globalresearch--2019-06-03--Does Modis Re-Election Threaten Indias Muslims Religion is Poisoning Indian Politics

Does Modi’s Re-Election Threaten India’s Muslims? Religion is Poisoning Indian Politics

India’s general elections were the most wide-ranging and possibly most expensive election campaign in the nation’s history. More than 2,000 parties and over 8,000 candidates contested 543 seats in the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, and some 900 million registered voters cast their votes. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) emerged victorious to seal his re-election with a majority of 303 seats.  However, Modi’s return to power has brought distress for some minorities, including India’s 200 million Muslims. With an increase in hate crimes against Indian Muslims, “some fear the world’s largest democracy is becoming dangerously intolerant” under the Hindu nationalist government, reports the BBC’s Rajini Vaidyanathan.  Using religion as a way to win is a global phenomenon. For instance, Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Republicans in the US all use religion in politics. Politicians appeal to religious emotions to gain support. Indeed, Modi is a great example of that practice and he has dramatically reshaped the politics of India.  Ever since he was first elected in 2014, Modi has tried to appease his party’s hard-line Hindu base while pursuing his goals of development and economic growth. He has humored Hindu extremists like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) organization that created his party. Modi himself was an RSS preacher before he became an active BJP politician. While the prime minister has not condoned violence against Indian Muslims, he has not publicly criticized anti-Muslim actions by Hindu extremists.  Hindutva, a form of Hindu nationalism, is where the problem lies. As a term and ideology, it was popularized by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar first in 1923. It forms the basis of the RSS, as well as the Vishva Hindu Parishad and Hindu Sena groups. As a far-right, ethno-nationalist ideology, Hindutva uses religion as a way to justify violence “against Dalits, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Ravidassias and Buddhists.”  Over the past five years, the Hindutva movement has gained momentum under the Modi government. According to Human Rights Watch, vigilante groups calling for the protection of cows have killed dozens of people. Most of them are Muslims who were murdered for allegedly slaughtering cows. Many Hindus believe cows are sacred and killing them is a sin. Therefore, some extremists have targeted those who kill the animal.  These attacks are a symptom of the rise of violent Hindu nationalism under Modi. With a BJP government in office, some have seen this as encouragement to embark on vigilantism against cattle traders. Even “lower-caste Hindus previously known as ‘untouchables’ have faced violence from hard-line Hindu nationalists,” reports Swati Gupta.  Hindu Extremism Must be Reined in  Paul Marshal, a senior fellow at the Center for Religious Freedom, says that while international focus has been  on Islamic terrorism, it has largely ignored Hindu extremism and its record of violence. Saffron terror is a real phenomenon and is supported by members of the BJP. It is rarely scrutinized in the West because Hinduism is stereotyped as a gentle and non-violent faith. It is personified by the image of Mahatma Gandhi.  This allows the RSS and the BJP to take advantage of the attention that the West gives to Islamist violence, enabling Hindu extremism to slip under the radar. In fact, the actions of Hindu extremists are perturbing and nerve-wracking. In India, religious extremism and hatred are now deeply entrenched.  Under Modi, anti-Muslim “bigotry has been normalised in the democratic process,” says journalist Neyaz Farooquee. After re-election, the BJP might double down on its policies, making life more difficult for Indian Muslims and other groups. Therefore, the international community must take urgent measures to ensure the ruling party does not persecute minorities.  The United Nations, along with other major powers, should put pressure on India to protect minority rights as per its constitution. India must curb the RSS and other extremist Hindu groups. It must prevent communal riots and human rights violations.  In 2018, the BJP government “harassed and at times prosecuted activists, lawyers, human rights defenders and journalists for criticizing authorities,” according to Human Rights Watch. This must stop. Instead, Prime Minister Modi must work to create a balanced, peaceful and tolerant environment for all minorities in India.  Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.  This article was originally published on Fair Observer, US.  Azaz Zaman is a columnist and a university lecturer. He currently teaches at the Bangladesh Army International University of Science and Technology. He has also worked as a researcher in several national and international research firms, including IPAG (Bangladesh) and EPSCoR (US). He regularly publishes articles in both national and international journals and daily newspapers. He was selected as one of the outstanding young researchers by the South-Central Climate Science Center, US, in 2014. He completed his BBA at North South University, Bangladesh and MSc in Applied Economics at Oklahoma State University, US.  Featured image is from the author


jerusalempost--2019-12-27--Montenegro's parliament approves religion law despite protests

By subscribing I accept the terms of use


lewrockwell--2019-12-04--The Transformation of Religion and the Control Over Society

“Religion is still useful among the herd – that it helps their orderly conduct as nothing else could. The crude human animal is in-eradicably superstitious, and there is every biological reason why they should be.    Take away his Christian god and saints, and he will worship something else…”    ~ H.P. Lovecraft  Worship by the human animal began long ago, and has taken many forms. The human species has forever looked for the answers to life, and has looked toward those who claim to speak to God, and has also looked to science. The reverence shown toward those wearing royal robes, vestments of service to God, has never been completely isolated to the claimed devout. Mankind has always been filled with fear and has been gullible, so those he followed and worshipped could be any port in the storm. Fear and gullibility is a dangerous pairing to be sure, and in this progressive and multicultural world of today, the end result of false religious fervor could be one of total societal control.  Religion has always been about control. In the church a thousand years ago, the highest member of clergy might claim that he talked directly to God, and that because he had exclusive knowledge of divine power, all should do as he says. They should turn over their money and individual freedom in order to comply with God’s will. At that time, this was accepted, as the masses of common people put faith in such beliefs as these, and due to fear, complied. That is not the case today, as with time, this bowing down to “holy” masters is mostly seen as foolish. So those seeking to control others needed a new religion, one that would be more widely accepted. Against the Left: A Ro... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Buy New $8.00  Rulers by definition seek to rule, and in order to accomplish their mission, control over others is necessary. In modern times, control over society has remained in place, but the basis of that control has dramatically changed. There is an old saying that a “Tiger never changes his stripes,” and this is an accurate description concerning the ruling elites, as money, power, and control have always been their only gods. Instead of magic and superstition, instead of faith-based religious rule, instead of the rule of royalty, and instead of rule by the majority, the planned rule sought will be one guided by “science” and technology. Real science is not considered in this equation, as future rule will be based on politicized science, which is completely immune from steadfast scrutiny, from question, from doubt, and from unrelenting challenge. In other words, the politicized science of today is not science at all, but is merely agenda driven fake science.  Legitimate individual scientists understand the concept of extensive and continuous research, of challenge, of new information, and of dissent, but when science is politicized, it is no longer valid. When most all science agrees, it is false. No truth can come from the group, as any group is essentially made up of different individuals, so mass scientific consensus is a certain sign of corruption. That corruption is guaranteed because the bulk of science today is funded from outside sources, and therefore is agenda driven. When scientists are paid to study and research, they are bound to a particular outcome, an outcome that is desired by those funding the research. This is obvious in the entirety of today’s scientific research at the university level, at the corporate level, and at the government level. In fact, all these shameful entities work together to achieve a particular end. The result sought is the control of everything and everybody.  Those who have an agenda to control the United States, as well as the rest of the world, are committed to rule administered by a select few experts that relies on science and technology as the basis for curing the human condition. This is a rule called Technocracy, and is now being quietly implemented at a rapid pace. The public at large so far is going along without much resistance, and this is a dangerous precedent to set.  While this anticipated rule by the elites is multi-faceted in nature, the single most important aspect of the propaganda necessary to fuel this takeover of human behavior is the con-game called “climate change.” This lie of politicized science is the driver of a technocratic agenda that will allow for domination of the world’s populace. In my opinion, this is the most dangerous type of control possible, as it will be all consuming, and based on capturing the entirety of humanity. This is a plan to affect a total behavioral change through technological means in a system without escape, and on a worldwide scale.  The choice now is clear. If the people at large decide to accept technocratic rule, they will be doomed to outright social and societal control. In a society such as this, living in a herd will take on new meaning, as people will voluntarily join the ranks of fenced in farm animals, dependent on their masters for their very lives and existence. Those who resist will be a minority, and a chaotic war of sorts amongst the people will likely follow. This resistance if it fails, will lead to an attempt by the elites to propagandize this failure in an effort to solidify the crowd, so they can hasten the implementation of a top-down technologically dominated system.  “Technocracy finds that the production and distributions of physical wealth on a global scale for the use of all citizens can be accomplished only by an accounting of technology – a holarchial style of governance of efficiency and function; A technate.”  “The term “Technate” refers to an operational area where the resources, means of production and other technical aspects of a civilization come under the management of technical experts. A Technate works through a distributed, holonic power structure, where technical decisions are made at the local level by those with the necessary technical expertise. All social decisions are being made in a direct democratic, consensus-driven process.”  Is this the new authoritative religious paradigm that Americans seek? Will mass ignorance and indifference allow for this systematic takeover of all individual behavior to flourish? Will the new lord of religion be Technocracy, and if so, what will it bring? Only time will tell, but total social and societal control will not be utopia, it will be dystopia.  The Best of Gary D. Barnett


lifesitenews--2019-12-19--Supreme Court to decide if religious schools can choose their own religion teachers

