June 2014 at 12:29  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

13 June 2014 at 13:15  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

David Grey

It's nice that you disbelieve in God and all but I really don't care that you think there is no God. And I require neither your permission nor your approval for how I chose to raise my kids.

You asked a question. I answered it. I have no interest in sparring with you over the existence of God. Especially give the quality of argument you displayed in that series of posts. When I have to ask myself "Did he write that under the influence of alcohol?" - and I did ask that question of myself after I read your last three posts - that's usually a good sign that it's time to exit stage right.

Do feel free to provide a stirring soliloquy for the viewing audience.

carl

13 June 2014 at 13:45  
Blogger William Lewis said...

Of course, if children were taught to stop and think and be sceptical religion would die out in a generation. So i completely understand why you lot want to indoctrinate them.

There aren't many certainties in life, but the self-righteous piffle of the new atheist can be relied upon with monotonous regularity.

13 June 2014 at 14:13  
Blogger Sister Julian said...

Dan Jo It's perhaps a good job that God believes in you, despite your not believing in him! In fact, adults can come to faith just as much as children can - I was brought up in Sunday School etc and then left God to go to college. Icame fo faith in my personal Saviour as an adult, so I'm sorry, dear thing, there's still a good possibility that God will get you yet!

13 June 2014 at 18:50  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, just to clarify, Happy Jack was talking in general terms and not specifics.

The *issue* could have been any of the seven cardinal sins - lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy or pride. We all suffer from temptation to succumb to these to one degree or another. Nowadays, there is no moral internal restraint and externally we do as we choose. Yet, society at large pays the price.

Take obesity - recently moves are afoot to have being fat defined as a disability and given protected status. Overeating is a free choice that gets out of control. What a denial of reality to label it otherwise.

As Tanya Gold wrote in yesterday's Guardian: "What to do? The problem, as always when discussing addiction, is denial: the government's denial, which is ideological; the people's denial, which is comprehensive; and the addict's denial, which is lethal."

The bare facts:

- One Mr Kaltoft was sacked by his local authority in Denmark for being unable to perform his duties due to his size;

- If 25st Mr Kaltoft wins, employers might have to provide fat people with larger seats and parking spaces next to the office;

- Half the population of Britain could be obese by 2050;

- In Britain, rates of obesity have doubled in the past three decades; and

- 64 per cent of adults are now overweight.

And we haven't even mentioned Type 2 Diabetes and the growing cost to the nation's health service.

So just what would a libertarian, liberal do about this?

13 June 2014 at 19:41  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Sister J: " Icame fo faith in my personal Saviour as an adult, so I'm sorry, dear thing, there's still a good possibility that God will get you yet!"

It can come and get me whenever it likes as far as I am concerned. If it can maintain the very particles of the universe moment by moment then it can do a Saul of Tarsus on me. In fact, I invite it to do so. As I have said many times in the past, this is not really about free will as I'd like the same free choice as the angels.

13 June 2014 at 22:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Danjo, just to clarify, Happy Jack was talking in general terms and not specifics."

Ofgs Dodo, we both know exactly what you were talking about. There can't be a person here who doesn't given the time you've been at it. Was there ever such a mendacious toad as you?

13 June 2014 at 22:17  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack was talking in generalities. Whatever you have on your mind is your responsibility.

Jack notes you avoided the actual point too. This being the adding and balancing of societal harm with individual liberty and inculcating and promoting the most appropriate values and lifestyles to promote the common good.

What constitutes societal harm and the common good is where we differ.

13 June 2014 at 23:12  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo
" ... this is not really about free will as I'd like the same free choice as the angels."

Insisting that God reveals Himself to you on your terms to prove He exists! The very idea!

Happy Jack used to ask that one in Catechism lessons before his First Communion.


13 June 2014 at 23:37  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

... aged 7 years.

13 June 2014 at 23:38  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

DanJ0

Wading in where angels fear to tread. And understand, I am doing this for Jack's benefit - not yours.

Was there ever such a mendacious toad as you?

Jack isn't Dodo. If he was still Dodo, I would say so, and you know this is true. I was the one who forced the issue of his identity when he was hiding behind Jack. Back three years ago, Dodo deserved everything you gave him. His behavior was terrible. And you know I have credibility to say this because I said so at the time. So I also have credibility to say what I am about to say. Even with his deception about Jack, I have been impressed with the change in his behavior. And it has gone on long enough that it's hard to believe it is transient.

