91Èȱ¬

Faith schools have been around for a long time, with no suicide bombings to speak of in the 20th century, so why all of a sudden are they a problem only just now?

What is so wrong with British society all of a sudden that all this social engineering is required?

Congratulations for resisting the urge to run another environment story tonight, especially given other 91Èȱ¬ outlets are reporting a WWF report as news.

PS; What is happening to the Newsnight set?

If ever the British public needed a demonstration of the contempt in which the Government hold them, it was in tonight's interview between Jeremy Paxman and the 91Èȱ¬ Office minister Liam Burne over the plans for Romanian and Bulgarian workers when they join the EC. Burne was openly laughing at J.P's questions being posed on numbers expecting to arrive on our shores both legally and legally to work. The failure to control our borders and the Prime Minister's blind rush to create a lasting legacy for himself will ultimately end in tears with the destruction of the Country I know as Great Britain.

I am puzzled. We need and welcome people immigrating to join the workforce and help the economy. We don't need people coming to the country, who cannot work and who will put a strain on the social infrastructure, although ideally, if this were strong enough we should welcome everybody.

The policy announced today puts a limit on the numbers of people coming to the country to work legitimately in our economy, but does nothing to limit people coming illegally, who won't be able to work and who, one way or another will then put a strain on our social system.

How is it supposed to work? I am puzzled.

I agree with Ruby. At 70 years of age i have seen a lot of changes in our society. Faith schools should be removed from our society as they cause divisions in society from the earliest age of education. That is not to say that pupils should not learn about all cultures, but religion should be taught at home and education is what is required at school. However we do need to have discipline at school and in the home so that pupils and students listen to what the teacher is trying to give to the pupils. Less interference from government would be useful in the way a teacher gives the pupils information.
As far as physics is concerned, I found it hard enough to learn in the nineteen-fourties, and the words vectors and scalars were never mentioned then - where did that description come from? - some smart-ass trying to impress his colleagues with his knowledge? The idea of 'keep-it-simple' which is an army phrase, works in all forms of life.

Heaven help the young people of this country. Not content with the lack of discipline at home and the lack of leadership in government we also have weak legal system and a preponderence of drugs culture within the so-called celebraties shown on tv and possibly in government circles making the laws.

The very idea of faith schools submits to the value of faith. As most intelligent people know religion is an utter waste of time and panders to fanatics as well as doing enormous damage world wide. What should be concentrated on is fact and where possible truth. Science produces near truth as is possible to get, except for mathematics which is true because it can be proved. Nothing in religion is true or can be proved, so bin it, it's a waste of time and money.

I agree totally with the views expressed by Ruby yet I note that only complaints about each post are invited. Perhaps I misunderstand your system.
I was educated in Scotland where sectarianism is endemic thanks to the segregation of children into Faith schools.
I studied science and encouraged my daughters to do the same. They and their contemporaries are now earning pittances on short-term contracts at post doctoral level in universities. The rewards are just not there. Perhaps Newsnight should do some research on the subject. I suggest they also do a re run of Carl Sagan's inspirational series of Science programmes.

We have
congested road system
Shortage of water
Shortage of housing (or at least affordable housing)
Government that want less pollution
Declining NHS service
Full Prisons
Under staffed Police Force unable to deal
1.6 million unemployed.

Do we really need more immigrants, or is this really just a way for Governments to stop wage inflation and keep the housing bubble going?

(i) Religious belief and its expression is a hallmark of democracy. Faith schools are necessary for that expression to be informed and 'reasoned'. Reason is not the antithesis of a belief in god, and (in my opinion) society would be the poorer for enforced secularisation.
(ii) RC schools in the UK, as VA schools, opted to pay a larger % of costs to remain outside government control. CoE, as VC schools, did not, being the official state religion. It's a bit unfair to now force RC schools into the govt conrolled agenda.
(iii) "Kenneth Baker says it's for the good of society". Don't make me laugh. This from a guy whose heroine said there was no such thing as society; this from a guy who spen his time as Educ Sec trying to control teachers, teaching and everything on the curriculum; this from a conservative whose fundamental belief is in less central control. Get outta here!

Religion has contributed much to European civilisation, as other religions have in other parts of the world. There will always be people to abuse it, but do you really want to FORCIBLY reduce its impact? What will the state forcibly reduce next?