WASHINGTON, D.C., December 19, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – The Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to weigh in on whether the government can control who a church school chooses to teach its religion classes.  In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and in St. James Catholic School v. Biel, Becket Law (formerly the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty) is defending two California Catholic elementary schools’ right to choose ministers that embody their faith without government interference. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against both schools and rejected the prevailing common-sense standard for allowing religious schools to choose their teachers, Becket appealed to the Supreme Court, which has now agreed to hear both cases.  In Hosanna-Tabor, a similar Becket case in 2012, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the “ministerial exception” for a church school, a First Amendment right that allows religious schools to choose their own religion teachers. The ministerial exception protects all religious groups’ freedom to choose “ministerial” employees without interference from bureaucrats or courts. Most courts have ruled that ministerial employees are those employees who perform important religious functions, like instructing young children in the precepts of the Catholic faith. But in both Our Lady of Guadalupe School and St. James School, the Ninth Circuit rejected this widely accepted rule.  “Parents trust Catholic schools to assist them in one of their most important duties: forming the faith of their children,” said Montserrat Alvarado, vice president and executive director at Becket. “If courts can second-guess a Catholic school’s judgment about who should teach religious beliefs to fifth graders, then neither Catholics nor any other religious group can be confident in their ability to convey the faith to the next generation.”  Agnes Morrissey-Berru and Kristen Biel played crucial roles in teaching the Catholic faith to their fifth-grade students. Both taught a religion class, integrated Catholic values into every subject they taught, joined their students in daily prayer, and accompanied students to Mass and other religious services. However, when each school decided not to renew the teachers’ contracts based on a history of poor performance, both teachers sued.  In December 2018, the Ninth Circuit ruled against St. James Catholic School, saying the school did not have the right to fire the religion teachers.  In April 2019, the court also ruled against Our Lady of Guadalupe School. Even though both teachers had significant religious responsibilities, the Ninth Circuit still decided that their work was not religious enough and therefore allowed the court to intervene. Nine Ninth Circuit judges wrote a scathing dissent criticizing the rulings, and leading legal scholars and diverse religious groups condemned the rulings as dangerously wrong.  “Do we really want judges, juries, or bureaucrats deciding who ought to teach Catholicism at a parish school, or Judaism at a Jewish day school? Of course not,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “Religion teachers play a vital role in the ecosystem of faith. We are confident that the Supreme Court will recognize that under our Constitution government officials cannot control who teaches kids what to believe.”


nationalinterest--2019-11-14--How Baghdadi Used Religion to Sell the Islamic State's Twisted Tribe

The Islamic State’s caliphate was never widely recognized among the global Muslim community and no longer has significant territory. But the Islamic State still uses the history of the caliphate to push their claims.  Just days after the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Oct. 27, the Islamic State named Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi as the new “caliph.”  In 2014, IS conquered vast swaths of Iraq and Syria and declared itself to be the “caliphate.”  Defined and applied in different ways over the centuries, the fundamental idea behind the caliphate is the just ordering of society according to the will of God.  The Islamic State’s caliphate was never widely recognized among the global Muslim community and no longer has significant territory. But the Islamic State still uses the history of the caliphate to push their claims.  As a scholar of global Islam, every time I teach my “Introduction to Islam” class, questions about the caliphate come up, in part because of IS’s claims.  The leader of a caliphate is called the caliph, meaning deputy or representative. All caliphs are believed to be the successor to Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad was not a caliph; according to the Quran he was the last and greatest of the prophets.  That means no one can replace Muhammad as the messenger of God. The caliph, for example, is not always seen as holding special spiritual authority. But he is meant to preside over the caliphate in the absence of Muhammad.  The debate over who was the rightful representative of the prophet began immediately after his death. While the majority supported Abu Bakr – one of the prophet’s closest companions – a minority opted for his young son-in-law and cousin, Ali.  Abu Bakr’s supporters would come to be known as Sunni Muslims, who believe that Muhammad did not leave instructions regarding his successor. Those who felt Ali was appointed by the prophet to be the political and spiritual leader of the fledgling Muslim community became known as Shiite Muslims.  Abu Bakr was the first caliph and Ali the fourth.  The second and third caliphs were Umar and Uthman. Under Umar, the caliphate expanded to include many regions of the world such as the lands of the former Byzantine and Sassanian empires in Asia Minor, Persia and Central Asia. Uthman is credited with compiling the Quran.  That al-Baghdadi adopted the name of the first caliph was no coincidence. Together, Sunni Muslims call the first four caliphs the Rashidun, or the “Rightly Guided Caliphs,” because they were close companions or relations of Muhammad. They are also believed to be extraordinarily pious. This period lasted about 30 years.  The Complex History of the Caliphate  After rebels assassinated Uthman in A.D. 656, Ali was elected caliph. However, a civil war soon broke out between Ali and Muʿawiya ibn Abi Sufyan. The civil war ended in Sufyan’s victory and the formation of the Umayyad caliphate in A.D. 661.  The Abbasid dynasty descended from Muhammad’s uncle, Abbas ibn Abdul-Muttalib, and succeeded the Umayyads.  These two caliphates oversaw the continuing expansion of the empire. Under them architecture, the arts and sciences flourished.  For example, the “Dome of the Rock,” a shrine in the Old City of Jerusalem, was built under an Umayyad caliph as a monument to the rising supremacy of their empire.  The Grand Library of Baghdad, also known as the “House of Wisdom,” was supported by Abbasid patronage. The “House of Wisdom” is credited with being a center of translation, scientific study and academic exchange. This period of flourishing, from the eighth to the 14th century, is often referred to as the “Islamic Golden Age.”  Both before and after the fall of the Abbasids in A.D. 1258, a succession of various empires made overlapping and competing claims to the caliphate. These included the Mamluks of Cairo and the Umayyads in Cordóba, Spain.  In 1517, the Turkish Ottomans amassed enough land and power throughout Asia Minor, North Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and Eastern Europe to claim the title “caliphate.” Ottoman sultans, however, were not universally recognized as caliphs. Many Muslims believe that the caliphate effectively ended after the Mongol conquest of Abbasid Baghdad in A.D. 1258.  Nonetheless, the Ottomans effectively held on to that title until 1924, when the Turkish nationalist and secularist Kemal Ataturk abolished the caliphate.  The idea of the caliphate, which the Islamic State has forcefully promoted, recalls a time and a place when Islamic states flourished politically, economically and socially. It also summons up a spiritual vision of a supposedly more devout and dedicated Muslim community than exists today.  Other modern-day Islamists have called for a resurrection of the caliphate, or at least its ideals, as a way to recapture the vibrancy of the past. However, only violent extremist groups such as al-Qaida or the Islamic State have tried to make it a tangible reality.  Killing al-Baghdadi has not quashed the Islamic State’s version of the caliphate. The idea lives on and continues to motivate its members in enclaves across the globe. It is worth mentioning that the name of their new caliph is an honorific title for a member of Prophet Muhammad’s family – “al-Qurashi.” This prophetic lineage is one more way IS is trying to resurrect the history of the caliphate for its destructive purposes.  [ Expertise in your inbox. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter and get a digest of academic takes on today’s news, every day. ]  Ken Chitwood, Journalist-fellow, University of Southern California's Center for Religion and Civic Culture / Lecturer, Concordia College New York, University of Florida  This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


nationalinterest--2019-12-11--How Men Used Religion to Shame Women Into Submission

The ‘extreme abstinence’ of the purity movement was used as leverage over evangelical women.  speaking out about the heightened emphasis on sexual purity that characterized their upbringing in that subculture.  Joshua Harris, a former pastor who became one of the most public faces of the purity culture movement in the United States with his 1997 book “I Kissed Dating Goodbye,” recently renounced his views and very publicly left evangelicalism. When his book came out, it was widely read and led many evangelicals to believe that the best path through adolescence and to a fulfilling happy marriage was the embrace of purity culture.  So, what exactly is the purity movement all about?  The label purity culture has a range of meanings. Many use it in its most literal form to refer to efforts, especially in conservative Protestant Christianity, to promote sexual abstinence prior to marriage.  But beginning in the 1990s some groups within conservative U.S. Protestantism began promoting an organized strategy to convince young people that the Bible requires a much more restrictive code, what one author has called “extreme abstinence.”  In 1993, for example, the Southern Baptist Convention launched its “True Love Waits” campaign, seeking to promote sexual abstinence among Christian youth with conferences, concerts and purity pledges. These are reminiscent of 19th-century evangelical temperance pledges, in which people signed a pledge to abstain from alcohol.  Advocates of extreme abstinence advise women to be appropriately submissive, not pursue leadership roles and not speak out too much in mixed company. That may mean avoiding mixed company except in tightly regulated circumstances, such as with parents present. All of these concerns become part of how “purity” is understood.  In this view, purity is much more than just refraining from premarital sex and dressing modestly. As I write in my book, “Building God’s Kingdom,” they replace dating with “courtship” that is pursued under the direction of the young woman’s father. Courtship in this case means that all interaction between young men and women must be explicitly for the purpose of pursuing marriage and under the permission and oversight of the young woman’s father.  The expectation is that “pure” young women will remain under the authority of their fathers until they trade it for the authority of their husbands – in marriages arranged by their fathers.  Both men and women are expected to remain sexually pure. This includes abstaining from sex, but it also extends to avoiding lustful thoughts. For the young women, being “pure” also means being responsible for the boys and men around them and comporting themselves in ways that do not “tempt” others to sin.  In purity culture, as I found in my research, a woman’s entire purpose is to appeal to a godly young man whom she can serve as a wife in whatever work God has called him to do. The woman’s sexual purity is what is of most value to the man.  These views are taught in many ways, but a common example comes from youth groups and summer camps where a pastor or camp director passes around a chewed piece of gum, telling the young women if they fail to protect their purity that is how they would appear to a Christian man looking for a godly wife.  This exercise prompted condom manufacturer Trojan to launch a 2019 campaign called “You Are Not Chewed Gum.”  Other groups joined in marketing chastity throughout the 1990s with purity rings, books, concerts and father-daughter “purity balls.” A purity ball is a father-daughter formal dance in which the daughters make a commitment to purity culture and fathers vow to protect their daughters’ purity.  These activities in general, but purity balls in particular, were especially pervasive in Christian schools and the Christian home school movement and in the churches affiliated with them.  As the children raised in these evangelical communities have grown to adulthood, a dark picture has emerged of a movement that has promoted shame and sexual ignorance.  Evangelical women have shared their stories of being shamed. There has been a a television documentary, and a new book explores the impact of those teachings on the everyday lives of young women raised in the culture. Social media has been an important way of connecting with each other for support.  Author Linda Kay Klein, who grew up in this culture herself, interviewed women to document how these teachings led to guilt and shame as well as profound ignorance about sex and sexuality.  Many young adults raised in this subculture have said that they still battle shame and trauma as a result of these teachings, making it difficult to develop healthy adult sexual relations.  The trauma of rape and sexual assault are made worse when women are taught to blame themselves as a result of the crimes against them.  The power of the purity movement  But these teachings serve important social functions in the context in which they persist. As I’ve written in my book “Evangelical Christian Women,” rigid gender norms characterized by women’s submission and male authority are at the very heart of the evangelical subculture. Purity culture reinforces that structure.  Moreover, in evangelicalism, what makes a person a Christian is having had a conversion experience, sometimes called being “born again” or saved. The conversion experience involves experiencing an overwhelming sense of guilt and a strong desire to seek forgiveness for sins.  Many evangelicals then want to protect their own children from the temptations that lead to that very experience of guilt necessary for conversion. Purity culture encourages fundamentally unattainable gender norms and purity requirements: that is, not only must unmarried people abstain from sex, but that merely thinking about sex risks eternal damnation. These rules create a powerful sense of shame and failure by design, even when there is no other “sin” that would seem worthy of hell.  That sense of shame and failure creates the need for exactly what the evangelical tradition provides: salvation.  [ Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter. ]  This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


