Public & Private Schooling in The Penrith Region

cypher67 on 12/05/2016 - 17:35
Last edited 19/05/2016 - 09:19

Hi OzBargain,

My eldest Son is due to start Kindergarten next year and I am currently exploring my options & am I after some advice.

I live out near Penrith in Sydney, the local public school to whose catchment I fall has a terrible reputation and performance results.

I'm not against paying for my kids education (without going crazy, $5k a year max) so started applying to some Private Schools.

All the school so far have declined us because I am not affiliated to any specific religion and those that are; get priority.

Has anyone else faced this problem & what did you do?
Any school recommendations between Blacktown and Emu Plains?

I never realised how many private schools are tied to a specific religion, I didn't think it would be this hard to get my son a decent education…

Education & Work

Comments

robbyjones on 12/05/2016 - 17:44

Who declined you based on your religion (or lack of it)? All 4 of my sons attended Catholic schools and we are not catholic and the two younger haven't been been baptised/christened either. We were also told that Catholic families took priority. If you applied and they rejected your application then I would take it up with the relevant diocese, if it is a Catholic school.

At our enrolment meeting we had a discussion with the principal about the values of the school and the Catholic church and we promised that, as a family, we would respect their principles and agreed to abide by the rules of the school.
- ozhunter on 12/05/2016 - 19:04
  
  At our enrolment meeting we had a discussion with the principal about the values of the school and the Catholic church and we promised that, as a family, we would respect their principles and agreed to abide by the rules of the school.
  
  I thought that this is way it is. I'm guessing they prefer Catholic students as they are more likely to uphold the same value, though at kindergarten age, it shouldn't matter.
  - Zondor on 15/05/2016 - 16:34
    
    +1
    
    Usually they like to get in the non-believers young so they can convert them from my experience.
    - ozhunter on 15/05/2016 - 16:56
      
      Not everyone believes in God when they get older but many still do as the evidence provided by science isn't enough to convince them otherwise.
      
      I agree that you don't need any religion to teach someone to be respectful, kind, caring etc. but even if you don't agree with it, it's effective.
    - Bargain Hunter 007 on 16/05/2016 - 13:27
      
      @ozhunter: No doubt, that's how I plan on teaching my kids, tricking them into being respectful, kind, caring etc. or else they will go to HELL! Rather than, you know, teaching them to be respectful, kind, caring etc. because it makes society a nicer place.
      
      I will give religion props for charity work though!
    - ozhunter on 16/05/2016 - 13:59
      
      @Bargain Hunter 007:
      
      Not a trick lol. You don't that to believe in it, but even if you don't you would still need to follow the school's rules.
    - poboy on 16/05/2016 - 14:01
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      Nitpick, but 'believes in a God' as there is more than 1 recognised.
    - jacross on 16/05/2016 - 16:40
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      As an agnostic atheist, science has nothing to say about the question of whether a god exists, what the concept of god means, whether someone should or should not believe in a god/s, and whether or not the absence of belief in a god should therefore equate to a belief that there is not a god.
      
      I think a more accurate statement would be 'the philosophical arguments against theism' aren't enough to convince them otherwise.
    - [Deactivated] on 17/05/2016 - 00:19
      
      +1
      
      My kids come home from school telling me about god. I just tell them I don't believe and I ask them to question their beliefs about why they believe and why it's important. To question the quality of sources. I just think they need to learn to think critically, whichever path that leads them to.
    - frewer on 18/05/2016 - 15:14
      
      @jacross:
      
      As an agnostic atheist, science has nothing to say about the question of whether a god exists, what the concept of god means, whether someone should or should not believe in a god/s, and whether or not the absence of belief in a god should therefore equate to a belief that there is not a god.
      
      The famous Richard Dawkins would disagree with you, and he a fair number of follower too
    - ozhunter on 18/05/2016 - 16:16
      
      @frewer:
      
      Though if he had to choose a religion, I think he'd choose Christianity. http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/profes…
    - frewer on 18/05/2016 - 20:32
      
      @ozhunter: Well that is something different from him in 2016, also that is a big IF. However, I sincerely hope it will become fact one day.
    - jacross on 19/05/2016 - 09:06
      
      @frewer:
      
      Caveat to the below: Upon reflection of my original statement I am happy to concede that induction (the scientific method's basis) can provide us with significant knowledge that contradicts numerous claims found in various religions). As I outline below it's very overrated in terms of the core questions that atheist's should really be interested in if they want to truly explore atheism and convert people to a self described 'atheism' that actually fits the concept.
      
      Richard Dawkins is a poor philosopher (not being a philosopher of course he is a poor philosopher). He does a good job of using science and historical research to point out the problems with some religions tenets, historical claims, and practical influence on the world, but he has very little to actually say about the philosophy of religion in general that is meaningful.
      
      Due to his natural adherence to empiricism as it relates to the scientific method he sort of falls into the philosophical position of 'strong/explicit atheism' borne of inductive atheology but he never really does the proper work to examine the relationship between epistemological schools of thought and the metaphysics of the concept of 'deities'.
      
