3rd August 2011

“There are two major risks from expansion of faith schools. The first is an increase in social and religious segregation in an already divided society, and the second is an increase in educational inequality.”

Graham Allen, MP

27 Responses to “3rd August 2011”

  1. CaptainZero Says:

    There is actually a third. In the U.S., the forces of ignorance have been trying for many years to pass “school vouchers”, ostensibly to allow kids in failing districts to be able to go to any school, charter, faith or traditional public. Their funding would follow the child and market forces take care of the rest.

    There is a lot to like about that since there are unquestionably many thousands of failing public schools. But better schools are not the real goal. Public funding of religious indoctrination is. If the pushers of this scheme are serious about this being solely about better education, they have only to write into their bills that public education monies are portable but can only be directed toward secular schools. Since they will not do this, their true motivation is clear.

    As a member of the reality based community, I feel it would be unconscionable to use my tax money to teach defenseless 6 year olds that we are fallen creatures because of an apple and a talking snake and that the cure is to (literally!) eat the body and drink the blood of god’s son who is actually god.

    There is your educational inequality!

  2. CaptainZero Says:

    Damn! I didn’t get to my third: Impoverishing public education. No doubt a significant enough percentage of people in certain areas of the country would opt to use their vouchers in religious schools. This would seriously degrade public schools already under terrible financial pressure.

  3. Panzerbjørn Says:

    One thing I really don’t understand is this:
    How can it possible be allowed to run a school in the UK and still teach children blatantly untrue science?
    Leaving aside the religious claptrap that should be taught alongside roman, norse and aztec mythology, how can it be allowed not to teach children the scientific skills that are needed to become doctors, engineers and so on.
    for example, in one faith school which wa svisited by Richard Dawkins, children were taught that salt water and fresh water can’t mix -_-

  4. solomon Says:

    Evolution is blatantly untrue science.

  5. RJ Says:

    religion is blatantly untrue fairy tales

  6. Dan Says:

    The mere concept of a “faith school” confounds me. Why would anyone combine education with the view that baseless convictions are a virtue?? If you truly support education and inquiry, then faith should be viewed as a fault, not a virtue.

  7. Atheist MC Says:

    Evolution is blatantly untrue science.

    Quite right Solly, there’s absolutely no good evidence for it at all

  8. CaptainZero Says:

    Well said, Dan.
    @ Silly – Evolution is a demonstrable fact described by the Theory of Evolution and supported by every other natural science. If evolution is untrue, so is math, physics, geology, paleontology, etc. Natural Selection, evolution’s mechanism, is easy enough for a child to understand. Provided, of course, that their brains haven’t been filled with wood chips and spider webs by some idiot cleric.

    And if you don’t believe it, you’ll be cast into !!HELL!! (Hell, I tell you!) Just kidding about the hell stuff since, you know, there ISN’T ONE.

  9. RJ Says:


    electrabotanical said SHE was gonna go to hell…..AND DRINK

    MAI-TAIS !!!! an if SHE’S goin , then I’M goin !!!!!!

    sounds GREAT to me !!!!!!

    BTW…………..every post on here today (( except you-know-who ))

    has been great.

  10. Dan Says:

    Thanks CaptZ.

    Guys (AMC & CaptZ): You don’t seriously think that evidence (or lack thereof in the case of his invisible friend) matters one iota to Sillyman, do you????

  11. solomon Says:

    Not a sound mind would buy the evolution crap. Can easily be refuted. Silly…not just silly but condemned atheists.

  12. RJ Says:


    let’s hear you refute it !!

  13. solomon Says:

    Provide fossil proofs of the gradual transformation from ape to men that must have existed in abundance if evolution was true.

  14. Hypatia Says:

    “Provide fossil proofs of the gradual transformation”

    There are plenty of fossils but a fossil is a snapshot – and you can’t show a “gradual transformation” with snapshots.