What all this means is that the dynamic between Jack and you has changed. Alot. When you say things like what I quoted above, you make yourself look like a condescending arrogant son-of-a-bitch. Now if you want to make yourself look like a condescending arrogant son-of-a-bitch, that's your business. I have no concern about it one way or the other. Just understand that is what you are doing. Jack takes all this abuse from you without responding, and in his forbearance makes you look worse and worse and worse. The irony is striking.

Now, I don't expect you to receive this observation. I frankly don't care if you receive this observation. What I expect from you for this is a torrent of abuse - which says something in itself. But as I also said, I did this for Jack. You can benefit or not as you wish.

carl

14 June 2014 at 00:35  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Carl, Happy Jack appreciates your support.

Thank you and may God Bless you - Calvinist or no.

14 June 2014 at 02:14  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Carl :"What all this means is that the dynamic between Jack and you has changed."

For someone who likes to try to get to the core of things, that's a surprisingly shallow interpretation from you. But you have your own dynamics here too, of course. *shrug*

14 June 2014 at 06:30  
Blogger David Grey said...

I think drunk or not 'there is no evidence' is a pretty strong argument, Carl.

14 June 2014 at 11:05  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Nowadays, there is no moral internal restraint and externally we do as we choose."

I can't say I'm that interested in a discussion of whether fat lasses love cake but I will highlight that up there as being a pile of old cack. I have lots of internal moral restraint myself, hence why I don't lie like a cheap watch here. You, however, have a long, ignoble history of it. You shouldn't project your own moral failings onto others, you know. Building an argument on there being no internal moral restraint in people in general is bound to fail because it's simply and obviously not true. Now, people not having moral restraint according to the Roman Catholic Church's version of morality is a somewhat different thing.

14 June 2014 at 11:30  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo
"I can't say I'm that interested in a discussion of whether fat lasses love cake but I will highlight that up there as being a pile of old cack."

It's not just women; its men and its increasingly young children. Read the statistics.

The question was should obese people be regarded as 'disabled' and have 'protected status', with all that entails because they choose to do things that have consequences for the common good?

Should B&B owners be required, by law, to provide reinforced beds and furniture? To adapt their homes so the oversized can gain entry and have parking bays for them nearby?

"Building an argument on there being no internal moral restraint in people in general is bound to fail because it's simply and obviously not true."

Granted and, with hindsight, Jack should probably have written: increasing numbers of people have decreasing degrees of internal moral restraint as the state and our culture promote the idea of 'self realisation'.

Morality is no longer grounded in a set of comprehensive injunctions where the impact of individual behaviour on others, especially children, is given due weight.

"I have lots of internal moral restraint myself, hence why I don't lie like a cheap watch here."

Jack is sure you do but what is it based upon? You being the supreme judge of what's right and wrong - so long as you cause no "harm"?

14 June 2014 at 12:52  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Jack is sure you do but what is it based upon? You being the supreme judge of what's right and wrong - so long as you cause no "harm"?"

I don't actually recognise the characterisation there. Moreover, I don't care whether you try to link our shared sense of right and wrong, rough-drawn as it is, with Natural Law and claim it was put there by a creator thingy. You have no basis to say that of course but it cuts both ways anyway because you acknowledge it is there so I can simply point at human nature as the basis for morality and wave at culture for its refining into ethics and principles.

"The question was should obese people be regarded as 'disabled' and have 'protected status', with all that entails because they choose to do things that have consequences for the common good?"

As I said, I don't have any interest or stake in a discussion about people over-eating. If you want to argue for the State having the power to provide people with rations of Soylent or some other paternalistic or authoritarian action to solve the problem you have identified then knock yourself out. You don't need me to be involved. Unless, well, you know, you're hoping to segue the whole thing into a poorly constructed argument about homosexuality just like I said you would? Afterall, I expect you'll be relying on some specific definition of the Common Good which I don't accept that you hope will give you some sort of permission to be repressive in some loosely Roman Catholic way to suit your prejudices and obsessions.

14 June 2014 at 14:00  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

But what am I saying?! Of course, you're not going to segue it into yet another talk about homosexuality with me! Why would I think such a thing? That reference to legal obligations for B&Bs couldn't possibly be the grounding to bring up the Chymorvah Hotel case. No, of course not. I should do penance for being so unnecessarily suspicious given that creationist fella spoke so movingly about your redemption, whilst indulging in a little no doubt satisfying aggression of his own, bless him.