I think we have had more than enough immigrants coming to work in this country.As the Polish invasion since the last 2 years proved,the 91Èȱ¬ Office cannot even take a wild guess as to how many people will be coming here and how they can be checked upon as legal or illegal workers,and I don't wanna talk about the number of failed asylum seekers nicely contributing to the rising crime rate.The ridiculous smile of the 91Èȱ¬ Office minister on Newsnight tells us volumes.The current plan won't work either,as the govn't cannot even deport the offending worker.This is a no-win situation.This country has enough on its plate already.Full prisons,high cost of living,youth crime, outsourcing costing 150,000 jobs,emigration of 100,000 British professionls every year,criminal foreign nationals,undisclosed number of failed asylum seekers,etc.I wish the 91Èȱ¬ shows the very recent protests by German people against the economic hardships they are going through due to their country's membership in the EU. If Britain wants to remain British we should get out sooner rather than later.We don't need to import cheap manpower. We have to care for the indegenous workforce who are being marginalised,and whose jobs are stolen, by EU workers just because they don't wanna work on the cheap or sleep in a room by dozens.Eu workforce is mostly profitable for the exploiting job agencies and employers.Most of Eu workers come here to have a foothold so that they can go back and bring their family and settle down, because they have nothing to go back to.A low-skilled worker in Poland is earning one tenth of what he earns here,then why should he go back?

Gosh! A battery of real professionals actually working in their respective fields of expertise and policy, sharing with us the fruits of their experience & thinking! Science as inspiration and economic and cultural necessity! Miracle! Thank you!

Re: Educating Our Young
Having lived in other cultures where there existed quite successfully it seems, the full gamut of secular, non-denominational & faith schools (yes, naturally, with allowances for admittance of students from 'other' faiths) all with varying arrangements for state financial support or independence therefrom, I fail to understand what all the fuss is about - if of course, it is, that our main concern is to be able to educate as many young minds as possible as well as possible, to prepare them for the rather miserable legacy our selfish, and self-centered stewardship is bequeathing.

Faith schools should continue to exist and offer a choice for those who prefer them.I think we shouldn't endanger the freedom of choice in this county.

Ref JamesStGeorge #1

"The sooner we are rid of catholic or any religious influenced schools the better. No child under age should ever be permitted entry to any State religious, or pure religious school, be it Sunday school or maddrassars or any sort"

Nothing massively wrong with our faith school system.

(love to see some stats about where the children in trouble e.g. anti social, poor behaviour/grades & performance etc get their education faith v non faith schools).

But fundamentalist & extremist movements in schools should not be encouraged or tolerated.

The finger for some time has been pointed at Muslim faith schools, as part of communities where the current brand of social division (some time in the making due to multiculturalism) is being sourced from. By dress/behaviour & attitude, the time spent during a working day to studying an interpretation of their 'faith' does not arm them with the educational & social skills required to enter mainstream society. The realised suspicion, is that cults/sects & those with agenda are using school as recurring grounds for extremism & means to ensure cultural enclaves not only remain but expand.

btw - I went to a Catholic school (a Jewish friend, who spent some time in both religions schools, commented they have a lot in common) - we had RE (religious education) 1 or 2 times a week for less than a hour each lesson, with short morning prayers & occasional mass. It cannot be compared to a 'madras' type of education.

Reality, Christian faith schools I would argue do a great public service. Parents send children because they want to and/or receive access to a sound education for an association to religious movements (2,000 years history).

There are also good other non Christian ones (I have read, not experienced).

There are numerous state schools (secular/atheist in nature) who are divisive given they churn out ill educated, poorly behaved anti social misfits.

Elements of Liberal Left & virtually all of the Left advocate this 'secularism' which is a faith movement in itself.

The United Kingdoms history, society, laws, institutions, cultural norms & practices, liberties & sense of right & wrong are deeply routed in a Christian heritage (nation still 72%+ Christian*) let alone much of Europe

* in context - 390,000+ class themselves as Jedi in the UK [1]

I like the idea of faith schools having 1/3 of other non faiths children attending, but should non Muslim children be forced to wear headdress if council buses them to a Muslim faith school, let alone behaviour/values arguments.

If looking to tackle the problems of extremism & fundamentalism, the liberal left & left are once again proposing we abandon our living heritage & embrace another one of their 'societal' experiments' - why should we listen to them.