      It's actually quite interesting to see how his very important work in evolutionary biology has gradually drawn him into becoming a standard bearer for atheism in the eyes of the lay public.
      
      He's basically a 'pop atheist'. I don't think that necessarily makes him a negative because he speaks to an audience that is already several steps below the kind of rigour I'm advocating. He's reaching and rebutting arguments and beliefs that have more philosophical flaws than his own so he's essentially still a rising tide that lifts all boats.
      
      As an agnostic atheist I'm of course also biased against his methodology.
    - syousef on 19/05/2016 - 14:24
      
      +1
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      Look at how effective religion has been for teaching respect, kindness and caring.
      
      Crusades.
      Invasion and cultural destruction.
      Stolen generations.
      Subjugation of women.
      Denial of contraception.
      Torcher and murder of scientists.
      War.
      Jihad.
      etc.
      
      "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion" - Steven Weinberg
      
      I fully expect to be downvoted. But truth is needed here.
    - ozhunter on 19/05/2016 - 18:33
      
      @syousef:
      
      Not all religions are for those listed. I'm pro Christianity, against everything else.
    - syousef on 19/05/2016 - 19:28
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      Dude check your history. Christianity has contributed to all of these things.
      Invasion and cultural destruction: The Americas, Australia.
      Stolen generations: Africa, Australia.
      Subjugation of women: Built into the doctrine, particularly for Orthodox Christianity.
      Denial of contraception: Keeps the Vatican in the papers.
      Torcher and murder of scientists: Inquisition, Galileo, Giordano Bruno.
    - ozhunter on 08/06/2016 - 17:48
      
      @syousef:
      
      Christians have done bad things, they're humans too.
      
      When you say cultural destruction and stolen generation, I think you referring to when they settled here http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2016/03/30/invaded-settled-un…
      
      Subjugation of women? I don't see where it says that in the Bible. It does say the husband is the head of the household.
    - syousef on 08/06/2016 - 18:12
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      Of course you don't see. You've got religion. Pointless continuing this.
    - ozhunter on 08/06/2016 - 19:52
      
      @syousef:
      Yea it is pointless, especially if you can't point it out.
    - syousef on 08/06/2016 - 21:11
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      I can point it out okay. Any of the stories you care to site as Christian truth sound ridiculous to an outsider. Faith is not an answer. If you make extraordinary claims you have to have extraordinary proof. None exists. And there is plenty of proof of religion being the BASIS of malicious action.
      
      Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg
      
      But I know you're going to come up with some nonsense to defend your tenuous position because you've been brainwashed into doing so. So far a lot of what you've said is falsifiable.
      
      There is plenty of hideous stuff in the Bible about women's "inferior status" as this page puts it:
      http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible7.htm
      
      The article you linked to about European "settlement" is ridiculous and offensive. Of course Australia was invaded and children ripped away from their "savage" parents. Not by me or you but definitely by those that came before us.
      
      This is not an invasion:
      https://res.cloudinary.com/the-news-hub/image/upload/q_60,f_…
      http://i.yomyomf.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/aboriginals-…
      
      But this is:
      http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2012/07/19/1226429/7164…
      
      This is why I'm not interested in discussing anything with people such as yourself. Your logic is twisted.
    - ozhunter on 09/06/2016 - 04:50
      
      @syousef:
      
      This is not an invasion:
      https://res.cloudinary.com/the-news-hub/image/upload/q_60,f_…
      http://i.yomyomf.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/aboriginals-…
      
      But this is:
      http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2012/07/19/1226429/7164…
      
      Those links neither show nor prove anything. You don't see Christians advocating violence do you?
      
      There is plenty of hideous stuff in the Bible about women's "inferior status" as this page puts it:
      http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible7.htm
      
      God did give the husband of being the head of the family. The link did referred to the verse where it commands wives to submit(not obey) their husbands but also conveniently left out the part where husbands are commanded to love their wives. http://www.gotquestions.org/wives-submit.html
      
      If you actually want to understand the proper interpretation of the Bible instead of passages taken out of context, this website is a good place to start. http://www.gotquestions.org/wrath-of-God.html
    - syousef on 09/06/2016 - 07:47
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      Those links neither show nor prove anything. You don't see Christians advocating violence do you?
      
      What were the crusades? What was the inquisition? Persecution of scientists: The Galileo affair, Michael Servetus Burned at the stake, aged 42. Giordano Bruno burned at the stake, aged 52 The witch hunts?
      