newspunch--2019-01-20--Canadian Party Islam Is the Native Religion of Canada

Canadian Party: “Islam Is the Native Religion of Canada”

Many Canadians have expressed concern over the claim by a political party that Islam is the native religion of Canada.  According to journalist Tarek Fatwah, the newly formed Islamic Party of Ontario wishes to introduce Sharia Law in Canada on the basis that Islam is the native religion of the country.  Spencerfernando.com reports: As Fatah noted in his article, “In case you have not heard of the Islamic Party of Ontario, its name was officially reserved under Elections Ontario rules in October 2018, with more steps required before it becomes a formal party.It operates with a mandate to introduce Islamic rule in Ontario and Canada because, according to the fledgling party, “We understand and believe that Islam is the native DEEN (religion) of Ontario and Canada.”  Disturbingly, the head of the fledgling party – Jawed Anwar – has called Fatah an “open enemy of Islam,” equivalent to ‘apostasy’ and something that radical Islamists believe is worthy of death:  Says Fatah, “For those who are living in 2019 and the 21st century, this may sound like a joke. But those who are still living as if it is 1019 in the 11th century, the beheading of an alleged Muslim apostate is part of their heritage and faith.”  What’s also messed up is the ideal that Islam is the “native religion of Ontario & Canada.”  Canada’s founding beliefs are clearly Christianity and Indigenous traditions. There’s no way around that basic fact.  Of course, the establishment media and left are silent:  “Can someone explain why the Canadian media (ALL news outlets!) insists on not to report about the new Islamic Party of Ontario and its anti-gay policy? Can someone explain why ALL groups representing the LGBTQ…”  To see a theocratic Islamist party potentially growing in Ontario is a very disturbing thing, and people like Ensaf Haidar – a brave human rights activist who has lived under the rule of Islamist governments, are sounding the alarm:  “After we have the Islamic Party of Ontario officially in Canada, what we should call his leader if he becomes PM of Ontario, Sheikh Grand Mufti of Ontario!  Shame on you Canadian politicians for how you are dealing with this shit issue.”  “The real enemy of Canada is the one who promotes Sharia law and establishes an Islamic party, based on Sharia, in a free country!”  All Canadians must heed the warnings of people like Haidar and Fatah, and stand together attempts to impose Islamist rule or theocracy in our great nation.  It cannot be allowed to happen.


pinknewsuk--2019-09-20--How can you be lesbian and Christian Home Office using religion against LGBT asylum seekers says

‘How can you be lesbian and Christian?’ Home Office using religion against LGBT asylum seekers, says report

LGBT+ refugee campaigners take part in the Pride in London parade on 06 July, 2019 in London, England. (Wiktor Szymanowicz / Barcroft Media via Getty Images)  A new report has alleged that the Home Office is using religion against LGBT+ asylum seekers.  The 85-page publication also found that the government department was using some LGBT+ asylum seekers’ dependency on homophobic or transphobic friends or family to discredit their applications.  The report, published earlier this month, outlines the often terrifying and traumatic experiences of LGBT+ asylum seekers navigating the UK’s immigration system.  “The Home Office makes me shiver,” one asylum seeker said.  “They make me tremble. Entering that Home Office is like entering the lion’s mouth.”  It further revealed that other asylum seekers had waited to apply for asylum because they did not know they could make it on the grounds of their sexual orientation or gender identity – and then believed that this was used against them by the Home Office.  One respondent said Home Office officials asked her questions including: “How can you be lesbian and Christian?,” “Isn’t the Bible against being gay?”, and “Doesn’t that contradict with your Christian belief or your belief?”  The report was based on 33 interviews with LGBT+ asylum seekers – 31 of these came from a Christian background and two were Muslims.  Another participant said: “‘In the application process, in my case, everything that I was doing I was doing it in secret, so I got to a point that Home Office is asking me ‘Where’s the proof?’ And it’s very difficult for me to come out with proof, because I’m doing this in a way that my [family members] will not find out who I am… I don’t have the right to work.  “So if these people kick me out, where am I going? So, that was the reason why it took me a long time for me to come out [as] who I am.”  The publication was commissioned by the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) of North London, which welcomes LGBT+ asylum seekers fleeing persecution, and supported by the UK Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group.  Jak Davis, at MCC of North London, described the findings as “extremely concerning” and said that it is “imperative” that LGBT+ people in need of refuge are given protection and safety.  “It is fundamentally wrong to assume that LGBT+ people cannot have or practice a faith,” said Davis.  “It is equally wrong to expect them to present detailed knowledge and analysis of scriptures that most people of faith, without a background in theological study, would struggle to do.”  “The Home Office needs to stop assuming that LGBTQI+ people cannot be religious or that they experience a conflict with their religion,” said Leila Zadeh, executive director of UKLGIG.  “They also need to stop using lack of knowledge of the possibility of claiming asylum as an LGBTQI+ person as a reason for refusing to grant refugee protection.”


rawstory--2019-04-16--WATCH Pete Buttigieg says hed like to see Pence evolve on LGBT Rights and not use religion to

WATCH: Pete Buttigieg says he’d like to see Pence ‘evolve’ on LGBT Rights – and not use religion ‘to harm people’

“My problem is when those religious beliefs are used as an excuse to harm other people,” Buttigieg charges.   2020 Democratic candidate Pete Buttigieg is responding to attacks from Vice President Mike Pence, who says the South Bend, Indiana mayor’s belief that God makes people gay infringes on his First Amendment right to freedom of religion.  The Vice President is “entitled to his religious beliefs,” says Buttigieg, who has been mayor since 2012, which includes Pence’s tenure as Governor of Indiana. “My problem is when those religious beliefs are used as an excuse to harm other people,” Buttigieg explained on CNN Tuesday (video below).  Buttigieg reminded viewers that Pence “advanced a discriminatory bill in 2015, under the guise of religious freedom, that said it was lawful to discriminate, provided you invoked religion as your excuse.”  “This isn’t about him as a human being,” Buttigieg added, apparently pushing back against Pence’s false claim that Buttigieg has attacked him personally.  “This is about policies that hurt people, policies that hurt children,” says the South Bend mayor, who would turn 39 the day before being sworn in to office should he win the Democratic nomination and beat Donald Trump.  Related: Christian University President Falsely Attacks Pete Buttigieg: ‘Please Stop Telling Us What Kind of Sex You Like’  Buttigieg charges that “to this day” the Vice President “hasn’t brought himself to say that it shouldn’t be legal to discriminate against people in this country because they’re LGBT.”  He notes that Pence “seems to be OK” with allowing LGBT people to be denied housing and services, and to be fired because they are LGBT.  “I would love to see him evolve on that issue,” Buttigieg said, noting that it’s “part of faith, that all of us can evolve and can grow better.”  Buttigieg, who served in the U.S. Navy as a Lieutenant in Afghanistan, also accused Pence of being against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because “he felt it was too pro-gay. He wanted to make sure that even closeted members couldn’t serve.”  He also called on Vice President Pence to “clear up” his positions against LGBT equality and civil rights.