Their biggest experiment ref culture & society - 'multiculturalism' - is a total failure - why do they think the public & institutions will listen to/put up with their interference again?

vikingar

SOURCES:

[1]

I found it quite disturbing that the Minister for Immigration appeared to find the subject amusing. I suspect that many others , including many traditional Labour voters , do not have the same opinion. I also found it quite staggering that he simply did not know the figures . If we intend to CONTROL immigration surely we set a figure , notwithstanding if they are Doctors , Students or whatever and issue work permits to that level . If ,at a later date, we decide the situation has changed we up the level or allow another group to come. I have often suspected that the Government has no idea of the amount of immigrants that are in the country and feel now even more strongly on this. His constant reference to waiting for figures from the other EU countries was also quite disturbing.Is this yet another example of control by the EU. I thought New Labour would never let our border controls be influenced by others. Why not get rid of a Minister for Immigration and let it be handled by Brussels. Think of the money that would be saved.

Physics and education

It is about time the media took some responsibility for the lack of physicists, engineers and scientists – they are always portraying the subject as hard and therefore best avoided.

So does Newsnight take this situation seriously – no, they produce a ridiculous report with someone who is clearly not taking the subject seriously, thereby continuing to treat the problem with derision.
It would have made much more sense to talk to Open University and get some real scientists and engineers who are good at presenting their work even to non-scientists. The report would have had provided information and stood a chance of inspiring some would be students to take up science.

The lack of scientists and engineers is likely to remain as long as news reporters and media people continue to boast that they gave up science at sixteen, found mathematics hard etc. or are just generally condescending about these subjects. They always seem to say – ‘look at me, I couldn’t do science and I have a great career’ - forgetting that without scientists their jobs would never have come into existence.

Then there was the suggestion that we could just employ scientists and engineers from abroad. I wonder how the presenters will feel about that when all the technical personnel in the television industry are not British and decide there is no longer any need for a television industry based in Britain as it would be cheaper to produce the programmes in India. Now there’s a thought.

Your reporter attempting to study physics is clearly a halfwit, disinterested or both.

His grasp of the world, and how it works, is obviously so lacking that I really can't see why I should take his opinion on anything seriously.

A similar demonstration of ignorance of history or literature would immediatlely disqualify him from news punditry.

And we wonder why kids don't take science seriously?

Fall in the number of science students.

Although it's good to see science on newsnight I think the way the report was written and focused on schools shows how out of touch things are. Although I would like more people to study science at university I don't blame anyone who doesn't. They'd be putting themselves through huge classes, long weeks of lectures, endless assignments, sometimes longer courses and for what? They might as well do an arts or social science course where chances are they'd enjoy it more, have smaller and friendlier classes, fewer lessons and at the end of the course be just as likely to get a decent job - still a low probability! The idea we need 10'000 Physics graduates a year is ridiculous. People know that there are very few degrees in science that will reward you financially such as Medicine and Civil Engineering and give you a fascinating job at the same time, or even just the latter.

To see why people don't do science you just need to talk to a few arts or social science undergraduate students who have a mocking disdain of science. They think we are "spoon fed", do no thinking for ourselves, just learn things endlessly and have no "analytic" or "critical thinking" skills, which miraculously they find on their courses. One can say that their image of science is completely and utterly wrong, but they still think it.

I've never seen jobs advertising that need Physics degrees, even on specialised sites. I have 3 science A-levels, never been needed or asked about in any of the jobs I've applied for or worked in. I've known Physics graduates. One went to a jobcentre and signed on and they asked whether he had any qualifications, and when he said BSc Physics they laughed.

I think you should mention at the end of tonight's show that while your science editor Susan Watts has a degree in physics from Imperial College, London she will not be doing Stephen Smith's A-level homework !

Thank God Tony Blair wasn't in power during the Blitz...his solution to the crisis would have been to build more hospitals!

That's the mentality of this government.

Ref Parker #21

I agree that the media approach to science is rather poor.

Outside of programmes like Tomorrows World (91Èȱ¬) 'Online' (91Èȱ¬) & The Gadget Show & (C5)

It seems a badge of pride that journalists/presenters are overly willing to self confess to a total technical ignorance.

But then more than happy to wax lyrical on the story surrounding implication of the 'technology'.

For some, who regard journalists as paragons of intellectual virtue, it must give the impression if they cannot do it "how can I".

Its not difficult, basic terminology & understanding can be readily grasped.

A journalist in my book should regard technical background to an item as important a piece of basic research to a story as understanding how to pronounce someone's name or the nuances of a political story.