      God did give the husband of being the head of the family. The link did referred to the verse where it commands wives to submit(not obey) their husbands but also conveniently left out the part where husbands are commanded to love their wives. http://www.gotquestions.org/wives-submit.html
      
      So subserviance is okay so long as the slave master loves his slave? Thanks for proving my point. There's nothing taken out of context here. This is barbaric.
- airzone on 12/05/2016 - 21:01
  
  +6
  
  Likely the poor reputation of the local public school has driven up demand on the private schools that they have to be a bit selective.
  - cypher67 on 12/05/2016 - 23:49
    
    +1
    
    Correct, every parent with means will go through what I am doing, because the alternative is not worth it.
    - virhlpool on 14/05/2016 - 10:03
      
      Isn't govt taking any measures to improve the public school in question if it's a known problem in the area?
    - captobvious on 14/05/2016 - 19:41
      
      some public schools are better than others in the same area is normally due to the quality of teachers and the competence of their principle to ensure they are proactive enough to gain extra funding from the govt or industry to run additional programs.
      Some teachers are so good they are able to engage with all their students.
      
      I have heard of a few exceptional public schools because polies send their children there, this is also the same for many exceptional private schools that are well funded because of their alumni and board with lots of money.
      
      So maybe find out which public school has children from polies or senior staff preferably from the education portfolio. Or a private school with Gina Rinehart or rich influential people on the board.
      
      The gina bit is just an example, im not actually sure if she gives a s.
    - Tnetennba on 16/05/2016 - 01:37
      
      @virhlpool: Sure, they might, but that could take significant time to improve, and OP wants to enrol their kids in the immediate future, not wait 10 years for the government to get off their ass and improve the school.
    - ItsMeAgro on 16/05/2016 - 15:33
      
      +6
      
      @virhlpool:
      
      Isn't govt taking any measures to improve the public school in question if it's a known problem in the area?
      
      No, we keep voting in governments who spend less on education, so inevitably some of the brightest young people who'd like to become teachers keep choosing other careers that don't come with a vow of lifelong poverty…
    - chriskq on 17/05/2016 - 12:15
      
      @mgowen: I seriously have no idea who to vote for this election. I've always voted for greens in past purely because i thought they were the lesser of all evils….. but they have not done much to convince me this year.
      
      Who should i vote for? I really dont like politics and it frustrates me whenever i try and research the parties. Is there a party which is for high speed rail, wants to go after tax dodging corps and values the education/science/medicare sector?
      
      I like this compulsory voting analogy
    - cwongtech on 17/05/2016 - 13:43
      
      @chriskq:
      
      Who should i vote for? I really dont like politics and it frustrates me whenever i try and research the parties. Is there a party which is for high speed rail, wants to go after tax dodging corps and values the education/science/medicare sector?
      
      Well you can vote for the current party.. for the "new" policies (let's not forget they are IN power right now but they aren't actually doing anything), or you can try for the other party who's known to use money and go into a small amount of deficit (that the current party likes to chuck hissy fits about) to try to better Australia's society.
    - chriskq on 17/05/2016 - 13:47
      
      @cwongtech: exactly - the lesser of two evils right..
      
      Sometimes i really think a (co-operative) dictatorship would even be better :p
    - cwongtech on 17/05/2016 - 13:54
      
      @chriskq:
      
      the lesser of two evils right..
      
      Yeah. I don't mind being taxed, just hope the money is going to good use, to better our quality of life in some way.
      Buying more submarines and military equipment doesn't really seem to better anyone's quality of life.. let alone ours.
    - Bargaingeek on 19/05/2016 - 07:53
      
      @cwongtech:
      
      $50 Billion on Subs that aren't even nuclear! Pathetic. And we never have enough money for our healthcare and education and infrastructure.
- cypher67 on 12/05/2016 - 23:48
  
  +1
  
  I dont think name dropping is important, they prioritize by religion+local, then religion, then local, then the rest. I understand why they do it, I suppose my beef is the crazy low number of none religion specific schools. Why are their so few non-religion specific private schools?
  - ozhunter on 13/05/2016 - 04:24
    
    +4
    
    My guess would be that, on average, public school students perform just as well as private school students. Also, if you want to send your child to school with religious values, it would have to be private, as I don't think there is any religious public schools in Australia.
  - callum9999 on 14/05/2016 - 03:08
    
    +3
    
    Because religious organisations have a much stronger reason for setting up a school than other organisations - it's just another form of proselytising.
    
    What parents usually do in your situation is "convert" to Catholicism etc. for the duration of their children's schooling.
  - D Money on 17/05/2016 - 13:33
    
    Tax concessions.
- rmamila on 17/05/2016 - 15:57
  
  @robbyjones: I am not sure about Sydney however this happened to me 6 years back. I am in Melbourne South East.
  When my elder one was about to start school I rang the primary schools in the suburb. I only knew 3 primary schools in the area all 3 were Catholic schools, as I was new in the area and relatively new in Australia as well.
  All 3 schools asked what my religion is which I said we are Buddhist. Answer I got from all 3 schools was that they don't take Buddhist kids. From one of the school the person who answered the phone just said that and hung the phone. I felt it too rude. Other two were politely said they can't take my kid.
  Finally I talked to few neighbors and found that there is a public school as well in the area and enrolled my daughter there. However most of my neighbors send their kids to those Catholic schools in the area but they are not Catholic and actually their ancestors are from Asia and Buddhist too. They told me that I don't have to say I am Buddhist but can just say we are Catholic and enrolled the kid which is what they have done and they actually don't follow any religion. I didn't want to start with a lie to get a school for my kid.
  
