Faith schools should be open to all, regardless of
the parents' faith or lack of it, according to another
one of those registered "charities" that advises
on social engineering tactics.
It is the usual MO whereby the government decides what
is to be "achieved," in this case, destroying,
particularly, the Christian religion, then uses the
"advice" given by a registered "charity"
by other charities and government departments who
they know will spin the case for the government.
It is really like asking yourself a question in the
mirror, but the public is hoodwinked into believing
that the advice is impartial and provided by experts.
Here is the basic argument from the Runnymede
Trust with my comments in italics:
Faith schools should be open to all
Runnymede's latest report 'Right to Divide?' examines
how faith schools have responded to the statutory duty
to promote community cohesion. It recommends:
1. End selection on the basis of faith
Faith schools should be for the benefit of all in society
rather than just some. If faith schools are convinced
of their relevance for society, then that should apply
equally for all children. With state funding comes an
obligation to be relevant and open to all citizens.
The last sentence is completely dishonest. Tax-payers'
pounds are doled out by the billion to specific groups.
Pensioners get a Winter fuel payment. I don't. Hardly
all-inclusive, diversity-appreciating equality in action.
I can afford to heat my home, so I am not complaining.
2. Children should have a greater say in how they
Children's rights are as important as parents' rights.
While the debate about faith schools is characterized
by discussions of parental choice of education, there
is little discussion about children's voice.
And if the child wants to be in a school in which
his faith is valued? I bet they weren't thinking along
these lines. Of course the social engineers are trying
hard to diminish parental rights by all means, so it
is unsurprising that the 'authorities' would rather
strike up discussions with children and ignore their
parents, especially if they can coerce them into worshipping
the new three-in-one of equality, diversity and choice.
3. RE should be part of the core national curriculum
Provision for learning about religion is too often
poor in schools without a religious character. Provision
for learning about religions beyond that of the sponsoring
faith in faith schools is also inadequate.
The sweetener. Their side of the bargain is that
faith will be given greater significance in state schools,
although they don't say it - just imply it - however,
they want a variety of religions to be taught in all
This is only natural in the new world order as it
will have the desired effect of diluting faith and therefore
its influence corporately and the empowerment that faith
gives to individuals to enable them to tackle authority
when it goes bad and it is going very bad.
The Almighty gives me wisdom to notice what is going
on and the strength to oppose it in some manner at least.
4. Faith schools should also serve the most disadvantaged
Despite histories based on challenging poverty and
inequality, and high-level pronouncements that suggest
a mission to serve the most disadvantaged in society,
faith schools educate a disproportionately small number
of young people at the lowest end of the socio-economic
So, for example, Christian couples with a good work
ethic and who encourage their children intellectually,
spiritually and morally should be penalised simply because
Why are faith schools expected to raise people out
of poverty by accepting non-believers en masse? New
Labour has allegedly been improving the lot of disadvantaged
people for over eleven years.
This is a red herring. Like Nero, degenerate rulers
will blame everyone but themselves. Good parents seem
to be getting tarnished as a danger to society because
they don't spend twenty pounds a night down the pub
but would rather give their children a good start in
life by being there for them and providing for them.
This is unwelcome behaviour from our masters' point
of view because there are fewer opportunities for their
'system' to interfere. Good parents are less likely
to be caught in the likes of the benefits and social
services trap and the 'justice' system.
What must our rulers do? Why, get them into the
'sexual health' system: guaranteed to make your child
more likely to have sexual relations and have treatment
and 'advice' behind your back.
What use are faith schools to them? Teaching children
to wait until they are married before having sex? That
won't help their friends in the abortion industry.
5. Faith schools must value all young people
People cherish facets of their identities beyond their
faith, and these also need to be the focus of learning
in faith schools - and valued within them. Similarly,
religious identities should be more highly valued within
schools that don't have a religious character.
That's right. Don't dare be identified by your faith!
Naturally, we humans are multi-faceted by design, but
not always in the way the government likes. This is
nothing but social engineering in an attempt to make
us all alike and all subservient to those who set themselves
up as our masters.
The sweetener again is that faith will be "more
highly valued" in state schools.
And I'm a monkey's uncle. Faith will mean whatever
they want it to mean.
6. If these recommendations are acted upon, faith
should continue to play an important role in our education
Faith schools should remain a significant and important
part of our education system, offering diversity in
the schooling system as a means of improving standards,
offering choice to parents and developing effective
responses to local, national and global challenges in
This is a fine piece of doublethink. Parents can
have 'choice' by being denied the type of school they
want. They can have 'diversity' even though they don't
want it and 'local, national and global challenges in
education' can be addressed, whatever that means. It
means whatever they want it to.
Page six of the "Right
to Divide? Faith Schools and Community Cohesion"
report offers further insight to the real agenda:
"Teaching about democracy and citizenship within
institutions that are autocratic only serves to demonstrate
to young people the double standards of adults. If young
people are to develop the ability for critical thinking
and selfdetermination, in opposition to absolutist thought
and closed approaches to difference, developing appropriate
democratic dialogue within schools is necessary."
This says to me that children will be taught about
the politics and morals of a decaying society, to despise
the values of their family by accusing them of being
hypocrites, in other words, they want children to grow
up believing that you cannot serve God and mammon. They
are correct, but they want us serving mammon by seeking
to reprogramme children and short-circuiting their conscience.
As for state schools encouraging "critical
thinking". Do me a favour.
By the way, government lackeys:
"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones
which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone
were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned
in the depth of the sea." Matthew 18:6
Comments can be left on my