91Èȱ¬ & other media, get a grip of technophobe presenters - much of your audience is not afraid of technology - why should they be?

(esp when the audience consume via net or via digital service).

The likes of 'How', Jonny Ball [1] & Adam Hart Davies [2] prove that science & technology can be both informative & entertaining.

Where are their modern day equivalents amongst childrens TV programming (other than Davies).

Surely not too hard for NCA presenters to come up to speed (rather than just entering another Celeb Dancing Competition or other extra curriculum activities).

vikingar

SOURCES:

[1]
[2]

Re: Falling number of science students.

Engineers of the future?

The critical point missed by the newsnight report is that ALL the professional engineering disciplines are based on a solid understanding of the sciences. Studying physics is a fundamental requirement for anyone in the electrical, mechanical, civil, and even some branches of software engineering.
We need talented engineers. We need physics students. Don't dumb down the curriculum.

The solution is obvious. Students studying science subjects or mathematics at university should be given a full maintenance grant with no fees. The additional cost could be offset by charging those on useless mickey mouse courses, for example sociology, psychology, golf course management, womens studies, media, double the current fee.

This could be extended to 'A' level students. A bonus could be paid to those acheiving the very highest grades, so long as they enrol on, and complete, a similar university course.

Government proposals to limit those coming to this country are a thinly veiled placebo to the general public. They are so full of 'exceptions' as to be utterly useless. Building labourers will be listed as self employed plumbers / joiners / drivers / electricians. Just as many Poles were.

The governments only concern is to maintain the constant reduction in the salaries and working conditions of employees to the benefit of their paymasters in business.

Hmm, in Stephanie Flanders' report: How do "£24b by 2010" become "£24b per year" when she compares it to costs? Did I misunderstand? Is that £24b for the year 2010 alone.. what about the years before? The 0.3% growth/y mentioned in the report is it on average? Is the forecast growth averaged over 2005-2010? Are forecast costs averaged? When not averaged, do these figures, both for growth and costs, grow exponentially? If so which one grows faster? Is the expected growth in real terms (offset for forecast inflation etc.)?

Yes, we do need to look at GDP/head but the first bit of this report really confused me.. Sorry.

The Romanians and Bulgarians who want to come here are no more interested in climbing on the benefit bandwagon than their predecessors from Poland, Hungary and elsewhere. They want to do an honest days work for an honest days pay - which is more than can be said for many of the native unemployed. I am afraid this is yet another example of government driven by public opinion being whipped up by tabloid scare mongering. John Reid somehow manages to sound so measured and reasonable in his presentation that we tend to lose sight of the fact that the policy is utter garbage.

We are widely respected and highly regarded in Eastern Europe for being one of only three countries in the EU (along with Ireland and Sweden) to honour the spirit of the accession arrangements for the last tranche by not imposing any restrictions. I do not see any damage arising in the economy from that decision and indeed many benefits.

Perhaps it is time for Reid to hand over the reins of power to the editor of the Mail or the Express since it seems they run the 91Èȱ¬ Office already. No wonder it is not fit for purpose.

Ref Paul D #33

"The Romanians and Bulgarians who want to come here are no more interested in climbing on the benefit bandwagon than their predecessors from Poland, Hungary and elsewhere"

OVERLY OPTIMISTIC:

You seem to have a rather blue tinted view of other peoples - let alone ignoring their inherent social malaises & nuances (which any society has):

Romania [1]
Bulgaria [2]

Look at rising benefits claims from existing far eastern 'ex' workforce [3]

If there are people in our country who 'work the system' WHY NOT others? i.e. low paid workers also claiming or travelling specially to claim after initial period of 'work'.

Rather see government investment to re-skill our rising unemployed & out of work to take up shortfalls in skilled and/or manual labouring jobs, rather than 'quick fix' approach of asset stripping the work force of other nations, where wages & earning then largely are sent out of the country.

Esp given the false suppressant effect it has on wages & costs, negatively effecting the incomes of British workers.

FOREIGN NATIONALS:

Given wholly underestimated numbers of existing East European labour influx (600,000+) do you think British Society & Economy will handle new influxes potentially taking totals to 1,000,000+ actual workers coming to the UK but with no long term side effects on British Society e.g. housing, social services, welfare state, education & environmental & transportation impact.