  It was all good for past 6 years till last week. Now my daughter is getting ready for Secondary school next year. There two Catholic girls schools in the area. One is just 500m walk from home. We don't have a state school in the suburb. I applied for both Catholic girls schools and the state school in the next suburb which I really don't want to send my daughter. I received the letters from both the Catholic schools notifying unsuccessful enrollment as our priority is lowest even though we live next to school. My neighbor who lied in the first place to send theirs to Catholic primary had no issue in getting the ennoblement to this Secondary school.
  
  I learnt my lesson. I've done same mistake with my little one already going into Gov primary. But it's not too late to fix the issue with the little one.
  
  I never expected this type of issues with schooling in here until I faced the issue.
  - serpserpserp on 17/05/2016 - 19:54
    
    +4
    
    Sending your kid to a public primary school is not a mistake. If you can help guide them and save your dollars for tutoring in the things they struggle with and you can't help with then they should be able to be great students.
    - rmamila on 18/05/2016 - 16:39
      
      You are right, I was happier to send my kids to public primary school. However given my cultural background we prefer to raise kids with discipline. Especially daughters. Don't get me wrong it's different culture.
      Having involved closely with the primary school I know the staff don't want to do anything extra to discipline the kids as that's not part of their job. You can't blame them for that too.
      However I hear from parents who send their kids to Catholic schools, that they care more for the kids discipline. I don't have personal experience in this.
      No matter what we have to do our part at home when raising kids to make them responsible good kids. Having competitive and top notch education second priority for me.
    - frewer on 18/05/2016 - 20:29
      
      @rmamila:
      That is what I will teach my kids, plus moral discipline or meaning of life.
      As this quotes put it in a better way than I can.
      A man who has never gone to school may steal from a freight car; but if he has a university education, he may steal the whole railroad. Theodore Roosevelt
  - buckster on 17/05/2016 - 23:06
    
    Killester isn't a particularly fantastic school just so you know…
    - rmamila on 18/05/2016 - 16:41
      
      Thanks for the information. You've done your research well :)
      
      I've seen kids behaving bad even though they go to the best school in state. A good school just helps your cause but no guarantee. More responsibility lies with parents anyway not the school.
    - rmamila on 23/05/2016 - 15:59
      
      @buckster
      Based on your experience would you be able to PM me some more details on this school so that it makes it easy for me to make my decision and not keep trying for a waiting list.
  - Bargaingeek on 19/05/2016 - 08:01
    
    +1
    
    What angers me the most is that Catholic schools has been receiving 250% more tax payer money than public schools in the last few years. Yet they are allowed to discriminate.
    
    If they rceueve public funds why should they be allowed to discriminate? Especially since Catholic schools have so much dominance.
    
    I don't have kids, but I know I will at some point. The schooling situation is horriblr
    - ozhunter on 19/05/2016 - 12:19
      
      What angers me the most is that Catholic schools has been receiving 250% more tax payer money than public schools in the last few years.
      
      If that is true, then maybe that's to equalize their funding with other schools for prior years.
      
      If they rceueve public funds why should they be allowed to discriminate?
      
      Anything and everything is discrimination.
      
      If my 10yr old son isn't allowed to join the girls high school netball team, is that age or sex discrimination? or both?
    - rmamila on 19/05/2016 - 13:39
      
      +1
      
      Totally agree with you. At least state schools should get similar funding. When Government created a scheme to provide funding to schools to rebuild their old buildings the main tag line was that they try to reduce the gap between advantaged and dis-advantaged schools. The only Gov Primary in my suburb is considered disadvantaged.
      However the exact opposite to the slogan happened at the end. All Catholic schools got their funding in the first round and built nice buildings and indoor gyms etc. The poor Gov school was put in the last round for funding. First demolished the old buildings and old basketball court. Funds approved for 4 buildings. However they only built 2 and builder packed up and moved away leaving the school as a work site. Reason was Government has recalled all remaining funding.
      If you think logically has that exercise reduced the gap between poor and rich schools or increased. After all it's tax money.
      The world we live in is not perfect and it won't be. However would you try to change the systems or go for the best available option for your kids future is the question.
    - syousef on 08/06/2016 - 23:37
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      Anything and everything is discrimination.
      
      If my 10yr old son isn't allowed to join the girls high school netball team, is that age or sex discrimination? or both?
      
      If you were forced to fund that girl's highschool netball team and the only other option for sports your son had was a gym where the boys get beaten up daily, I think you'd be complaining and asking for some of that funding to be diverted to something accessible to your son.
      
