Not sure if this has been brought up but I can't find it if it has...

 

Where do we all stand on this??

 

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about, when I went to school (1995-2000) we were split into different sets for subjects based on ability. I.e maths set 1-7 (1 being the best and 7 the worst) so that you didn't have someone really good being held back by being in the same class as someone poor at it (and visa versa)

 

Surely grammar schools are just the same but grouping by district as appose to just within a school?

 

Also, as it stands to get into the best high school in Chorley (St Micheals) you have to go to church every week ffs. Same with the best primary schools. It doesn't matter if your Catholic, Jewish, Muslim etc etc as long as you attend every week and get your stamps

 

They are only doing this as they know a parent willing to go to church every week will also put a shift in teaching at home

 

I'd rather have an 11+ system / Grammar schools than the current system of faith taking precedence

Edited September 9, 20169 yr by birch-chorley

It's not QE II you should worry about, but her likely successor....

I can't imagine Charlie being a God botherer, then again, I can't imagine him being King.

I can't imagine Charlie being a God botherer, then again, I can't imagine him being King.

Wouldn't get the Crown on for a start.  They'd have to lob off top of his ears.

Wouldn't get the Crown on for a start. They'd have to lob off top of his ears.

It's a bit girly is her crown. Will the King not have a more masculine one?

Yeah, barbed wire over the top it.

Now then.......The Queen (who I know you like) - she's the Supreme Governor of the Church of England and Defender of the Faith.......so she surely must "believe" that there is an afterlife, otherwise it would be a bit off to hold those positions.

 

I know how much you like and admire our Monarch..........do you think religion is a crutch for her, and she's mentally weak in her belief of an afterlife? If she think's it's a load of old bollocks, then she could easily say so, and relinquish the religious element of her role surely.

 

 

Of course I'm taking the piss, but........it is interesting to see how our Monarchy, of which some approve, is massively entwined with religion. I think she generally refers to God quite a lot in her various speeches, and I think part of the coronation ceremony involves promising to maintain the church..........Should the Queen be taking a stand and distancing herself from the Church?

And there's that song about her and god that some belt out before football matches

Good point Zico....our National anthem is only sung by the weak minded

Now then.......The Queen (who I know you like) - she's the Supreme Governor of the Church of England and Defender of the Faith.......so she surely must "believe" that there is an afterlife, otherwise it would be a bit off to hold those positions.

 

I know how much you like and admire our Monarch..........do you think religion is a crutch for her, and she's mentally weak in her belief of an afterlife? If she think's it's a load of old bollocks, then she could easily say so, and relinquish the religious element of her role surely.

 

 

Of course I'm taking the piss, but........it is interesting to see how our Monarchy, of which some approve, is massively entwined with religion. I think she generally refers to God quite a lot in her various speeches, and I think part of the coronation ceremony involves promising to maintain the church..........Should the Queen be taking a stand and distancing herself from the Church?

 

Now look here smartypants, I am fully aware that HM is defender of the faith and all that but in line with her constant presence, which most of us admire so much, there is a duty to uphold certain traditions and practices and I am sure and certain this plays a very big part in her thinking.

 

None of us could ever find out but I have a strong suspicion that such a bright and intelligent woman would have worked out many years ago that religion has been a tool for controlling the masses and, as much as I personally admire the Royal Family, without such control some decades back, the possibility of a Commie overthrow of all we hold dear could have been possible. Seems a ridiculous thought now but I am sure that when the US were in the 'Reds Under The Beds' paranoia phase in the Fifties the British establishment would have been wracked with concern over the activities of the slimy little treacherous toads Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, Donald Maclean and John Cairncross and all the damage they could have done. HM extolling the virtues of the C of E may well have been useful in defusing any malicious intent which may have been present in sinister elements amongst the masses. Who knows? All pure conjecture of course.

 

Bottom line is, I have no problem with folk believing whatever the hell they want as long as they don't parade it or try to force it down every other fuckers throat. I may think that Islam, Christianity, Scientology etc. are all as fucking loopy as the Flat Earth Society but I have no problem with people using those various crutches if they feel they need to. Just don't fucking preach to me, or indoctrinate young minds in schools thank you.

Good point Zico....our National anthem is only sung by the weak minded

 

 

Is it fuck a good point. The pair of you are just being silly twats now.

 

I belt out Jerusalem with great gusto when I get chance and I am the ultimate atheist. At BCGS it was the school song and our start to the day every day at assembly. Simply a tradition. Uplifting are words like 'Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand'.

 

Besides that, I love the 'No Surrender' bit in the National Anthem 

I see the 'weak mentally' comment is being misconstrued by some.

 

That comment applied to peoples views on what happens after life and nothing else. Clearly, there are some extremely bright religious people - some so bright that they have been well remunerated bricks in the building of multi billion dollar gold laden industries out of their 'faith'.

 

IMO religion is a crutch for people who can't handle the fact that, after living, we turn to dust and that is the end.

 

All we have to do is decide what to do with the time we are given and make the most of it.

Fucking hell, Bolty, a simple 'whoooosh' would have sufficed.

An impassioned plea for Atheism coupled with a positive remark on sectarianism, whatever next?