Also what of influxes attributed to other sources (see below):

Between 1991 and 2001, half of Britain's population growth was due to immigration [4] (before rising influx of far eastern workers)

A. illegal immigrants 310,000 - 570,000 [5]

B. failed asylum seekers 250,000+ [6]

C. asylum seekers * 55,000 [6]

D. registered EU workers since 2004 expansion 375,000 [7]

D1. additional estimate worker arrivals to UK 187,000 [7]

* p.a. average last 10 years, 1994-2004, 88% of all cases were initially rejected in 2004, separate figures show about a fifth are won on appeal, rising to higher numbers among some nationalities.

Our borders, our controls? - surely - what do the public think?

"Q.7 Mori Poll" concerns of 'Race relations/immigration/immigrants' 2nd only to crime [8]

REALITY CHECK:

All economies have high & low (history) so when things get tight, are you arguing that foreign nationals (economic workers) will head off where the work or not to look to claim here?

Reality is certain types give little/no credence to human nature & history in respect of their Euro, cultural & societal dreams.

However, in other agendas such as societal issues (social services, crime, education) its all about acknowledging 'human nature'

Certain people put their political conviction about how they want people to behaviour rather than how they actually do.

Those same unelected minority interest/pressure groups were those behind the discredited notion of 'multiculturalism', & pursuance of their Euro Dream.

TAX v BENEFITS:

For the sustainability of the welfare state & tax system, we should be rightly concerned about who & how many pays tax & where they come from & the same ref who claim benefits.

Using the tax generated from non-sustainable number of foreign workers to sustain British unemployed is short termist in the extreme - it only works when people presume the former do not/will not need to claim benefits themselves.

Also 1 productive foreign national worker who then bringing over dependents (partner/spouse with 1+ children) will more typically take more out of the system (benefits) than they contribute (via tax) esp at the low paid manual labour end.

SUMMARY:

The population does not need 'whipping up' via politicians & media. There has long been mainstream concern about how this country has been for far too long been steered in a certain direction according to the fanciful nations of certain unelected groups, with vested interests & multi agendas.

This does not mean British society is overly xenophobic & euro sceptic, rather they desire control & balance ref the nature of their society & the relationships they have with other nations, whether that has basis in economic and/or social concerns.

The amount of passion & debate that belatedly British society now engages, is testimony that this did not appear over night, rather it has been there for a considerable time i.e. ever since the British have been denied the right to discuss the changing cultural nature of our society (i.e. imposition of multiculturalism).

But no more - its on the agenda & out in the open, which will be in the long term interests of British society & sustainable balanced Euro relations.

Controls on the amount of people & which people can enter the United Kingdom are both sensible & rather desirable & does not mean the whole nation has suddenly become racist.

Nothing is more likely to cause cultural conflict & lead to undermining of social conventions than to disregard human natures, agendas & the wishes of mainstream indigenous British society [8]

vikingar

SOURCES:

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]

Fact - faith schools are regularly oversubscribed to, 'secular' schools are not.

Parents are falling over themselves to get their children into faith schools.

Statistics on such things as delinquency, exam records and discipline show faith schools doing better than 'secular' schools.

Something must be happening for the good in faith schools.

If by the ridiculous definition given by the first contributor was correct about brainwashing what makes him think state secular institutions would be any different? We would soon be at the Pink Floyd level for that too 'we dont need no education we dont need no thought control' and if that were so no system of education would stand and we might as well not educate at all!

Surely relatively unskilled jobs should have fair wages in order to attract the many jobseekers in the UK. Presumably the highly qualified Poles doing these jobs will wish to return to Poland in the future to obtain more suitable jobs when the Polish economy improves and then the UK will have to sort out its 'cheap labour' problem without further relying on immigrant labour.

Re: Vikingar - No.35.

I am not at odds with you on this as you seem to think and your well researched answer to my critique of the 91Èȱ¬ Office has very good points to make. For this reason, I will not come back at you on a point by point basis.

However, I think there are questions to be raised and points to be made. I fail to see the connection between the 'far eastern (ex) workforce' and the point at issue. I am referring specifically to immigrants from present and shortly to the enlarged EU. I made no reference to far eastern immigration. I have no brief for illegal immigrants or failed asylum seekers either and this forms no part of my argument. Such people should reasonably expect to be repatriated and so they should be.