      Apples and Oranges.
    - ozhunter on 09/06/2016 - 04:18
      
      @syousef:
      
      You forgot to mention I'm also forced to fund the government gym. I'd be asking why no one is preventing the bullying in the gym.
    - syousef on 09/06/2016 - 07:48
      
      @ozhunter:
      
      Didn't forget that at all. "Something accessible" could be reforming the current gym, or disbanding it and offering something new.
ozhunter on 12/05/2016 - 19:02

I never realised how many private schools are tied to a specific religion

I think around 85% of them are religious.
GameChanger on 12/05/2016 - 19:11

+7

I would go to a private school from year 4, you're just wasting money now.
- cypher67 on 12/05/2016 - 23:50
  
  +1
  
  Whilst I agree, schools have a limit and a long waiting list. The likelihood of a spot becoming available at the school I want and then selecting me from the waiting list in pretty low, considering I didnt get in in the first place because of my religion.
- sal78 on 14/05/2016 - 21:29
  
  you may not be able to get in.. and yr 4 its hard, would have to rely on someone leaving for a spot to open up.
- Finde on 15/05/2016 - 00:19
  
  +7
  
  Disagree. Myself and my older sister went to a private primary school from prep.
  
  My parents decided to have two more children later in life who are now in grade 2 and 4. They sent then to a public primary school with that same attitude with the intention of sending them to the same private school I went to when they hit the middle school (year 5).
  
  As they have described, they just "didn't realise how much better the private school system really is". They then had to wait on lists to get them into private school.
  
  I also have a primary teaching degree and have worked at both private and public schools.
  I personally would not send my children to a public school.
  
  I am not saying a private school is without it's issues, but there are far less issues. From my experience, the quality of the teaching staff is far better and students have access to too far more resources to be able to learn.
  
  The families also make a massive difference. The children at the private school are, in my experience, generally much better behaved. With some of the parents I have dealt with, I just feel sorry for the children.
  
  What hope do the children have though when I asked the parents to come in to speak to them about their child, and as soon as I mention the child in any negative light, the parents start screaming at me calling me every name under the sun. It got so bad to the point that the parents were banned from school premises. Sadly, things like that are far more common then you would think.
  
  I'm not saying every public school is like that, I would however strongly recommend to do as much research as possible before sending them to any school.
  - Bargain Hunter 007 on 16/05/2016 - 13:35
    
    +1
    
    Hmm sounds like the issue is more with the parents rather than the public or private school. What you seem to be saying is that less affluent parents are likely to be worse behaved (on the whole, probably a correct statement).
    
    So if you are sending your kid to a public/ private school and you are a 'good' parent, all that stuff won't really matter.
    
    My experience (public school) with a good parent seems to have worked out OK. Meeting people from private schools throughout high school, university and the work force hasn't left me with any real interest in putting my kids through a private education. I'd prefer to spend that money for extra-curricula activities and holidays. To my knowledge this is generally the same conclusion as studies that compare public and private schools.
    
    However this is off-topic as OP mentioned it was a terrible public school. So in summary, I having nothing of substance to add.
  - chriskq on 17/05/2016 - 12:17
    
    isn't middle school an american thing? I've never heard the Australian schooling system refer to it?
    - Finde on 17/05/2016 - 22:29
      
      +1
      
      A number of p-12 private schools are now switching to that set up.
      Their school has the following set up - Primary school is prep to 4, middle school is 5-8, there is a separate year 9 centre then senior school is 10-12.
      Years 5 and 6 are more like a mix between primary school and high school which is supposed to make transitioning easier.
    - chriskq on 18/05/2016 - 09:57
      
      @Finde: Interesting - thanks for the reply
Ash-Say on 12/05/2016 - 19:42

This link might be useful

http://www.privateschoolsguide.com/penrith-region-private-sc…
rgr on 12/05/2016 - 20:19

+10

religion should have no place in education, it's so bad how kids are made to learn this shit.
- ozhunter on 12/05/2016 - 21:07
  
  +22
  
  Good thing you have a choice if you want to send your kids to private schools, isn't it?
  - cypher67 on 12/05/2016 - 23:46
    
    +8
    
    I have a choice to send my kid to an under performing public school or a high performing private school, as I do have a choice I think its pretty easy to make, no?
    - ozhunter on 13/05/2016 - 01:16
      
      +5
      
      Yes.
      
      My reply was to rogr stating that religion shouldn't be allowed in schools.
    - callum9999 on 14/05/2016 - 03:10
      
      +2
      
      @ozhunter: Not that it's a particularly sound argument to someone who is against religion… The parent, i.e. the one with the choice, isn't the one being indoctrinated - the child is.
      
      If you still have respect for religion that may be an issue, but it certainly is for those of us who have no respect for it!
    - ozhunter on 14/05/2016 - 03:25
      
      +2
      
      @callum9999:
      
      So what if you don't have respect for it? There's both private and public schools with many more of the latter.
      