14 June 2014 at 14:10  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

"As I said, I don't have any interest or stake in a discussion about people over-eating."

No? Do you know how much it is costing and the strain it puts on health and social care?

"If you want to argue for the State having the power to provide people with rations of Soylent or some other paternalistic or authoritarian action to solve the problem you have identified then knock yourself out."

Jack does not know the solution, other than the provision of stable loving homes and the development of character and morality in early life. He thought you might want to apply liberal thinking to the problem.

"Of course, you're not going to segue it into yet another talk about homosexuality with me!
Why would I think such a thing?"


No, Jack is not doing this and if you think so then that's your issue. We could talk about abortion instead; or about quickie divorces; or the number of children raised in single parent households.

Once again, Jack will end this discussion as its going nowhere constructive.

14 June 2014 at 14:58  
Blogger Luther said...

Sadly, I agree with the CofE post on this. They are so woefully inadequate at teaching the true Protestant Christian faith of this country in their schools (as per the 39 Articles) that there is no way such 'CofE faith schools' will ever be able to be equated with the Birmingham disaster.

Indeed, most do all in their power to prevent genuinely Protestant ministers from even getting through the door, let alone being allowed to open their mouths.

14 June 2014 at 15:02  
Blogger Luther said...

Sadly, I agree with the CofE post on this. They are so woefully inadequate at teaching the true Protestant Christian faith of this country in their schools (as per the 39 Articles) that there is no way such 'CofE faith schools' will ever be able to be equated with the Birmingham disaster.

Indeed, most do all in their power to prevent genuinely Protestant ministers from even getting through the door, let alone being allowed to open their mouths.

14 June 2014 at 15:02  
Blogger Luther said...

Sadly, I agree with the CofE post on this. They are so woefully inadequate at teaching the true Protestant Christian faith of this country in their schools (as per the 39 Articles) that there is no way such 'CofE faith schools' will ever be able to be equated with the Birmingham disaster.

Indeed, most do all in their power to prevent genuinely Protestant ministers from even getting through the door, let alone being allowed to open their mouths.

14 June 2014 at 15:02  
Blogger Luther said...

Sadly, I agree with the CofE post on this. They are so woefully inadequate at teaching the true Protestant Christian faith of this country in their schools (as per the 39 Articles) that there is no way such 'CofE faith schools' will ever be able to be equated with the Birmingham disaster.

Indeed, most do all in their power to prevent genuinely Protestant ministers from even getting through the door, let alone being allowed to open their mouths.

14 June 2014 at 15:02  
Blogger Luther said...

Sadly, I agree with the CofE post on this. They are so woefully inadequate at teaching the true Protestant Christian faith of this country in their schools (as per the 39 Articles) that there is no way such 'CofE faith schools' will ever be able to be equated with the Birmingham disaster.

Indeed, most do all in their power to prevent genuinely Protestant ministers from even getting through the door, let alone being allowed to open their mouths.

14 June 2014 at 15:02  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Before going, Jack meant to leave this one hanging for you to respond to - or not:

"I can simply point at human nature as the basis for morality and wave at culture for its refining into ethics and principles."

What is your view of "human nature"? Its the liberal's weakest and unsubstantiated point, yet they have based an entire philosophy on it.

14 June 2014 at 15:05  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "No? Do you know how much it is costing and the strain it puts on health and social care?"

But why are you arguing this with me, Dodo?

"Jack does not know the solution, other than the provision of stable loving homes and the development of character and morality in early life."

Righty-ho, that's certainly going to help discourage fat blokes from eating a kebab on the way home from the pub, or chubby kids wanting a Happy Meal or chicken nuggets instead of carrot sticks and an apple.

"He thought you might want to apply liberal thinking to the problem."

Thanks for the opportunity. No, really. I love it when people choose my topics here, and say I've failed to answer when they bark related questions at me.

"Once again, Jack will end this discussion as its going nowhere constructive."

How noble. However, you'll just pop up on another thread trying to start it all over again, with late-night goads like the one at 12 June 2014 02:55.

14 June 2014 at 15:11  
Blogger David Grey said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

14 June 2014 at 15:18  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "What is your view of "human nature"? Its the liberal's weakest and unsubstantiated point, yet they have based an entire philosophy on it."