David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement


rawstory--2019-11-06--Judge voids Trump’s ‘religious freedom’ rule that allowed medical providers to use religion as shiel

Judge voids Trump’s ‘religious freedom’ rule that allowed medical providers to use religion as shield to refuse care

A federal judge has just voided President Donald Trump’s rule that allowed medical providers to cite their personal religious or moral beliefs as a reason to refuse to provide care to certain individuals or to perform certain procedures.  Abortion, contraception, and care of LGBT, especially transgender individuals are among the events that, under the Trump rue, providers could refuse patients.  “U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan declared the rule unconstitutional in a decision stemming from a lawsuit by New York and 22 other mostly Democratic states and municipalities,” The Washington Post reports.  The rule came from the Dept. of Health and Human Services’ Office of Civil Rights, headed by Roger Severino, a right wing religious activist. Severino has a background in working for far right religious organizations and has used his considerable power at HHS to work against women and the LGBTQ community.  This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.


rawstory--2019-12-29--How Christian fundamentalism is turning people away from religion and toward science

Christianity is on the way out, according to surveys Americans who identify as Christian have dropped by 12 percent in the last decade, and those who identify as having no religion have increased 9 percent.  The Daily Beast cited multiple researchers who have examined the evolution of religion and the turn toward science. Christian fundamentalism is adding to the problem as some sects devolve back to the 1600s when science and religion were mutually exclusive.  “Those who have remained faithful are more fundamentalist than ever,” said the Beast. “Moderate Protestantism has declined, while conservative evangelical religion has increased as a percentage of America’s religious, with immediate political consequences: Donald Trump would not be president had conservative evangelicals and Catholics not rallied to his side, despite his many personal transgressions and evident lack of faith.”  Science, by contrast, has provided answers for those who hear “voices of the Devil” or who say they literally hear “the voice of God.” As neurology advances, doctors can pinpoint the source of delusion and use medication to aid in mental and emotional healing. Still, the well-known Bible stories persist in culture, which Pascal Boyer explained in his 1994 book is due to their simplicity.  “Religious stories, in another irony, have survived human history’s version of natural selection. They are the ones that have stuck around, and they’ve done so not because of their truth or value, but because they are the kinds of stories that human brains understand, and want to repeat,” The Beast paraphrased.  Robert McCauley argued in his 2011 book that religion is “cognitively natural” and reflects how humans think after millions of years of evolution. The brain processes things “fast, (mostly) unconscious, automatic, effortless, intuitive thought.” It makes sense for the early years of human life when those who couldn’t think fast were often killed by larger animals.  “Science, McCauley shows, is actually very unnatural and counterintuitive. For example, we ‘naturally’ look for agents who take actions in the world; we look for quasi-people, not impersonal forces. But science has shown that impersonal forces—the laws of physics and natural selection, for example— actually are responsible for most of the world around us,” explained The Beast.  Essentially, the big questions humans have always asked like, “where did we come from?” and “are we alone?” are also questions our brains want to find easy explanations to.  For fundamentalists, whose brains are not accustomed to thinking critically, rational arguments don’t make a dent with entrenched belief systems. McCauley explains, “people are rarely argued out of beliefs that they were not argued into in the first place.”  When confronted with evidence that conflicts their worldviews, fundamentalists blame the sciences.  The Beast went on to cite Antony Alumkal’s 2017 book, Paranoid Science: The Christian Right’s War on Reality, which explains how conservative Christians not only don’t trust science, they then create conspiracy theories about scientists to justify their beliefs.  “Alumkal’s examples are familiar: climate denial, intelligent design, ‘gay conversion therapy,’ and opposition to stem cell research. In each case, drawing on Richard Hofstadter’s classic The Paranoid Style in American Politics, Alumkal shows how rather than simply state that their faith disagrees with the scientific evidence, Christian Right figures have created a fake scientific discourse to compete with the real one, which they allege to be a conspiracy,” the report explained.  The example they used was the evangelical group, the “Cornwall Alliance,” which takes a large portion of its funds from oil companies and oil executives. Naturally, the group doesn’t believe that climate change is real. It’s akin to a corrupt politician taking funds from an industry lobbyist and voting to support that industry. The main difference, however, is that religion uses God to justify their corruption and emotionally manipulate followers to believe the same.  Cornwall has resorted to creating conspiracy theories about the 97 percent of climate scientists who believe in the science.  The Beast compared it to atheists, whose militantism isn’t exactly comparable to fundamentalist Christianity. Atheists don’t burn people at the stake for being a witch, put scientists under house arrest for believing the Earth is round or perform exercises to remove demons. There are atheist activists like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens, The Beast recalled. they want to rid the world of religion, but most non-believers just want to be left alone. None are taking up a flaming sword to crusade against religious leaders.  According to Jerome Baggett’s 2019 book, The Varieties of Nonreligious Experience: Atheism in American Culture, Atheists have positive values based on the goodness of humanity. The value integrity, “open-mindedness, and the importance of progress.”  Read more about the conflicting beliefs and the ways right-wing fundamentalist Christianity is pushing people away from religion at The Daily Beast.


redstate--2019-02-09--Mike Lee Hands Mazie Hirono Her Rump Over Making Religion An Issue During Judaical Confirmations

Democrats have made it a habit to put the faith of the judicial nominees in the spotlight during their confirmation hearings, making the presence of faith a thing to be questioned in terms of fitness for a job.  As Sen. Mike Lee made very clear on Friday, however, the question of religious faith should go no farther than questioning whether a person’s faith will cause them to break their oath and duties to the positions they are applying for.  Senators like Hawaii’s Mazie Hirono, however, is one of the Democrats under the belief that certain beliefs may disqualify you from that position as it may run contrary to the whims of certain groups, such as the LGBT community.  Two days prior to this, Sen. Cory Booker grilled Neomi Rao, a nominee for the DC Court of Appeals, about her beliefs as stemmed from her Christian faith, namely about whether or not she thought homosexuality was a sin. Sen. Ted Cruz immediately swept in and chastised the Democrat for making the hearings a religious test.  It would appear that Lee picked up Cruz’s torch and launched into making it clear to Democrats that this isn’t how the committee should conduct itself.  The problem with asking a nominee about the particulars of his or her religious beliefs is that those questions inevitably expose those beliefs as somehow a qualifier or a disqualifier for public office. That is flatly inconsistent with at least the letter, at least the spirit if not also the letter, of at least two provisions of the Constitution. I cannot fathom why this would ever make sense to do. There was a time in this country when people might have been asked in a job interview context, or in the context of a hearing, like those we hold here, whether someone believed in God, whether they were Christian. When they might have been asked those it was not for a good reason, because there is never a good reason in a public setting to ask that question, save perhaps, if you just want to make sure that that person’s religious beliefs do not require that person to betray the judicial oath. Beyond that, I can’t fathom a circumstance in which that would be appropriate.  Hirono fired back at Lee, denying that she has ever done such a thing.  “These probing questions — if you were to list all of the questions that we ask, they have to do with whether or not these nominees’ very strongly-held religious views, as well as any other views that may not enable them to be objective as judges in lifetime positions, I think that’s a legitimate area of inquiry. And it is not that we all ask, ‘Do you think such and such is a sin, et cetera, et cetera —’”  “That was asked then. This week. This week it was asked. I’m not making this up,” Lee countered.  “We are not in the business of censuring each other’s questions to nominees or falsely assigning motives that don’t exist,” Hirono responded. “There is no religious test for nominees on this committee and to suggest otherwise is, to quote my friend from Utah, ‘wildly inappropriate.’”  Hirono went on to say that she’s merely questioning their religion (remember, she never does that) so that she can tell whether or not they’ll be fair to the LGBT community.  “I don’t care what religious views they have,” finished Hirono…who clearly cares.


renegadetribune--2019-04-16--Jews Have a Religion of Being Persecuted Everywhere

Jews Have a Religion of Being “Persecuted” Everywhere

Such was the life and the blessing which the Judahites, gathered in the Temple in 621 BC, were exhorted in the name of Jehovah and Moses to choose by their tribal chieftain Josiah, the mouthpiece of the priesthood.  The purpose and meaning of existence, under this “Mosaic Law”, was the destruction and enslavement of others for the sake of plunder and power. Israel might from that moment have counted itself happy to have been pronounced dead and to have been excluded from such a world to come. The Israelites had mingled in the living bloodstream of mankind; on its banks the Judahites were left stranded in the power of a fanatical priesthood which commanded them, on pain of “all these curses”, to destroy.  To the terror inspired by “all these curses” the Levites added also an allurement. In this tenet Deuteronomy most clearly revealed the status allotted to the heathen by The Second Law. In the last analysis, “the heathen” have no legal existence under this Law; how could they have, when Jehovah only “knows” his “holy people”?  Insofar as their actual existence is admitted, it is only for such purposes as those stated in verse 65, chapter 28 and verse 7, chapter 30: namely, to receive the Judahites when they are dispersed for their transgressions and then, when their guests repent and are forgiven, to inherit curses lifted from the regenerate Judahites.  True, the second verse quoted gives the pretext that “all these curses” will be transferred to the heathen because they “hated” and “persecuted” the judahites, but how could they be held culpable of this when the very presence of the Judahites among them was merely the result of punitive “curses” inflicted by Jehovah? For Jehovah himself, according to another verse (64, chapter 28) took credit for putting the curse of exile on the Judahites:  Deuteronomy employs this Doublespeak (to use the modem idiom) throughout: the Lord makes the special people homeless among the heathen for their transgressions; the heathen, who have no blame either for their exile or for those transgressions, are their “persecutors “; ergo, the heathen will be destroyed.  The Judaist attitude towards other mankind, creation, and the universe in general, is better understood when these and related passages have been pondered, and especially the constant plaint that Jews are “persecuted” everywhere, which in one tone or another runs through nearly all Jewish literature. To any who accept this book as The Law, the mere existence of others is in fact persecution; Deuteronomy plainly implies that.  The most nationalist Jew and the most enlightened Jew often agree in one thing: they cannot truly consider the world and its affairs from any but a Jewish angle, and from that angle “the stranger” seems insignificant. Thinking makes it so, and this is the legacy of twenty-five centuries of Jewish thinking; even those Jews who see the heresy or fallacy cannot always divest themselves entirely of the incubus on their minds and spirits.  The passage from Deuteronomy last quoted shows that the ruling sect depicted homelessness at one and the same time as the act of the special people’s god and as persecution by the special people’s enemies, deserving of “all these curses”. To minds of such extreme egotism a political outrage in which 95 Gentiles and 5 Jews lose their lives or property is simply an anti-Jewish disaster, and they are not consciously hypocritical in this.  In the Twentieth Century this standard of judgment has been projected into the lives of other peoples and applied to all major events in the ordeal of the West. Thus we live in the century of the Levitical fallacy.  Having undertaken to put “all these curses” on innocent parties, if the Judahites would return to observance of “all these statutes and judgments”, the resurrected Moses of Deuteronomy promised one more blessing (“The Lord thy God, he will go over before thee, and he will destroy these nations from before thee, and thou shalt possess them… “) and then was allowed to die in the land of Moab.