      If parents like the teachings of a private school then they should be allowed to send their kids there.
    - callum9999 on 14/05/2016 - 06:22
      
      +2
      
      @ozhunter: You missed the entire point. If you don't respect religion, then you're not going to think parents having the right to force their children to attend religious schools is a good thing…
      
      I despise it as it causes countless death and misery around the world. To therefore answer your question, no I do not think it's a good thing for them to run schools.
    - ozhunter on 14/05/2016 - 13:54
      
      +1
      
      @callum9999:
      
      You could say the thing if you don't respect atheism or other religions than your own.
      
      Most wars aren't religious https://carm.org/religion-cause-war
    - belongsinforums on 14/05/2016 - 13:59
      
      @ozhunter: remember that 99.99% of Muslims are peaceful
    - antzz on 14/05/2016 - 15:06
      
      @tomkun01: I would say 80 to 90 pc. Hardliners is minority but still significant population at that
    - belongsinforums on 14/05/2016 - 15:12
      
      +1
      
      @antzz: The response is supposed to involve the 0.01% and the actual number of devout Muslims that would make. An example of a moderate muslim would be an islamic malaysian, who still can't marry someone without the other party conversion, not to mention eat a variety of meats or drink a drop of alcohol. Apostasy is still a definite no-no there. Then just think: that's about as moderate as it gets!
    - antzz on 15/05/2016 - 02:04
      
      +2
      
      @tomkun01: I am talking about wahabi here. The most stringent form of Islam. Trust me they are not that small in number. I am talking 10 to 20 percent of Muslim population. In most majority Muslim countries they strongly promote their views and spread confusion to moderate Muslim. In low income countries the seed of hatred spread so easily
    - callum9999 on 15/05/2016 - 06:20
      
      +1
      
      @ozhunter: You could, but your specific question is why should anyone object to religious schools, and that was my answer.
      
      I didn't say most wars are religious - not that your link to a group of Christian apologetics reassures me anyway. You cannot refute that religion has resulted in the murder of millions of people and it is still happening today. Regardless of whether you feel that's ok because non-religious people kill as well.
    - callum9999 on 15/05/2016 - 06:24
      
      +1
      
      @tomkun01: I have a Malaysian Muslim friend who just married an atheist (notionally Christian) Australian… She hasn't renounced her faith, her family and friends are supportive and he hasn't converted.
      
      She keeps halal and doesn't drink, but no-one is forcing her to do it. I think Malaysia is a bit more liberal than you imagine it is! (Though I've only been to Kuala Lumpur and she is the only non-KL Malaysian I know - maybe it's different out in the small villages?)
    - belongsinforums on 15/05/2016 - 07:49
      
      +1
      
      @callum9999: she can't renounce it, because that would result in extreme consequences. Sounds like she's moved to Australia, too. I wonder why.. Ask her if she'll brand her kids with the Muslim tag
    - belongsinforums on 15/05/2016 - 07:53
      
      @antzz: yea, a lot of poor countries have shitty people, but then again, a lot don't. Take most of SEA, for example. Thai people are some of the most hospitable you'll ever meet. I wonder if religion has something to do with that…
    - ozhunter on 15/05/2016 - 14:35
      
      -3
      
      @callum9999:
      
      I didn't say most wars are religious - not that your link to a group of Christian apologetics reassures me anyway
      
      I sure you looked it up but couldn't find anything that refutes that link.
      
      You cannot refute that religion has resulted in the murder of millions of people and it is still happening today. Regardless of whether you feel that's ok because non-religious people kill as well.
      
      I never said it was ok, but that religion you were referring to is Islam, just to be clear.
      Shows that people kill for a number of things, religious or not.
    - callum9999 on 15/05/2016 - 23:36
      
      @tomkun01: She can renounce it, several of her friends have done so openly. Whether this is technically legal I do not know, but it's certainly tolerated in some circles at least. Not to mention they're presumably government employees being teachers.
      
      She's moving yes. I don't wonder why, Australia is a much nicer place to live than Malaysia.
      
      I doubt she'll "brand" her kids anything. If they want to follow Muslim practices they can, growing up in Australia with an atheist father I'd imagine they'll grow up atheist with a "Muslim" cultural background.
      
      I initially thought you were talking from experience and know the community well (assuming the experiences I know from KL were atypical for the country as a whole). It seems more like you're just making it up now?
    - callum9999 on 16/05/2016 - 00:10
      
      @ozhunter: I didn't as your link was rather ridiculous and doesn't remotely counteract any point I have made, given I at no point stated religion caused most wars. Nor does religion need to specifically start or be the main reason for the war in order for it to cause any suffering.
      
      Your attempt to justify the millions killed by Christianity say otherwise. I also never said people don't kill for "a number of things" - I can see this discussion is going to be completely pointless as you're unwilling to read even basic English if it dares point out the fact that your faith is responsible for untold suffering on this planet. I was actually talking about all religions, your ignorant attempt to transfer blame to Muslims is pathetic.
      
      Who are victimising and killing transgender and homosexual people right now? Christians.
      Who are forcing children, rape victims and sick women to go through with pregnancy - killing many of them? Christians.
      Who are telling Africans that it's evil to use contraceptive, thus causing the spread of HIV on a huge scale? Christians.
      