Again? I'll just cut and paste it to save myself the effort. Perhaps I'll put it on a hot-key for future use too

"We're a gregarious, self-aware species with characteristics like sympathy, empathy, and so on, as well as having self-interest as individuals. We also live in societies and have to carry on one way or another so we need shared ethics that ideally can be reasoned for so that diverse people can buy into them."

14 June 2014 at 15:18  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

14 June 2014 at 15:22  
Blogger David Grey said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

14 June 2014 at 15:28  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Ha! I succeed where it counts, random angry person.

14 June 2014 at 15:35  
Blogger Sidney Deane said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

14 June 2014 at 15:39  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

14 June 2014 at 16:37  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

DanJ0

It was a narrow analysis. I carefully constrained the scope of what I said. Narrow is not the same as shallow.

This one is for free. Brain cell for brain cell, you are one of the smartest commenters on this weblog. You don't need to call people mendacious toads.

carl

14 June 2014 at 16:47  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

In for a penny ....

Danjo

"We're a gregarious, self-aware species with characteristics like sympathy, empathy, and so on, as well as having self-interest as individuals."

Well, yes, who could disagree?However, this is not really a full statement on the nature of man. People can also be anti-social, violent and show a distinct lack of empathy for others. They can be selfish and self-centred.

"We also live in societies and have to carry on one way or another so we need shared ethics that ideally can be reasoned for so that diverse people can buy into them."

Shared ethics through reason that people buy into? Agreed. However, the real world doesn't quite work this way. People can be terribly unreasonable in pursuing their own interests. Societies tend to work on the basis of 'in' groups and 'out' groups. Changing fashions and world views impact on "reason" which does not exist in a vacuum.

15 June 2014 at 01:46  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Carl: "You don't need to call people mendacious toads."

Indeed I don't, even though in this instance it's manifestly true. The reality is that I have almost zero tolerance now for certain things and I find it needs to be expressed. We go over the same things, time and again down here. After a while, one realises that the content is not important for certain people, it's the transactions themselves that matter.

Look at the latest stuff. There's nothing Dodo has to say that I'm remotely interested in anymore yet he seems to find me endlessly fascinating and seems to need to have the same conversation over and over again. I know the position he adopts [1] word for word and I thoroughly reject it. He knows that of course but it's not important because the psychological payoffs come from the interaction not the 'debate' itself.

I was considering quietly disappearing very recently simply out of boredom and the lack of anything new to add but the change in format may change things quite considerably. For instance, it may be possible to explore discrete points without distractions from others or having to lay out the big picture each time. So I'm hanging around for a while to see what happens.

[1] I honestly don't believe he's actually a practising Roman Catholic at all, you know. I think his position is one he's developed specifically for this place as he's gone along. I'm being quite serious. There's nothing wrong with developing a position over time of course.

15 June 2014 at 17:49  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Well, yes, who could disagree?However, this is not really a full statement on the nature of man. People can also be anti-social, violent and show a distinct lack of empathy for others. They can be selfish and self-centred."

Hence the second section where I'm talking about ethics i.e. rules of behaviour. I doubt even thieves think stealing is universally acceptable. They no doubt recognise that people ought not to steal for a society based on property rights to function well.

Ethics tend to endure too. Consider promise-making. A recognition of the obligations involved has probably been in existence since the dawn of societies, as has the inclination for some people to try to renege on them. These things aren't just made up as part of some cultural fashion statement.

15 June 2014 at 18:03  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, happy Jack stated early on:

"A Church of England School or a Roman Catholic School seeks first to prepare a child or young person for life and, on this foundation, determine their particular talents and develop them."

The foundation is, or should be, Christian morality. There is a big, big difference between ethics and morals.

"Ethics tend to endure too."

Do they? Surely ethics are external rules of conduct which if transgressed attract peer or society's disapproval. They're based on what society says it is right to do. Ethics are dependent on others for definitions and are contextual. They are subject to change - as history shows.

Morality is internal, based on ideals, principles and beliefs about what is right and wrong. It endures whatever the context. Behind the 'ethics' and 'rules' of the Commandments and Christ's teachings lies an unchanging morality.

"A recognition of the obligations involved has probably been in existence since the dawn of societies, as has the inclination for some people to try to renege on them."