russiainsider--2019-04-23--Is Britains Religion Christianity or Islam

Is Britain's Religion Christianity or Islam?

On this day many of us celebrate Saint George's Day, an occasion to reflect on our Country’s history, is ‘the feast day of Saint George’ as celebrated by most Christian Churches and by the several nations, kingdoms, countries, and cities of which Saint George is the patron Saint including of course England, and even certain regions of Portugal and Spain.  In a letter published to the Daily Telegraph of London written by a Mark Hudson of Ashford, Kent, he very rightly pointed out that it was understandable that British architects of secularism, the most guilty of whom always was and has been Tony Blair, were concerned about the then Prime Minister David Cameron’s claim that Britain is a Christian country and that the reappearance of Christianity in public life would be very inconvenient for them though they admit that Britain is constitutionally Christian.  Mr. Hudson further pointed out that “The Coronation service and the Coronation oath are shot through with Christian beliefs and values, without which they would make no sense. So is that other great pillar of our liberties: the Magna Carta. Parliament convenes with prayer, and bishops of the Church of England sit in the House of Lords. National and civic occasions are marked by Christian ceremonies, and the calendar remains unabashedly Christian.”  Her Majesty the Queen has in the past explained her role as ‘Defender of the Faith’, and having an established Church in the Church of England, meant that the freedom of everyone to practise their faith as they wished was protected.  However, how corrupted by Arab money, have successive British governments been, both Labour and Conservative?  Particularly money from an extremist and subversive group as The Muslim Brotherhood notably via their main benefactor the tiny island State of Qatar? Instead of pontificating at length all the common sense reasons why what you are about to read, its fact, its existence speaks for itself and all that can be added is that the vast majority of British people think this revelation, about to be revealed for the first time to many, is abhorrent to the great British public.  Saint George's Day, also known as the Feast of Saint George, is the feast day of Saint George as celebrated by various Christian Churches and by the several nations, kingdoms, countries, and cities of which Saint George is the patron saint including England, and regions of Portugal and Spain.The historic Admiralty House and four other Whitehall buildings are now operating in accordance with some sharia rules – including a ban on alcohol – after they were used as part of an Islamic bond.  The properties must comply with some aspects of sharia under the terms of special bonds known as sukuk, announced by George Osborne two years ago when the UK became the first Western country to issue them.Andrew Bridgen, the then Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire. What is not commonly known is more than £200m of Sharia compliant ‘sukuk bonds’ have been sold to Muslim investors in the UK and to major Islamic finance centres in the Middle East and Asia.  Under Sharia law, charging interest, or usury, is forbidden. So to allow Islamic investors to receive rent, ‘the sukuk bonds’ pay them the rental income on certain buildings instead. Semantics!  Little reported otherwise, two years ago, the MailOnline reported that certain landmark Whitehall buildings were now owned by people bent on enforcing Sharia law in our Country.  No wonder our London Mayor is a Muslim.  The MailOnline wrote “the buildings were now governed by Sharia law”.  Andrew Bridgen, the Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire has been quoted as saying: “I do find it unbelievable government buildings are governed by Sharia law. I don’t see the bars as being an essential part of Parliament but it’s the principle that matters. Most of our constituents will be absolutely amazed that the principle could ever have been authorised.”  The Government buildings in question known about are Richmond House, and Wellington House. “The sukuk is issued under, and governed by, English law which applies at all times.” a spokesman for the UK Treasury commented.  Other than banning alcohol use in such buildings, it is unclear which other aspects of Sharia are being adhered to by the managers of the buildings concerned, but a government source said it had been agreed that serving pork in Richmond House would not affect the Sharia compliance of the sukuk. “Alcohol being served hasn’t arisen, as you would expect for a government building,” a spokesperson added.  In January, The Times reported that a plan to relocate MPs to Richmond House to allow refurbishment work at Westminster was meeting resistance because Richmond House was ‘dry’ under the terms of the sukuk agreement.  Can any Christian Britain think this acceptable?


cnsnews--2019-09-04--Elizabeth Warrens Bias Against Private and Religious Schools

Elizabeth Warren's Bias Against Private and Religious Schools -- and Their Teachers

From the time she was a little girl, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts had a dream. She wanted to work for the government.  "Me, I knew for sure what I wanted to do from second grade on," Warren said in a speech delivered in Philadelphia on May 13. "I wanted to be a public school teacher."  "Can we hear it for public school teachers? That's what I wanted," said Warren.  The American Federation of Teachers — a union affiliated with the AFL-CIO —hosted the event Warren addressed.  Notice she did not tell the teachers' union she simply wanted to be a schoolteacher — or a high school teacher, or a grammar school teacher. She said she wanted to be a "public school teacher."  "I will name, as president of the United States, a secretary of education who has been a public school teacher," said Warren.  Notice, again, that Warren did not vow to name someone who had been a schoolteacher to be secretary of education. She vowed to name someone who has been a "public school teacher."  Warren did not make a rhetorical slip here. She made a political commitment. On Aug. 31, she posted a tweet that included a video of her repeating this commitment. The tweet said: "I will nominate a Secretary of Education who has been a public school teacher — Betsy DeVos need not apply."  Imagine, hypothetically, someone who spent 25 years teaching at an urban Catholic school and another 10 serving as its principal. Imagine that this teacher inspired thousands of students along with his faculty colleagues, taught them so well that many gained acceptance to and graduated from prestigious colleges.  Imagine many of his former students returned from these colleges to become role models in the community where they grew up. Some even returned to teach at their alma mater.  After 35 years, this teacher-turned-principal retired from education and ran for Congress. He eventually became chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor.  Would this former teacher be qualified to serve as Elizabeth Warren's secretary of education?  No. Why? Because this former teacher was never a "public school teacher."  Warren's bias against teachers at religious and private schools — and against the schools at which they teach — also informs her very peculiar approach to school choice.  When President Donald Trump nominated Betsy DeVos — a prominent advocate of school choice — for secretary of education, Warren sent her a 16-page letter. Under the heading "Privatizing and Defunding K-12 Education," Warren's letter attacked DeVos for supporting voucher programs that allowed students to attend "private and religious schools."  "For decades," Warren wrote, "you have been one of the nation's strongest advocates for radically transforming the public education system through the use of taxpayer-funded vouchers that steer public dollars away from traditional public schools to private and religious schools."  In fact, it is not the voucher that steers money away from public schools; it is the parents who hold a voucher and decide to redeem it at a private or religious school, rather than at a government school.  Tellingly, Warren has favored giving parents school choice as long as they are prohibited from choosing a private or religious school.  "Short of buying a new home, parents currently have only one way to escape a failing public school: Send the kids to a private school," Warren said in "The Two-Income Trap," a book she co-authored with her daughter, Amelia Warren Tyagi, in 2003 (and which was republished in 2016).  "But there is another alternative, one that would keep much-needed dollars inside the public school system while still reaping the advantages offered by a voucher program," Warren and her daughter wrote. "Local governments could enact meaningful reforms by enabling parents to choose from among all the public schools in a locale, with no presumptive assignment based on neighborhood.  "Under a public school voucher program, parents, not bureaucrats, would have the power to pick schools for their children — and to choose which schools would get their children's vouchers."  For Warren, American parents should be allowed to choose where they send their children to school — as long as the government runs the school.  More often than not, this means parents would be forced to choose academically inferior schools.  The Department of Education's 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress tests indicated that 63 percent of high school seniors in Catholic schools were proficient or better in reading. That was true of only 36 percent of seniors in public schools.  Forty-eight percent of seniors in Catholic high schools were proficient or better in math — compared with 23 percent in public schools.  Parents who truly have a choice about where they send their children to school will also consider the values taught in the school.  Warren apparently would prefer that American children learn their values in government-run schools.  Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor in chief of CNSNews.com.


hotair--2019-11-04--Dem N.H. lawmaker rants about private, religious schools - GOP responds