I presume that your figure of 55,000 asylum seekers refers to successful applicants and 187,000 migrant works from elsewhere people who have successfully applied for work permits. Add this to the 375,000 registered EU influx from the last enlargement and you have a gross figure of 617,000 - not far off the unofficial estimate for the total and a little over 1% of the population. The registered EU element is, in round figures, 60% of the whole or 0.6% of the total population. Seen in this way, the figures for the people I am actually concerned about, i.e EU citizens is not that alarming.

The population of Romania is a little under 22 million and Bulgaria 7.5 million or under 30,000,000 in total. For the estimate of 1,000,000 migrants to be correct would mean over 0.1% of the gross population of both countries would be coming to the UK alone. I do not find this credible since many will opt for other western European destinations.

"This does not mean British society is overly xenophobic & euro sceptic". I don't suggest for a moment that it is. I do, however, suggest that there is a section of the media that is not only "xenophobic & euro sceptic" but also unduly alarmist and that is having an effect on 91Èȱ¬ Office policy.

The idea that the influx of migrant workers will involve bringing 2 dependants each (partner/spouse with 1+ children) is also not entirely credible since, in the case of the last intake, many were bread winners who came alone and were sending money home to support families who did not emigrate. And of course your figures take no account of people who opt to leave the UK every year. The most recent estimate I can find for that is 190,000 in 2003. If that figure is correct as an annual trend and, given that the 375,000 registered EU citizens who have arrived have been spread over two years, an average of 187,500 per annum, there is actually a net minus figure. Of course, this does not include the other non EU and unofficial EU immigration but I suspect we are in agreement about these.

My point remains clear. The 91Èȱ¬ Office is over-reacting, there is a concerted effort in sections of the media to promote restrictive policies and it is built largely on misunderstood or wilfully distorted statistics. As to the remarks about multiculturalism, it seems to me that in the current climate, this has much more to do with rising tensions between ethnic groups within the UK than with European immigration.

By the way, shouldn't that be 'rose tinted'?

Re: Philip Handa - No.36.

If the requirements of the National Minimum wage were correctly enforced, this would be at worst a peripheral issue. Too many employers are getting away with abusing the employment rights of legal immigrants. Illegals have only themselves to blame and their employers are breaking the law.

On the issue of immigration from Rumania , Its not a matter of race ,there are issues like slave labour and increasing the minimum wage ,

Is an economic boom based on slave labour, and which doesn’t increase the wages of the worst off worth having.

Faith schools be it of any religion is important in defining the character and a sense of moral righteousness. The alarm today is the result of Islamic fundamentalist teaching and brain washing that has led to chaos, murder and mayhem. These Islamic schools are not run in order to teach faith but hate because the people who are considered teachers do not have a standard, accepted and fully recorded curicullum to follow. Therefore the so called teachers take advantage of the blind acceptence of their community that everything taught by these individual preferences of the teacher is right.

This leads to abuse and shallow thingking and lack of models that eventually lead to the teaching of hate and prejudice as the main ingredient of anything taught in these schools. What is actually taught is personal bias and prejudice thinking opinions of the imams. And to add to this situation, there is no supervision and the teacher is not required to answer to anyone because what he says and opinions is liken to their Gods.
This leads to abuse. This is the problem in the Islamic schools. The government is asked to leave them alone so that they can teach what they want. This is WRONG.

So the leaders should not advocate banning religion in schools. In fact from my experieces as a government teacher, morality and ethics taught through religious principles in the early years with proper supervision and professional curriculum, is most likely to guarantee a useful citizen. Religious principles of love and acceptencemust be taught in schools early, just like languages. Without that little fear of religion and God no amount of ehtical and moral talking advocated by these political leaders will work. Their propositions are excuses for the lack of concrete ideas and results. In the long run it will only turn out educated imbeciles, who are neither educated nor deciplined in life.

So I advocate religion must be the backbone of all our educational activity without fundamantalism and fanaticism. That is what true religious teaching is all about. To make a better person.
It must be done with judicious supervision. Faith teaching is extremely vital for a healthy life but fanatics should not stand in front of young minds in front of the classrooms with the lisence to do as they please. The moulding of young minds with faith and goodness must be a dynamic community responsibility with the government playing the role of fostering and providing and checking.

Any government in my opinion is asking for moral disaster and bankruptcy if it advocates to remove faith in schools. It is a call by moral bankrupts who appear to offer solutions that actually spells disaster in the long term. It is time we throw out these people who simply throw opinions without much study and contemplative thought.