But how does your creed explain this inclination to act unethically by trying to renege on rules? And what are the consequences if they are not caught. Breaching morals and principals impacts on the individual.

15 June 2014 at 22:30  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "The foundation is, or should be, Christian morality."

Not in State-funded schools it shouldn't.

"There is a big, big difference between ethics and morals."

No shit, Sherlock.

"Surely ethics are external rules of conduct which if transgressed attract peer or society's disapproval. [...]"

Someone has been Googling as all that isn't really your language style. Heh.

"Behind the 'ethics' and 'rules' of the Commandments and Christ's teachings lies an unchanging morality."

So what? Why would we choose to do so if we don't accept the core underlying premise? We could choose, or be forced, to use Islam's instead. It even comes with its own set of law. Or how about Kant's attempt at reasoning one if it's just a matter of rummaging around and holding something up as aspirational?

"But how does your creed explain this inclination to act unethically by trying to renege on rules?"

Nice use of creed there. :rolleyes: Review what I said about human nature and, well, take a guess. It's hardly rocket science.

"And what are the consequences if they are not caught."

People don't get their stuff back, and other people will get their stuff stolen, if you're talking about thieves?

"Breaching morals and principals impacts on the individual."

Not sure what to say about that as I don't really know where you're going with all this if you're not about to, well, assert that homosexuality is immoral and claim a right to repress it based on the Dodo interpretation of the Common Good and a paternalistic concern for the welfare of homosexuals, irrespective of their own wishes. But of course that wouldn't cross your mind here, it's all just, you know, general stuff isn't it?

15 June 2014 at 22:56  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Here's an argument loosely based on an alternative notion of the Common Good. We're clearly a diverse society now and faith schools encourage divisions. Given that religious people will be promoting their beliefs and behaviours to their children anyway, including through Sunday Schools, Madrassas, Churches, and Mosques, teaching critical thinking in a non-religious environment alongside children from different backgrounds will help to open up their minds. Afterall, it's in everyone's interest that we understand one another and learn to live together as best we can.

15 June 2014 at 23:08  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

In a plural society such as ours, it ought not to matter whether a Christian thinks it is wrong to kill because his god says so, and an a-theist thinks it is wrong to kill because (say) he recognises his own value in others or he would not be able live with himself knowing the consequences on others. If people nevertheless accept the shared ethic then we end up in the same place, more or less.

15 June 2014 at 23:17  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Let's lok at this:

Danjo
"In a plural society such as ours, it ought not to matter whether a Christian thinks it is wrong to kill because his god says so, and an a-theist thinks it is wrong to kill because (say) he recognises his own value in others or he would not be able live with himself knowing the consequences on others."

But it does matter because one is changeable and other is not. Jack noticed you inserted empathy into your ethics there to explain feelings of shame and guilt at wrong doing. What if an atheist considers the other person less than human? What if he is seeking revenge for a harm done to him or his family? The society he lives in could justify this. Empathy is subject to variation according to underlying perceptions. Christian morality is based on underlying principles of serving others, denying self and honestly seeking God's way in human situations.

"If people nevertheless accept the shared ethic then we end up in the same place, more or less."

Do we? What if someone comes along and changes perceptions and therefore action? The ethics of the situation might change; not the morality.

Ethically one can debate whether prostitution is proper conduct and the various contingencies governing this. In Christian moral terms the answer would not change. Same with abortion.

As for your example, what is a "a non-religious environment" that aims to "open up their minds"? You know todays major social issues require moral and theological consideration. Jack says parents are entitled to choose between an atheist environment and opt for one that assists children to explore the big questions of life and gives them the tools to do so. In fact, there should be more faith schools.

How far can a pluralist society go? This is a nation entitled to preserve its common traditions and culture. It is based, still, on Christianity. If "faith schools encourage divisions" between different religions, teach in contradiction to our established laws and customs, or ways of treating one another, then this should be addressed.

And when Jack referred to "Breaching morals and principals impacts on the individual.", he was meaning the consequences of acting against one's conscience. This may not have been developed, of course, or, in time, may become so deadened as to have no effect. What a pluralist society decides to do is different from the teachings of the Church and the expectations it places on its members.