New Hampshire Democrat State Representative Tamara Myer Le posted a profanity-laced rant on her Facebook page against private and religious schools. That might not be particularly newsworthy for most politicians but in this case, the elected official is a member of the House Education Committee.  Myer Le is a strong advocate for students with disabilities. It looks as though her daughter is one such student. Currently, in eighth grade, her child’s friends were all beginning to apply to attend private high schools. Myer Le lashed out about private and religious schools that do not have anti-discrimination policies against disabled students. Some fellow Democrat members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives “liked” her Facebook post.  “And then it happened. The Sunday afternoon my 8th grade daughter who is getting A-/B+s in 8th grade had to learn – while her friends were applying to private high schools – we would not be,” Le wrote. “Private and religious schools do not have anti-discrimination policies that protect students with disabilities.” “F*** private and religious schools,” Le concluded. Several of her fellow House Democrats ‘liked’ her comment, including Reps. Casey Conley and Heidi Hamer.  Hours after her rant was reported in the New Hampshire Journal, Myer Le deleted the Facebook post and replaced it with one free of profanity.  While the new post is more civil and more in line with what one might expect from an elected official, her opinion still calls into question her bias against private and religious schools. She has not responded to questions submitted by the press. She continues to justify her original post. It is reported that Myer Le has made her opinion on private and religious schools clear so the question is, why is she sitting on the House Education Committee? Her opposition to school choice is well-known.  It isn’t unusual for Democrats to object to school choice. Many are beholden to teacher unions as campaign donors. Public school teachers object to school choice because they say it takes funds from public schools. Parents, however, come out strongly in favor of school choice. One poll taken in January 2019 shows an increase of support for school choice of 4% since 2018. It is now at 67% approval. The poll was conducted by The American Federation for Children, the nation’s voice for educational choice, and Beck Research, a Democratic polling firm. 1,200 likely November 2020 voters were surveyed.  Conservatives have long pushed for school choice. The freedom to send a child to whichever school best suits his or her needs is essential for the child’s success. Myer Le is exercising her freedom of choice, whether she realizes it or not, to send her child to a school that meets her requirements. Her main concern seems to be that her child may be feeling left out as her friends apply to schools to which Myer Le and her husband do not support. Myer Le said she and her husband were unwilling to “give money to any high school that discriminated against people who experience disabilities” in that now-deleted Facebook post.  Having sent a child to both public and private schools, I find it hard to believe that Myer Le cannot find a private or religious school that fits her daughter’s needs, if that is her desire. No school deliberately discriminates against any child – as a matter of fact, private schools go out of their way to show how inclusive they are in admissions. Federal or state funding, for example, would not be available for grants and programs if discrimination was prevalent. Guidelines must be met for schools to qualify.  There are 329 private schools in New Hampshire with about 29,000 students enrolled. The House GOP leader said Myer Le’s rant was critical of all private and religious schools. The Democrat House Education Committee chairman Myer Le speaks for herself and not the committee.  “Sounds like it to me,” House GOP leader Dick Hinch told NHJournal. After seeing Rep. Le’s Facebook post Hinch released a statement calling for her to “apologize to every private and religious school throughout the state,” and demanding that she be removed from the Education Committee. “Given this exhibition of online rage, I do not believe that Rep. Le can provide any fair or objective review of policies pertaining to private and religious schools as a member of the Education Committee,” Hinch said. “House Speaker Shurtleff must remove her from the House Education Committee, and he should, in the strongest terms, condemn this type of behavior from her.” House Education Committee chairman Rep. Mel Myler (D-Contoocook) distanced his committee from Le’s controversial comments. “Rep. Le speaks for herself and not that of the House Education Committee. Positions of the committee are taken after full debate on an issue.”  State government officials and lawmakers may not have the national recognition of a representative serving on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. but the state government is powerful in the lives of a state’s residents. The state government is the body that passes laws that directly affect communities and neighborhoods. A state representative with a personal grudge against school choice, as well as private and religious schools, doesn’t have the impartial objectivity needed to make sound public policy decisions. At the very least Myer Le should apologize for her use of profanity and set a better example for students. She should apologize to the schools and parents of students who she trashed by implying their lack of consideration of disabled students. There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all school.


realclearpolitics--2019-04-06--So Yale Law School Endorses Anti-Religious Bigotry

What starts in the ivory tower of academia â including blatant discrimination against religious groups and students won't stay there for long.


rt--2019-06-19--Guns as religion Trumps envoy calls for armed guards at synagogues Jewish schools

Guns as religion: Trump’s envoy calls for armed guards at synagogues & Jewish schools

US President Donald Trump’s special envoy for combating anti-Semitism has called for an armed presence at Jewish institutions across the US, insisting synagogues, schools and community centers beef up on security.  The appointee, Elan Carr, said American Jews face a “time of danger” and must take steps to protect themselves from attacks and persecution, according to the Jerusalem Post.  “Any synagogue, every JCC [Jewish community center], should have guards,” Carr told an interviewer on Wednesday at a conference in Israel. “God willing, may they never be needed, but they should be there.”  President Trump tapped Carr to be the State Department’s pointman on anti-Semitism issues in February, after complaints from Democrats and Jewish advocacy groups pressured him to fill the position, which sat vacant for the first two years of his term.  Carr also spoke at the conference of the president’s commitment to protecting Jewish minorities in the US and around the world.  “The rhetoric of the president couldn’t be clearer,” he said. “Every time the president speaks on this issue, he calls it [anti-Semitism] a vile poison that must be rooted out.”  Some Jews reject Carr’s description of the president, however, and argue his policies and rhetoric actually put Jewish communities in more danger. In a recent survey of 1,000 American Jewish voters, nearly 60 percent of respondents said Trump “bears at least some responsibility” for recent synagogue shootings in Pennsylvania and California. Seventy-three percent said they thought Jews were less safe in the US than they were two years ago.  In his proposal for armed guards at Jewish institutions, Carr may have taken pointers from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who made a similar suggestion in May as one way to address rising anti-Semitism in Germany.  Like this story? Share it with a friend!


tass--2019-06-28--American Private Schools With Religious Background Are Attracting More Students

CHICAGO, June 28, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- The 2019-2020 admission season for international students into American Private Schools has come to end. According to Amerigo Education, the number of international students applying for their religious American private schools has doubled. Private schools with religious background are attracting more international students for their excellent performance in academic and moral standards.  Currently, more than two-thirds of private high schools in the United States are religious schools and they are well-known to be prestigious and offer top notch academic and extracurricular programs. Compared with non-religious schools, the school style of church schools is relatively "rigorous", because the school uses religious concepts and management models to regulate student learning or behavior. In addition, because of their religious beliefs, most teachers and students are generally friendly and helpful in dealing with people and things, and they are more accepting to students from different backgrounds. Amerigo believes that international students are more easily to adjust to new environment in such a supportive and caring atmosphere.  One Amerigo student from Russia said that before he entered into Amerigo campuses, he had worries about whether studying in a Catholic school would have conflicts with his own belief. After one-year studying, he said there should not be any worries because there are no restrictions on the religious background of students. And each staffs and students respect the idea of freedom of religions.  In addition, the student said that taking religious classes helped him to better understand western history, culture, art and social changes of the ancient western world. The so-called religious curriculum, in fact, is similar to a course integration on history of world civilization and western ideology which helps international students build a thorough understanding of American society in a holistic way.  Currently, all ten campuses from Amerigo are Catholic High Schools. Besides its advanced facilities, each campus also is made up of first-class teachers. In addition, Amerigo attach great importance to cultivating students' well-being and personal growth in and out of the classroom, and helping students to successfully enter the ideal top university in the United States.  Amerigo supports international students at premier U.S. high schools with a holistic and supportive approach that emphasizes excellent academic outcomes. We help international students seeking a preparatory education in the United States thrive both in and out of the American classroom. Combining a nurturing boarding environment, supplemental academic support, English language development, and an approach oriented around successful college outcomes, Amerigo prepares students with the skills, values, and care required to succeed in high school, at the university level, and beyond. For more information, visit www.amerigoeducation.com.


thedcclothesline--2019-12-26--NY Supreme Court rules Amish cannot exercise religious vaccine exemption to attend their own private

NY Supreme Court rules Amish cannot exercise religious vaccine exemption to attend their own private Amish school

The petition by an Amish father to the New York State Supreme Court to allow his family to practice their faith and allow his children to attend a private Amish school has been denied.  Jonas Stoltzfus has three children, all unvaccinated, who attend the Cranberry Marsh school in Romulus, NY, a town between Rochester and Syracuse.  Amish father Jonas Stoltzfus recently filed a lawsuit challenging a new New York state law requiring students to be fully immunized against contagious disease.  Stoltzfus says he was informed that his three children will be blocked from attending their Cranberry Marsh School, a traditional Amish school in this Seneca County settlement of six church districts. All 24 students at the school are Amish.  take our poll - story continues below  Stoltzfus’ opposition to the law was based on his belief that “God made his children ‘right and good’ and to vaccinate his children is to lose faith in God,” the lawsuit states.  A state Supreme Court Justice has now denied Stoltzfus’ legal challenge to temporarily stop the law:  Supreme Court Justice Daniel Doyle ruled that the state has the authority to require vaccinations to protect public health, citing prior appeals court decisions. He also rejected the lawsuit claims that the new law should be halted because it violated religious rights’ protections in the state constitution.  Kevin Barry of First Freedoms, Attorney for Mr. Stoltzfus, says that there will be no more appeals in the case.  Barry says that the state of New York has threatened to shut down the Cranberry Marsh School that the Stoltzfus children attend, though the state has taken no action yet.  The First Freedom’s web site notes the unusual choice that the judge made in writing his opinion.  New York law now requires K-12 Amish children to receive a combined 35 doses of 10 vaccines:  There is currently a bill in the NY Legislature to add the HPV vaccine, for a sexually transmitted virus, to the mandatory school schedule.  The American Academy of Pediatrics has now joined the vaccine industry and announced that their number one priority is the removal of the religious vaccine exemption from every state in the US. Participation in the abortion industry is now required for full participation in public life, including Christian education, in five us states. New York, California, West Virginia, Mississippi, and soon Maine will require children to be vaccinated with aborted fetal cell line vaccines to be educated in both public and private Christian schools, and legislation is being presented to do so in more than a dozen states. • Michigan county threatens to demolish 14 Amish homes unless they give up their religious beliefs and upgrade their homes • The Amish, who don’t get vaccinated, rarely get autism, cancer, or heart disease – coincidence? • Gov’t Revokes Off-Grid Amish Community’s Religious Rights, Forces Them to Use Electricity


theguardianuk--2019-01-31--School defends LGBT lessons after religious parents complain