      And I can go on and on. The reason why I did not even mention war (you just jumped straight in with that and your weird claim that it's ok because they only killed a few million) is that it's complicated and you could argue that some of them would have taken place anyway. The suffering mentioned above is a DIRECT consequence of religion that would NOT have happened had your religion not existed. I hope you're proud.
    - ozhunter on 16/05/2016 - 01:10
      
      @callum9999:
      
      I at no point stated religion caused most wars
      
      I never said you did, but at you mentioned religions cause countless death and in war, a lot of people die which is why I mentioned it.
      
      Who are victimising and killing transgender and homosexual people right now? Christians.
      
      So we disagree with it? Are we allowed to disagree with pedophilia or should we only support what you say?
      
      Who are forcing children, rape victims and sick women to go through with pregnancy - killing many of them? Christians.
      
      Nothing wrong with being against murder, and abortions related to those reasons are tiny compared to just can't be bothered to raise a child.
      
      Who are telling Africans that it's evil to use contraceptive, thus causing the spread of HIV on a huge scale? Christians.
      
      It contraception automatically disappear, they wouldn't instantly get HIV. Their actions cause them to get it, but a lot Christians don't agree that contraception is wrong.
      
      I hope you're proud.
      
      Very proud
    - callum9999 on 16/05/2016 - 01:37
      
      -5
      
      @ozhunter: Hmmm, I was hoping you'd come back with "not all Christians are like that", but it seems you're actually one of them. What an evil scum bag you are, this is over.
    - belongsinforums on 16/05/2016 - 06:27
      
      @callum9999: I have only visited KL, never lived in it, and I only know a few muslims. Anyway, good to hear that there are some sane muslims out there
    - ozhunter on 16/05/2016 - 14:09
      
      -4
      
      @callum9999:
      
      There are those who have differing opinions on those issues.
      
      I agree that homosexuality is wrong, but doesn't mean I wouldn't go to lunch or not invite people over because their gay. If they are killing them, of course I think that's wrong.
      
      I agree that abortion is wrong, but understandable in exceptional circumstances like the ones you've listed.
      
      I personally don't think there's anything wrong with using contraception.
    - Bendo on 17/05/2016 - 22:17
      
      @callum9999:
      Oh please!
      "I despise it as it causes countless death and misery around the world." So you've NEVER heard of HITLER, STALIN, MAO TSE-TUNG. Together having caused the death of millions. Far more than any religion. And these guys were ATHEISTS.
      
      Also people have a choice. They are not FORCED to send their children to a religious school. They can do what they want. Religious schools are also funded by the people who go to the local church and pay extra school fees. They want the religious instruction. It is their choice. Try and get that choice in an atheist country.
    - tryagain on 18/05/2016 - 14:32
      
      @callum9999: Your point is moot on every level I can think of. You would need to correctly argue that the Murder rate from religious people was greater than it was from irrelogous people in the same time period and culture (to negate those contributing factors) to have a point, which you cant.
      Are you also against governments running schools as they cause far more death and misery so you must surely be against public schools right?
      I do wonder if you actually looked into it and found that the murder rate for religious people was less would you change your position or would you just grasp onto some other argument to justify your predjuice.
      
      edit, corrected mute to moot
    - 2ndeffort on 18/05/2016 - 15:07
      
      @tryagain: At the risk of jumping into someone else's argument…..your grasp of all things education is called into question by the fourth word in your statement. If indeed the other poster's assertion is questionable, the term to use would be moot. Mute infers that the other poster is unable to speak. Additionally, what is this wild fascination with the insidious influence of the church of Rome. I get it that many schools have a religious connection. To expect that they are brainwashing our kids and perpetuating a quasi religious capitalist/military conspiracy to subjugate the workers of the world is so far beyond both the topic of discussion (and the bounds of reasonable debate) that raising it only highlights your paranoia.
      
      Please point me to any academic peer reviewed research proving that children taught in independent religious schools in Australia are so indoctrinated by their evil tutors that they are more likely than Joe Average to commit violent offences (like murder). I am not religious before you ask, i sent both my children to an independent school aligned with the Anglican church even though I have no connection (or interest in the Anglican church whatsoever. Neither of my kids are religious, we dont go to church. My kids have had to do some religious instruction at school but neither of them have come home with a burning desire to wage bloody war on unbelievers! We dont go to church and I cant see either of my kids wanting to once they leave school, indeed the eldest is already at Uni and he is too interested in music, pubs, video games and girls. The thought of him getting out of bed before midday on a Sunday would scuttle any religious potential before it got going! I think many people in this thread are massively overstating the influence of religion in education. i am old enough to remember the school chaplain at the government high school I attended.
      