16 June 2014 at 00:12  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, I am not devoid of morals. Quite the opposite. Moreover, I actually act in acordance with them, unlike you it seems. I note that your conscience doesn't seem to have bothered you much over the years. No-one is arguing that ethics replace morals. Our ethics tend to derive from our morals, values, history, culture, and so on. You've written a load of pretty words up there in reply but you very obviously skipped of a core issue: the paragraph about why we should all adopt one system of moral absolutism (or moral objectivism) over another? Why don't we hold Kant's version up and declare it the approved basis of our morality in the UK?

16 June 2014 at 06:09  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo :"Jack says parents are entitled to choose between an atheist environment and opt for one that assists children to explore the big questions of life and gives them the tools to do so. In fact, there should be more faith schools."

As far as I know, there are only 18 Muslim faith schools in the UK but something like 3 million Muslims. There's certainly plenty of scope to increase that number. As there tends to be population clusters, children will live and breathe Islam (and the socially conservative culture of parts of Pakistan for some areas in the North of England) throughout the day. I wonder if that is really acting in the Common Good, if we can define the Common Good in loose terms like you do.

16 June 2014 at 06:35  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo :"This is a nation entitled to preserve its common traditions and culture. It is based, still, on Christianity."

That'll be the culture and traditions that are changeable and therefore are a poor source and repository of ethics? Christianity being the religion with a weekly church attendance numbered in the several millions out of 62 million of us? Not much of a basis there, I'd say.

16 June 2014 at 06:46  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack is not advocating "we should all adopt one system of moral absolutism (or moral objectivism) over another". Faith and morals have to be internalised and cannot be imposed - unlike man made systems of control. However, he does believe there is only one valid morality that 'works'. And even in a pluralist society this is a legitimate area for debate between those of faith and no faith.

If you are not "arguing that ethics replace morals" then what source would you have us base our morals on? Without some substantial underpinning, that can be discussed, it can only be a system of changeable ethics.

Jack gave the example of prostitution - is this an ethical or moral question? If people want to sell their bodies for sex and others want to pay them, where's the harm with it being legalised and regulated?

So far as Islam is concerned, Jack did say: "If "faith schools encourage divisions" between different religions, teach in contradiction to our established laws and customs, or ways of treating one another, then this should be addressed." And our laws and customs are still rooted in Christianity whatever attendance at church signifies. Once you detach the one from the other, potentially anything goes and we get the kind of confusion amongst our young we have today.

16 June 2014 at 11:24  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "If you are not "arguing that ethics replace morals" then what source would you have us base our morals on? Without some substantial underpinning, that can be discussed, it can only be a system of changeable ethics."

Oh how I love going over this particular bone of contention time and time again. Look, you simply don't get it and I really don't care a hoot whether you get it or not. This is not an Internet version of the film Groundhog Day. I don't feel the need to repeat this stuff endlessly.

"And our laws and customs are still rooted in Christianity whatever attendance at church signifies."

As far as I know, none of our laws refer to morals at all, and rightly so. The most important ones are basically codified ethics.

As for your attempt to hang onto the past to justify your beliefs and fulfil your wishes, we always live in the rubble of the past and we can choose how we carry on.

"Once you detach the one from the other, potentially anything goes and we get the kind of confusion amongst our young we have today."

And that one too. It isn't anything goes at all. You know that very well really. Your experience may vary of course but I wouldn't choose to live at any other time in our history. We're blessed at this time and in this place.

16 June 2014 at 19:14  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo
"Oh how I love going over this particular bone of contention time and time again. Look, you simply don't get it and I really don't care a hoot whether you get it or not. This is not an Internet version of the film Groundhog Day. I don't feel the need to repeat this stuff endlessly."

So you're not willing to present an argument? What's the point of being on the forum then? No 'hot key' ready? Unlike you.

"As far as I know, none of our laws refer to morals at all, and rightly so. The most important ones are basically codified ethics."

Really? Then why are our laws so different to those of Islam? What stopped abortion in the past? What stopped (yes, that issue) homosexuality being legalised? What's behind the prostitution laws? Why was divorce unthinkable a few generations ago? All based on morality. Its because we're a so called free and secular society that morals have taken a back seat. And did these ethics just spring out of the ground?

"We're blessed at this time and in this place."

Rather a selfish attitude, wouldn't you say? Jack is thinking of the generations to come and not our own immediate comforts. You don't care about obese people, despite the problems this is creating for future generations. So why the interest in education? You have a stake in this - why is that?

16 June 2014 at 19:36  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "So you're not willing to present an argument?"