    But that’s irrelevant because the genetic information showing our shared ancestry with the apes is solid, irrefutable evidence.

  15. nonDelusionalReality Says:

    – How curious, the very people who cling on to ancient primitive primate superstitions, traditions, and beliefs are usually the same ones that say we didn’t evolve from primitive primates.

  16. CaptainZero Says:

    Here you go, Silly. You don’t even have to go to an academic site to find the information you SAY you want.


    Not all remains fossilize, which should be obvious. We’re lucky to have the specimens we do. But even if we had NO fossils, Hypatia is quite right to point out, evolution would be demonstrably, irrefutably, true. All the evidence is on evolution’s side. On creation’s? Crickets chirping, I guess.

    The trouble with people like you, Silly, is that you don’t care enough about facts to challenge beliefs that are held for no better reason than that you were taught them as a child.

  17. Simon Says:

    In the UK faith schools perform better than state schools. All arguments (even seemingly sophisticated secular rational) boil down to one of two possible reasons for this; pupil selection or divine intervention. Which is more likely.

  18. solomon Says:


    Genetic information is not a proof the transformation of ape to men took place. Don’t try to pull a silly bluff.


    Your ‘facts’ are’nt factual enough. Can be refuted.

  19. solomon Says:


    Arranged some sets of lousy skull….
    There you are…make a lousy claim its evolution.

  20. CaptainZero Says:

    “Your ‘facts’ are’nt factual enough. Can be refuted.” – Sol

    Ok, then why haven’t you made an attempt?

    OK, you don’t like bones? I give you Flavobacterium, a neat little organism that evolved to eat nylon, an entirely man-made material invented in ’52. That is wicked fast evolution.

    Still no? Why are many cave dwelling animals blind and yet have eyes? The world is full of examples of organisms evolving to suit their environments. You deny deny deny but offer up nothing at all to support your denials. I’d feel silly if it were me.

    How about the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe? If that is “design” than the designer was a complete idiot.

  21. RJ Says:

    you know, there’s one guy who posts on this site that i’m pretty sure

    followed the same evolutionary and DNA path

    as Mr. Potato Head !!!!

    no names………….no names

  22. Dan Says:

    Provide fossil proofs of the gradual transformation from ape to men that must have existed in abundance if evolution was true.

    WOW. You have a short memory Solly. I already provided you those fossils (on July 28th). And, typically as with any creationist twit, you ignored them and simply came back another day pretending that they don’t exist. As with any creationist, you can’t exist without your head in the sand.

    Here’s the list again:
    Sahelanthropus tchadensis
    Ardipithecus ramidus
    Australopithecus anamensis
    Australopithecus afarensis
    Kenyanthropus platyops
    Australopithecus africanus
    Australopithecus garhi
    Australopithecus sediba
    Australopithecus aethiopicus
    Australopithecus robustus
    Australopithecus boisei
    Homo habilis
    Homo georgicus
    Homo erectus
    Homo ergaster
    Homo antecessor
    Homo heidelbergensis
    Homo neanderthalensis
    Homo floresiensis
    Homo sapiens

  23. Dan Says:

    Oh, and Solly, given that we have 20 fossils showing the transition from a Chimp-like ancestor, you should provide at least one fossil showing a dirt-to-man transition. Otherwise, once again, you’re just making baseless accusations that any thinking individual should laugh at.

  24. solomon Says:


    “you should provide at least one fossil showing a dirt-to-man transition”

    That was some chicken feed stuffs.
    I did’nt even need to provide the fossils.
    When you die you will automatically transformed to your original form..’DIRT’

  25. Dan Says:


    I did’nt even need to provide the fossils.

    Typical creationist B.S. — you refuse to live up to your own standards of credibility… which is EXACTLY why anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity acknowledges that evolution has all of the credibility and religion has none.

  26. solomon Says:

    Fit for the trash…

  27. Dan Says:

    Why am I not surprised that you view use of one’s rational mind as “trash?”