      Quite honestly I have been far less concerned about any religious programming the kids received and far more concerned about the strong left wing political agenda that i perceive from time to time woven through the klds assignments. It angers me when I read contentious topics that are being debated in the public forum being represented in my kids school assignments with a very leading agenda. I have seen circumstances where teachers have encouraged students to attend activist events and situations where offering an alternate (non PC) viewpoint on issues has earned rebuke. Personally I expect teachers to pass on knowledge and not their personal politics.
    - tryagain on 18/05/2016 - 15:37
      
      +1
      
      @2ndeffort: I have fixed your moot comment about my grammer (actually typo/autotext) ;). We are actually on the same page in the broader argument so I think the rest of your post should have been directed at callum9999, luckily we are mature enough to see arguments for what they are and not get sidetracked on minor technicalities.
    - 2ndeffort on 18/05/2016 - 15:43
      
      +1
      
      @tryagain: No problem, I just feel the anti religious zealots have found a convenient distraction from the original topic about education.
- juki on 14/05/2016 - 11:01
  
  +2
  
  it all depends what people do with it… my religious school, had us participate in a lot of social activities like cleaning up parks, helping old people and visiting historical places, as well as just organising kids stuff.(the only memories i have about all the church stuff is being silly just as you would in any other class)
  
  yet, while teaching in asia i came accross very strange religious schools of american source with all the fearmongering and crazy ideas associated, which fortunately most people ignored.
  
  I don't think Aus has gone that crazy yet(?)
  
  just like many things blame the users,
  - belongsinforums on 14/05/2016 - 14:01
    
    -4
    
    My religious school had me talking to an imaginary bearded man in the sky, believing that he could hear me and would shoot lightning at my enemies. Great use of my parentsmoney. Oh, and if you blasphemed, you were punished, thus harming students freedom of speech and critical thinking.
    - ozhunter on 14/05/2016 - 18:15
      
      +5
      
      I bet if you got punished for verbally abusing/cursing at the principal or at little kids, you'd also say that's harming your free speech?
    - belongsinforums on 14/05/2016 - 19:52
      
      @ozhunter: Of course, but at least banning swearing doesn't compromise the development of critical thinking skills.
    - juki on 15/05/2016 - 10:54
      
      haha if it's true, yes unfortunately idiocy affects all groups of people, religious or not, australian or not, alcoholics or not ect ect (no reason for the forementioned choices, don't read into it)
      
      if i remember my lessons jesus did kick out the pharisians of a temple or a market because despite being known as the most religious they were really making money, on some kind of egoistic trip, so just like with food don't just look at what it's advertising.
      
      some vatican scientists (yeah they do have some) say it's the definition of god that causes problems (they also laughed at the imaginary hippie throwing lightening). science isn't compatible (but that's a loong story)
      
      religious or not i don't really mind, people should focus more on tolerance and acceptance (which some atheists also forget)
  - cheesecactus on 14/05/2016 - 19:41
    
    +3
    
    Exactly, depends on the school. I went to one of the top 5 most expensive schools in my state. They said they were religious, but in reality we didnt do anything at all….ever.
    
    I know one of the other top 5 had religion as a unit and was compulsory even at year 12 (but it was still a good school, i was just surprised to hear that. We didnt even have religion as a unit).
- ItsMeAgro on 16/05/2016 - 15:36
  
  If religion is nonsense, your kids can figure it out. No harm done, except to listen to someone talk about right and wrong for an hour each week.
  
  It's not like most of Australia's private schools are run by dangerous cults or extremists or something…
  - rgr on 16/05/2016 - 18:56
    
    -4
    
    er no, kids wouldn't be able to 'figure' it out at an age where their brains are quite malleable. you can easily talk about right and wrong each week without talking about how god created the universe and that there was a flood and noah saved all the animals. you don't get the point, religion is a heavy waste of time and you're teaching kids things that translate to NO value whatsoever in real life. they should be learning about other things like ummm lets see….maths, english, critical thinking and reasoning and maybe even how to run a lemonade stand because that's a huge amount more useful than religion.
    
    it's funny you mention extremists because extremists are born out of religious beliefs.
Findo on 12/05/2016 - 20:21

Move to a north shore, northern suburb or eastern suburb school catchment area!
- cypher67 on 12/05/2016 - 23:53
  
  +1
  
  This is an option yes, however when you compare the price of housing/renting, it would be the equivalent to pay $25k a year for the chance of the education. I do agree though, that is where the best school are and the reason why housing is crazy expensive. My friend pays $300 extra a week rent compared to the person across the street from them, because their sides in the good school catchment. Supply and demand, its crazy
  - ihbh on 14/05/2016 - 00:07
    
    Out of interest, which schools are these?
    - Findo on 14/05/2016 - 02:31
      
      Knox/Barker/Shore/Abbotsleigh/Pymble Ladies/Ravenswood/Wenona/Loreto/St Aloysius/Saint Ignatius/Monte or for public ones Cheltenham/North Sydney Boys and Girls/Sydney Boys and Girls/Normanhurst/Killara etc
      
      Look at the top 25 HSC ladder schools and most will be found in the north or east.

Public & Private Schooling in The Penrith Region

Comments

New Forum Topics