Fucking hell, Bolty, a simple 'whoooosh' would have sufficed.

 

 

Have you ever known me cut it short

An impassioned plea for Atheism coupled with a positive remark on sectarianism, whatever next?

 

 

McCarthyism.

McCarthyism.

I'm happy with Parky, thanks, as are most, so it's probably just you and Anewman who's into that (still).

I'm happy with Parky, thanks, as are most, so it's probably just you and Anewman who's into that (still).

 

 

Now you really have lost me. I thought you'd decided that we'd work through all the '-isms'.

Capitalism, racism, sexism - the foundations of cock-rocking idealism.

 

© Napalm Death 1988.

 

Anyway, McCarthyism is before sectarianism alphabetically.

For anyone who's not heard it, those 'ism' lyrics are from 'Cock Rock Alienation' anyway, enough of that waffle, here's a bit of Napalm Death, with that very ditty...
 

Edited September 13, 20169 yr by Youri McAnespie

grammar schools.

Why should the rich and/or the religious have first dibs on a decent education?

 

I'm glad I don't have kids, piss poor educational standards and a popular culture and ethos that is largely moronic is a toxic mix. Kids aren't suddenly 'thicker' they're just being let down en masse by those who should be guiding them.

 

Look at anyone who's anybody's biographies on Wikipedia, it's notable just how many have had a private education...Maybe increase mobility by sending poor kids to some of these schools - an existing infrastructure.

 

Haven't read the whole  thread but you raise a good point!

 

I work in education and have seen from the inside the unfairness of the current system.  The Equality Act says a child can't be refused an education due to his/her sex & preference, race, religion etc - but what about how much money their parents have?  In this country a kid from a poor family has a lesser chance than a kid from a rich family - but why should that be so - considering we are all for Equality!?  Imo, we, as a society, discriminate minors on grounds of their parents financial status when we should really be looking at their ability and application - no more, no less.  £ isn't a 'protected characteristic', but in the above case(s), I think it should be!

 

If we want the cream to rise to the top, which would mean the more able get the best jobs etc, then why don't we see this in action?  

 

Oh, I'm sure I read a stat the other day that said around 70% of all British athletes were privately educated.   Imagine how well we would do if all those that deserved such an education/opportunity got one . . .  

Edited September 13, 20169 yr by madthatter

 They should teach this lot in school.

http://www.aetherius.org/

Believe Jesus lives on Venus and some top mon "Mars Sector 6" who lives on, well, Mars as it happens, saved us from a race of intergalactic fish called "the fiends of Garouche". Cracking stuff (and not in some intentionally piss taking way, they genuinely believe it and have done for decades since the 50s) - when I lived in London I went to a talk by one of them and it's so bonkers you have to love it.

Turns out if you go to that site, things have progressed they even have a Manchester branch based in, of all places, Bury:

 

Manchester Branch

Organisers: Mollie Entwistle
Assistant Organiser: Paul White

43 Bronte Avenue, Bury, Greater Manchester, BL9 9RW
0161 763 4954 0161 763 4954
manchesterbranch@aetherius.co.uk

If it's not bloody migrants, the lovies are telling us what we should be doing, it's education now.

Hypocritical bint

http://tgr.ph/vfg3Es

Haven't read the whole  thread but you raise a good point!

 

I work in education and have seen from the inside the unfairness of the current system.  The Equality Act says a child can't be refused an education due to his/her sex & preference, race, religion etc - but what about how much money their parents have?  In this country a kid from a poor family has a lesser chance than a kid from a rich family - but why should that be so - considering we are all for Equality!?  Imo, we, as a society, discriminate minors on grounds of their parents financial status when we should really be looking at their ability and application - no more, no less.  £ isn't a 'protected characteristic', but in the above case(s), I think it should be!

 

If we want the cream to rise to the top, which would mean the more able get the best jobs etc, then why don't we see this in action?  

 

Oh, I'm sure I read a stat the other day that said around 70% of all British athletes were privately educated.   Imagine how well we would do if all those that deserved such an education/opportunity got one . . .  

 

 

Do you want equality or to look at their ability and application?

Do you want equality or to look at their ability and application?

 

Give everyone an equal start and let their ability and application determine the rest.

Equality of opportunity I think is what Madhatter is angling at.

 

Grammar schools were an opportunity for gifted but poor kids in the past, in the present I think the fear of places being grabbed, by means fair or foul, by kids of 'proactive' parents is a real one.

 

Specific tuition for kids, parents being on parent commitees and 'close' to teachers, moving to catchment areas etc. Donations and church/temple/mosque attendance in the case of faith schools - all these tactics and others which are currently employed to get places at the top ranked schools will be employed in the scramble for the new grammar places.

 

Edit: madhatter posted in the meantime whilst I was writing in reply to BD.

Edited September 13, 20169 yr by Youri McAnespie

Why doesn't Purple Aki get himself an agent? I bet he could make a bit of money doing nightclub pa's, stag doos etc

Edited September 13, 20169 yr by Youri McAnespie

Give everyone an equal start and let their ability and application determine the rest.

 

So, ban grammar schools, faith schools and private schools, in favour of comprehensives?