The assistant headteacher of a school teaching children about homosexuality as part of a special programme has defended its decision after 400 predominantly Muslim parents signed a petition for the subject to be dropped from the curriculum.  Andrew Moffat, who was awarded an MBE for his work in equality education, claims he was threatened and targeted via a leaflet campaign after the school piloted No Outsiders – a programme run as part of sex and relationship education (SRE) lessons. Its ethos is to promote LGBT equality and challenge homophobia in primary schools.  Moffat, the author of Challenging Homophobia in Primary Schools, resigned from another primary school – Chilwell Croft Academy, also in Birmingham – after a similar dispute with Muslim parents.  Moffat, who resigned from his post in December 2013, said then that some Christian parents had also complained. The current dispute centres on Parkfield Community School in the Saltley area of Birmingham.  Children from reception age through to year 6 were being taught five No Outsiders lessons per year, each one covering topics to meet requirements in the Equality Act. Books being read by the pupils include Mommy, Mama and Me and King & King - stories about same-sex relationships and marriages.  However, following the inclusion of the programme in the curriculum, Moffat, who is gay, faced angry protests by parents, who gathered outside the school gates, while others removed their children from the school.  The issue was first raised by parent Fatima Shah, who initially pulled her 10-year-old daughter out of the school, saying children were too young to be learning about same-sex marriages and LGBT in the classroom. “It’s inappropriate, totally wrong,” she said.  Shah, whose daughter has now returned to the school, which is rated as outstanding by Ofsted, has revealed that she will continue to fight against the teaching of No Outsiders. She added: “Children are being told it’s OK to be gay, yet 98% of children at this school are Muslim. It’s a Muslim community. He said all parents are on board with it, but the reality is, no parents are on board with it.”  Shah claimed her children were becoming “confused” about homosexuality and that the local community’s concerns were not being taken on board. She said: “We have nothing against Mr Moffat – we are as British as they come. We respect the British values … but the problem is, he is not respecting our ethos as a community.  “We don’t send our children to school to learn about LGBT. We send them to school to learn maths, science and English.”  But Moffat, who was one of three British teachers shortlisted for the Varkey Foundation’s “best teacher” prize, says the feedback from most parents has been positive, and that the protests have arisen from the concerns of a “very small minority” of parents.  “I’m in exactly the right place and I have no plans to leave,” he said. “I know that some parents struggle with some aspects of the Equality Act and we’ll always talk and have respectful discussion.  “But, as I’ve said, the vast majority of parents understand that it’s in context. Yes, we’re talking about LGBT in a small amount of lessons but it’s always in context. The context is that living in the UK, you can be different, but you can get along with other people.”  Moffat, who is also a personal social health education teacher at the 770-pupil school, introduced the programme around four years ago. It includes the welcoming of people of any race, colour or religion and those who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.  He said: “I’m just teaching children from an early age that there are different families out there and, let’s not forget, that in some schools there are children with two mums, so I see it that they’re not being taught anything. All they’re seeing is their family is being accepted.  “We want all children in Birmingham to know that their family is normal; that their family is accepted and welcomed in schools.”  Moffat, who was awarded an MBE by the Queen in 2017 for services to education, also runs an after-school club which he says helps create opportunities for children at his school to meet people of different races, religions and cultures around Birmingham.  The award-winning school is in the heart of a devout area where three inquiries have been held into the alleged Islamist Trojan horse plot by Muslim governors to take over state schools. Parkfield was not affected.  Olympic gold medalist Callum Skinner, whose father is gay, tweeted a message of support for Moffat. He wrote: “Mr Moffat sounds like he’s doing a great job. When I was at school, I was someone who had one set of same-sex parents. It sounds to me as if this programme is as much about protecting kids from intolerance as well as same sex couples. It should be commended, not shunned.”  Hazel Pulley, the chief executive of Excelsior Multi Academy Trust which runs the school, said she was disappointed by the protest. She said: “We’ve been doing No Outsiders for four years now and it’s been so successful … We want the best for our children. We want them to be accepting and to welcome anybody.”  Mohammed Idrees, the Muslim councillor who spoke out in support of the protesting parents and said pupils were “too young” to be taught about homosexuality, has since apologised for his comments and has been formally reported to Birmingham City Council’s Standards Committee by Conservative councillor Gareth Moore, who is gay.  Moore said: “Part of the challenge when you are growing up is that you don’t understand what’s wrong. This scheme, if you are different, lets you know there is nothing wrong with being different. I would have liked this scheme when I was growing up.”

Nazia Parveen North of England correspondent


theirishtimes--2019-04-24--Schools failing students on religious study opt-out atheist group claims

Schools failing students on religious study opt-out, atheist group claims

Pupils are being “forced” to study religion and schools are failing in their duty to allow young people opt out of the subject, Atheist Ireland has claimed.  Protesting at the Teachers’ Union of Ireland (TUI) conference in Killarney, Co Kerry, members of the group said the union had refused to implement a Department of Education directive to provide alternative subjects for students who opt out of religion.  Jane Donnelly, human rights officer with Atheist Ireland, said students who did not want to study religion were “forced to sit at the back of the class”.  She said the TUI members in Education and Training Board schools “had refused to even try to implement the department’s directive, citing resources and a lack of consultation”.  A TUI spokesman said resourcing was the only issue preventing the implementation of the department’s directive.  “Under the department’s circular, subject options would have to be made available to students at the time that religious instruction takes place,” he said.  “Clearly, this would have required the employment of additional teachers in schools but, remarkably, the Minister made clear that the required resources would not be provided.  “To suggest that the TUI’s position was related to anything other than serious and justified concerns about the absence of required resources – at a time when schools are already experiencing a recruitment and retention crisis – is at best grossly misinformed,” he said.


theirishtimes--2019-07-04--Pact between State and religious should widen school choice

Pact between State and religious ‘should widen school choice’

Parents must get more choice for their children’s education in any new covenant between the State, churches and other ethical bodies, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said.  Greater choice for parents “through the availability of more Educate Together schools, community national schools and Gaelscoileanna” is required, he said.  “It also means the divestment of some existing religious schools to the community sector should parents want that. It doesn’t mean the complete secularisation of education,” he said.  He was speaking in Dublin Castle at a meeting between the Government and leaders of Ireland’s churches, other faiths, and various ethical groupings – an engagement mandated by the Lisbon Treaty.  Twenty-eight separate religious and ethical groups participated in the dialogue as did Minister for Business Heather Humphreys, Minister for Housing Eoghan Murphy, Minister for Education Joe McHugh, Minister for Children Katherine Zappone and Minister of State for Equality David Stanton.  Recalling his address to Pope Francis last August, Mr Varadkar suggested that “the time had come to build a new relationship between religion and the State in Ireland – a new covenant for the 21st century. One in which religion is no longer at the centre of our State but continues to have a real and meaningful role to play on our society.This structured dialogue is part of that work.”  Open, transparent and regular dialogue is the best way to do this, recognising that all sides in the debate have much in common, but yet “respects our differences”, he said.  The covenant is not one “handed down by the State”, but is instead “created by the people, shaped by all of you and reflecting the values of our society”, said the Taoiseach.  “I am very proud of the fact that our country is now one of the most diverse in the world, and one of the youngest,” said Mr Varadkar, who began with an apology over his “sinning priests” attack upon Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin.  Irish people see “the value of religion and faith based organisations every day all around us”, he added, citing the work of religious charities and voluntary organisations.  “Any new covenant – any new relationship between the State and your organisations – should be about pluralism, rather than absolute secularism,” he said.  The divestment by the Catholic Church of schools under its control can “give rise to concerns” among parents, but he believed that problems can be handled “sensitively” and “in a collaborative way”.  The objective, he said, is to offer the choices desired by parents, but “such choice does not denigrate in any way the invaluable contribution of various churches” to Irish education over many generations.  “It simply recognises that in the more diverse Ireland of the 21st century many parents want a greater choice about where to, and how to, educate their children,” he said.  “We must also recognise that a choice of schools may not be possible or practicable in all areas, so we need to have regard to the views of majority as well as minorities,” he added.  No curbs should be placed on future State funding of faith-based charities and voluntary organisations, such as the St Francis Hospice and Our Lady’s Hospice and Care Services, however.  “We do not want to see their funding taken away or the voluntarism and ethos that exists there removed,” he said. “Many faith-based organisations have made a huge contribution to helping us deal with the housing shortage, such as Crosscare and de Paul, Peter McVerry Trust and others.”  The Dublin Castle meeting was “a little bit of an experiment”, he said. But he hoped for two-yearly meetings and more regular meeting between the Government and individual groups.


