A chara, – Seamus McKenna (October 23rd) believes my remarks in defence of our denominational educational system demand a national debate on what a secular society is in response. I rather doubt there are many who would accord equal significance to my words; but if a debate is to begin, it needs to begin with some degree of accuracy.
First, secularism is not neutral, as he claims. Mr McKenna seems to think that it would effectively operate in a value-neutral fashion if it were made the sole ethos of our school system.
I disagree. I think it would be impossible for an ideology that is in many ways hostile to religion to behave in a way that would not seek to undermine the faith of those who attend our schools were they to be forced into some secular model.
Second, religion is not an ideology, which he also asserts. Ideologies deal with the systems of ideas that underpin economic or political theory. Secularism, therefore, is indeed an ideology, as he states; religion, however, clearly is not. That Mr McKenna should attempt to start a debate either unwilling or unable to appreciate these basic facts is not a good indicator of how people of faith would be treated in a school system designed by secularists. Fortunately, a few persistent voices to the contrary, there is little to indicate that there is a demand for either debate or change around this issue. – Is mise,
Rev PATRICK G BURKE,
Castlecomer,
Co Kilkenny.
Sir, – Allowing non-Catholic children equal access to all schools would not in any way diminish the denominational aspect of our education system, so those who think religion belongs in a State-funded classroom would be safe. What it would mean, however, is that there would be (more) children in the class that have to sit through a daily 30 minutes of Catholic teaching, not to mention prayers, hymns and sacrament preparation, in spite of the fact that they are of other or no religious persuasion.
Denying children access to Catholic schools is only the tip of the iceberg of discrimination that is our education system. We were “lucky” that our local rural school does not include religion in its entrance criteria and our daughter got a place without difficulty. There is no multidenominational school which it would be feasible for her to attend, nor do I think she should be exiled from her local rural community, where there is an excellent State-funded school attended by the children that live in her local area, play in her local sports clubs and so on. – Yours, etc,
KEELIN MURPHY,
Cork.
Sir , – The current exemption from discrimination laws applies to religious organisations only. So the 96 per cent of schools with religious patrons may discriminate on religious grounds. Other schools (for example, Educate Together schools) may not – they must admit all citizens equally.
Thus until 100 per cent of schools remove religious discrimination from admissions policies, children who are not baptised are discriminated against. It really is that simple. – Yours, etc,
PAULA KEARNS,
Killiney,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – It is simply wrong to discriminate against a child or any person on the basis of religion with regard to accessing a State service. It would be most unethical, if not illegal, for a hospital or healthcare provider to do so. The church enjoys a privileged position under statute in this respect. My hope is that legislators eventually recognise the Equal Status Act for the discriminatory legislation that it is and makes changes accordingly.– Yours, etc,
NEIL CONDON,
Dublin 4 .