Not again, no. I actually find it odd that the assumption inherent in your comment doesn't reach out and shake you.

"What's the point of being on the forum then?"

I'm on the forum just for you, Dodo. I love interacting with you, you see, as I get so much out of it. Heck, I even get to feature regularly on your little blog thingy. How flattering that is.

"Really?"

You'll be able to name some then, I expect. There's probably some legacy ones but I'm struggling myself. I think you'll find that our law is predominantly about behaviour. For sure, laws have specific aims which often reflect our values but values are different to morals, at least in the sense I think you're using when talking about morals. As for your raft of questions, I'll just answer each one on the face of it given my comment above.

"Then why are our laws so different to those of Islam?"

We have different cultures. I don't suppose the core of the law differs all that much.

"What stopped abortion in the past?"

Nothing actually stopped abortion in the past. That was part of the problem addressed by the reformers.

"What stopped (yes, that issue) homosexuality being legalised?"

Antiquated views, mostly based on Christianity.

"What's behind the prostitution laws?"

I ignored that earlier because you don't actually seem to know our law there.

"Why was divorce unthinkable a few generations ago?"

Multiple reasons. A few generations ago, women would have found it tough to contemplate because men were usually the so-called breadwinners. Many simply couldn't afford to divorce. Of course, the possibility of divorce has been around for hundreds of years.

"All based on morality. Its because we're a so called free and secular society that morals have taken a back seat."

I don't think morals have taken a back seat at all. They certainly haven't with me.

"And did these ethics just spring out of the ground?"

No.

"Rather a selfish attitude, wouldn't you say?"

Not at all. I hope future generations have the same freedom, security, luxury, and opportunities that we enjoy.

"Jack is thinking of the generations to come and not our own immediate comforts."

I doubt that very much. You're here for entirely different reasons, I daresay. And have said.

"You don't care about obese people, despite the problems this is creating for future generations."

I don't care because I refused to be your foil in an argument you raised yourself that had nothing to do with me? You're a strange fella, and no mistake.

That said, I was and am intrigued what you would like to do about obesity given that you raised it yourself. You never did come up with anything much.

"So why the interest in education? You have a stake in this - why is that?"

Have I not already explained that? You know, I'm sure I have. As it goes, I see quite a philosophical difference between the State involving itself in universal education, and the State involving itself in regulating one's lunch and dinner. Don't you?

Dodo, where are you going with all this? I've been humouring you so far, of course, waiting for the dénouement but it doesn't seem to be coming any time soon. Get on with it, please? I'm growing even more bored than usual with you.

16 June 2014 at 22:06  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Just a reminder to what I actually said as I can see this veering off, taking what is left of my patience with it: "As far as I know, none of our laws refer to morals at all, and rightly so. The most important ones are basically codified ethics."

16 June 2014 at 22:09  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack says, well keep your patience. He is fed up with your refusal to have a polite discussion and your sarcastic avoidance of the central issues.

16 June 2014 at 22:29  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, Happy Jack says, well keep your patience. He is fed up with your refusal to have a polite discussion and your sarcastic avoidance of the central issues.

16 June 2014 at 22:29  
Blogger David Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

16 June 2014 at 23:07  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo :"He is fed up with your refusal to have a polite discussion and your sarcastic avoidance of the central issues."

The possibility of polite discussions with you went the way of the Dodo a long time ago.

17 June 2014 at 04:59  
Blogger Happy Jack said...

Danjo, that is a great pity as I'm sure, with effort on both our parts, we could explore issues without it always becoming so acrimonious - whatever has transpired before.

One of your strengths is detecting flaws in arguments and exposing when religion is used as an easy cover for prejudice of one form or another. However, rather than point this out in constructive ways, you often 'up the anti' by personalising replies which isn't helpful. You spot the buttons to push. These discussions do not have to be win-lose situations. That said, I fully accept responsibility and acknowledge 'Dodo' wouldn't haven't responded positively.

'Dodo' was a tribal Catholic who failed to engage in reasoned debate when Catholicism was attacked - with anyone. He has taken the chastisements given to heart and has been a slow learner. 'Happy Jack' is different and is used as my avatar as a way of reminding me of this. Of course, I will make mistakes from time to time, after 3 years plus on here this is to be expected. And I will use goads occasionally, as will you - why not?

Maybe next time .....

I'm leaving this thread now.

Peter

17 June 2014 at 12:49  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older