theirishtimes--2019-08-01--Catholic schools can still ask questions on religion despite new law

Catholic primary schools are still requesting details of children’s baptism records despite new laws that prohibit the use of religion in their enrolment policies.  Legislation to deal with the “baptism barrier”, which came into effect in October last year, prohibits the use of religion to give priority access to children of a particular faith and affects enrolments from next month.  However, a section of the legislation preventing schools from asking the question on religion has not yet been commenced or implemented and will not come into effect for another two years.  The Department of Education is consulting schools on their enrolment and admissions policy, and the schools have until the 2021-2022 school year to publish their policies, at which point the remaining sections will be commenced, or enforced.  A spokesman for Minister for Education Joe McHugh said: “Since last October it has been made abundantly clear that primary schools cannot use religion as a criterion for admissions, except in specific circumstances when dealing with children of minority faiths. Primary schools should be abiding by those rules.”  Just over 90 per cent of primary schools are of a Catholic ethos and the School Admissions Act prohibits them from giving enrolment priority to baptised children where schools are oversubscribed. About 20 per cent have too many applications for the number of places.  A parent reluctant to be identified as he feared it could affect his child’s enrolment at a school in south Dublin said it was an “obvious absurdity” in the legislation that while it was illegal for schools to discriminate on the grounds of religion, they can “still ask the question and effectively discriminate”.  “The crucial, central pillar of the Act is not in force,” he said.  His family is not religious and his child is not baptised. He said when he made a query this year the school he wants his child to attend asked questions about what religion the family was and asked for a baptism certificate if there was one.  A large number of primary schools ask similar questions in enrolment forms.  “I rang the appeals section of the department twice and both times was told that any appeal of a school refusal would not succeed so long as schools can continue to ask questions about religion,” the parent said.  He added that: “Until the law changes so that the policy is that they can’t ask the baptism question, they are not going to uphold the legislation.”  The department said in a statement that anybody seeking advice about an appeal under the Equal Status Act should seek the advice of the Workplace Relations Commission.  Atheist Ireland human rights officer Jane Donnelly said that although schools could not use information on religion to give preference to Catholics, “if your child was discriminated against on grounds of religion, how could you ever prove it?”  She added, however, that “it would be difficult to discriminate on grounds of religion and pretend not to, because you would have to get more than one person to agree – including the board of management. It might be easier to do in a small school but not in a larger one.”


theirishtimes--2019-08-01--Schools and religion Non-believers treated like second-class citizens

Schools and religion: ‘Non-believers treated like second-class citizens’

Helen O’Shea’s daughter is used to doing her homework at the back of the classroom during religious education.  As an atheist parent, she says it is the price pupils pay in an education system which is still dominated by religion.  “There’s an assumption that everyone is okay with religious instruction or a priest coming into the classroom . . . and if you’re not, you’re relegated to the back of the class and treated like a second-class citizen.”  So she was encouraged when the Department of Education published a circular last year which instructed State-run secondary schools to offer alternative subject choices to students who did not wish to study religion.  In the mostly conservative world of education, this was a game-changer.  It stated that the past practice of assuming that pupils were predominantly Catholic and arranging religious instruction accordingly was no longer appropriate.  Instead, parents would have to be polled on whether they wanted their children to study religion or, significantly, a different, timetabled subject.  The circular applied only to State-run schools, which account for about half of secondary schools.  These are run by local Education and Training Boards (ETBs) and community schools, which are run jointly by ETBs and the Catholic Church.  Voluntary secondary schools, typically run or owned by religious organisations, were not affected by the circular.  “I was delighted,” says O’Shea, whose daughter attends a community school in Ardee, Co Louth.  “I never baptised my daughters and went out of my way to send them to an Educate Together primary school . . . But religion has a way of encroaching into your life, especially in the education system.”  The department’s move, however, was fiercely opposed by groups such as the Catholic Church, Education and Training Boards and the Teachers’ Union of Ireland.  Documents obtained by The Irish Times last year show Catholic bishops warned the department that students who would receive tuition in an exam subject instead of religion would receive an unfair advantage.  (Instead, they proposed that such students who opted out of religion should be offered a course in “religious heritage and values as well as ethics”).  Education and Training Boards complained of having to offer an alternative subject without being given additional resources to do so.  Religion teachers were also highly critical and insisted the circular was leading to widespread confusion by not clarifying the difference between “religious instruction” and “religious education”.  While it said “religious instruction” related to the teaching of a particular religion for pupils of that faith, “religious education” was a much wider subject open to all pupils, regardless of their belief.  In October last year, in the face of this opposition, the department issued a “clarification” of its circular which watered down much of the meaning of the original.  In a significant reversal, it said the State-approved curriculum on religious education did not contain any element of “religious instruction, formation, indoctrination or worship”.  As a result, opting out of the subject and being timetabled for an alternative subject “does not arise”.  However, the revised circular still included some significant changes.  It said students who opted out of religious instruction (such as worship or faith-specific teaching) should be timetabled for alternative subjects, rather than doing homework at the back of class.  It also said schools should proactively establish the wishes of parents in relation to opting out of religious worship or instruction.  This should be integrated with the school’s processes for establishing subject choices generally.  New documents, however, show most State schools are ignoring this revised circular.  ETB schools, for example, have been recently directed by their umbrella body to “maintain the status quo in relation to the provision of religious education and opting-out arrangements”.  The evidence on the ground in many community schools, similarly, is that the latest circular is not being implemented.  Sources in these schools argue that the lack of funding to provide for additional teaching for non-religious students is a key obstacle.  However, schools are required to follow procedures set down in department circular letters.  In a statement, a Department of Education spokesman confirmed that the circular applied to all “community and ETB post-primary schools”.  Meanwhile, parents such as Helen O’Shea remain as frustrated as ever over what she sees as the violation of non-religious students’ rights and those of their parents.  “Schools shouldn’t be allowed to cherry-pick what suits them when it comes to religion . . . It shouldn’t be so hard to uphold a child’s constitutional right to drop out of religion.”


theirishtimes--2019-08-01--Schools refusing tuition for students who opt out of religion

State secondary schools are refusing to implement a directive which requires them to provide students who opt out of religious instruction with access to another subject.  Last year, the Department of Education issued a circular requiring State schools to timetable alternative tuition throughout the school year for students who opt out of religious instruction.  This was aimed at ending the practice of assuming that pupils are predominately Catholic and requiring non-religious or minority faith students to do homework during religious instruction.  The circular applies to State-run schools, such as community schools or those run by Education and Training Boards (ETBs), which account for about half of secondary schools or 160,000 pupils.  Voluntary secondary schools, typically run or owned by religious organisations, are not affected by the circular.  However, new documents show most State schools are not implementing the circular on the basis that they do no have resources to provide alternative tuition.  ETB schools, for example, were recently directed by their umbrella body to “maintain the status-quo in relation to the provision of religious education and opting-out arrangements”.  A spokesman for the department has confirmed that the circular, issued in October last year, remains in place and schools are required to follow it.  The campaign group Atheist Ireland said the failure of State schools to implement these measures means non-religious students are being discriminated against.  “The practical application of maintaining the status quo means students who exercise their constitutional and human right not to attend religious teaching cannot access another optional subject,” said Jane Donnelly of Atheist Ireland.  Nessa White, general secretary of Education and Training Boards Ireland, confirmed that the umbrella body’s advice to schools has been to maintain the “status quo” in relation to allowing students to opt out of religious instruction.  “Religious education is open to all students regardless of their religion or world view. In some instances, parents or students over the age of 18 wish to opt out of religious education. This is fully permitted in ETB schools.  “However, our schools have not been provided with any additional resources to provide alternative classes to students who opt out. Our schools cater for these students to the best of their ability with the resources currently available to them.”  Ms White insisted that ETB schools are “multidenominational and cater for all students regardless of their religious or non-religious beliefs”.  Many community schools are also not implementing the circular, which also requires schools to proactively establish the wishes of parents in relation to opting out of religious worship or instruction.  The circular states this should be integrated with the school’s processes for establishing subject choices generally.  “Past practice of assuming that the pupil body is predominately Catholic and arranging religious instruction accordingly is no longer an appropriate approach,” the circular states.  “ In a changing context the constitutional right not to attend religious instruction must be given effect through changed practices.”


theirishtimes--2019-08-27--Four religious-run schools switching to multi-denominational model

Four religious-run primary schools are changing to a multi-denominational model this year.  Scoil an Ghleanna CNS, Co Kerry; Tahilla CNS, Co Kerry; and Lecarrow CNS, Co Roscommon – previously Catholic schools – will now fall under the patronage of local Education and Training Boards (ETBs).  Kilnamanagh CNS, Co Wexford is being transferred from the Church of Ireland.  Three other Steiner schools – Mol an Oige, Co Clare; Galway CNS; and Raheen Wood, Co Clare – that were already multi-denominational have been chosen to become Community National Schools (CNS).  Three newly established ETB schools will also be opening in Dunshauglin, Ashbourne and Swords.  Nessa White, general secretary of Education and Training Boards Ireland, said she is “delighted” to see the CNS model growing across the country.  She said; “2019 will bring many new opportunities and challenges to the CNS model, in particular the seven schools with an existing children, parent and staff body moving over the CNS model.  “These schools come from a variety of patrons and will have different needs in order to make the transition successfully. ETBI [Eductiona and Training Board Ireland] and ETBs will work closely with these schools to ensure that reconfiguration is a success for them and for the CNS model.”  The Government has pledged to have 400 multi-denominational primary schools by 2030.