« February 2005 | Main | April 2005 »

March 23, 2005

Top marks for sect schools that shun the modern world

A secretive religious sect that bans children from using computers or reading fiction has won praise from Ofsted for the quality of education provided by its schools.

The Exclusive Brethren, which also believes that members should not go to university because it is too "worldly," runs 43 private schools educating 1,400 children.

The group, an offshoot of the Evangelical Protestant Plymouth Brethren, cuts itself off from the outside world, which it regards as evil. Members are not allowed to have friends from outside the Brethren. They work only in Brethren-owned businesses, and their meeting halls have no windows. They must follow a rigid code of behaviour set down by their leader, known as the "Elect Vessel".

Television, radio, mobile telephones, newspapers and going to places of entertainment are all banned. Computers and the internet are regarded as tools of the Devil.

All private schools are now required to register either with Ofsted or the Independent Schools Council to show that they satisfy minimum criteria for education, although they are not required to follow the national curriculum. Ofsted has already accredited six of the Brethren's schools through the Focus Learning Trust, an educational group established by the church.

A spokesman for the trust said it hoped to have all of them registered by the summer. He said that the schools observed the same rules as the Brethren on the use of computers and modern technology.

"We don't have such things in our homes, we don't have them in our businesses and we would not have them in our schools," he said. "Children were educated extremely well, some would say better, before such things were dreamt up. There is a general perception in the educational world that the teacher who needs to employ such gimmicks to get their message across is clearly not the most committed teacher."

David Bell, the Chief Inspector of Schools in England, praised the Exclusive Brethren in his annual report last month, in which he also criticised Islamic schools for teaching a narrow curriculum that posed a potential threat to Britain's sense of national identity.

The sect, which adheres to a strict interpretation of biblical teaching, has most of its schools in the South of England. They were set up to keep children "away from damaging influences" in the state system.

Mr Bell said in his report that teaching in the Focus Learning schools visited so far by inspectors was generally good. He went on: "Focus Learning provides good support to its schools and has developed a number of common policy documents that are of very good quality . . . The quality of teaching, most of which is done by experienced practitioners, is generally good."

Most of the schools, which cater for pupils aged 11 to 17, had operated previously as tuition centres for children who were otherwise taught at home. They rely on fees from parents or donations from the Exclusive Brethren. Pupils are entered for GCSE and vocational qualifications.

The Exclusive Brethren was founded in the mid 19th century. It believes the world is the domain of the Devil, and members spend most of their time in "safe places" such as meeting rooms and their own homes.

Ofsted's praise of education standards at its schools has drawn criticism. Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said: "Denying children access to knowledge that would help them to cope in the modern world is tantamount to abuse.

"It will leave them ill-equipped to cope if they later decide that life inside the Brethren is not for them. It is alarming that Ofsted, in its keenness to accommodate religion, appears to have suspended its critical faculties."

Doug Harris, director of the Reachout Trust charity, which provides support for former members of religious sects, said: "The basis of Exclusive Brethren belief is separation from the rest of the world. It can be distressing for them if they try to leave."

Separate Lives

The Times - UK
By Tony Halpin
http://www.rickross.com/reference/general/general730.html

Posted by Julia at 06:59 PM

March 22, 2005

New charges for Chile cult head

Former Nazi and cult leader Paul Schaefer has been charged with the 1976 disappearance of an opponent of former Chilean dictator Gen Augusto Pinochet.

Photographer and left-wing activist Juan Maino was arrested and taken to Mr Schaefer's secret commune, Colonia Dignidad, and never re-appeared.

Mr Schaefer was also questioned over the allegation he abused 26 children.

The German, 83, who was deported to Chile from Argentina, already faces charges over another disappearance.

Both Juan Maino and Alvaro Vallejos were last seen at Mr Schaefer's secluded compound after being arrested by Gen Pinochet's security forces.

Chilean prosecutors and human rights activists have long asserted that Gen Pinochet's military government used Colonia Dignidad as a centre for interrogation and torture.

"Schaefer's arrest was very important," said prosecutor Sergio Concha, representing Mr Maino's family.

"We knew about the link between Colonia Dignidad and Juan Maino's disappearance, but now that he is available for the judge to interrogate, we can prosecute."

Chile's most wanted fugitive, Mr Schaefer was a corporal in the German army during World War II before running a religious commune in Chile.

He established the commune south of the Chilean capital, Santiago, after fleeing child abuse allegations in Germany in 1961.


Colonia Dignidad was shut off from the outside world
In November 2004 he was convicted of child abuse in absentia by a Chilean court, but those charges are being re-submitted to the courts now Mr Schaefer is in custody.

He escaped from Chile in 1997 shortly before police raided Colonia Dignidad, and spent almost eight years on the run.

He was arrested in Buenos Aires on 12 March and deported back to Chile to face charges.

He is also wanted for questioning in Germany on suspicion of the abuse and corruption of minors, and is under investigation in France.

In addition, he is wanted for questioning about the disappearance in 1985 of Boris Weisfeiler, an American-Jewish mathematics professor of Russian origin.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4370607.stm

Posted by Julia at 07:10 PM

March 13, 2005

Faith schools [in Iran] mean fewer rights for children

People who are against faith schools often say that it causes segregation, perpetrates a system of apartheid that it separates children of 'different religions' from each other. Would you agree or disagree with that?

Bahram Soroush: I would agree with that. We are supposed to have mainstream, secular education for children and it should be irrespective of what their families' religious affiliations are. A whole lot of issues come into this discussion; the issue of secularism, i.e. whether you want to have a secular education or not, and also the issue of children's rights, whether you want to allow them the opportunity of a free and secular education, free from the religious indoctrination that comes with faith schools.

Some might say why should secularists decide on what children should learn? If parents who have religious beliefs want their children raised with these religious beliefs, why not? Isn't it being repressive, in a sense, asking the state to intervene and ensure that schools are secular?

Bahram Soroush: The state intervenes on many other issues and nobody calls that repressive. The state intervenes on the issue of the protection of children, for example. The rights of parents do not stand apart from other rights in society. Certain rights override others. Especially, when it comes to children, parents do not have absolute rights in how their children are brought up. For example, you have child protection laws which definitely condition and limit the rights of parents. Any defender of the rights of children would say that children's rights should override any political, cultural and economic considerations. Most definitely and most clearly they should override the rights of parents. So the issue of whether parents have the right to send their children to a faith school comes up against the issue of children's rights.

But there are parents who say that they want their children to go to faith schools because they want their children to have a proper upbringing, to be moral, to be ethical, and they say what's wrong with that? They ask what's wrong with giving our children that sort of education.

Bahram Soroush: There's nothing wrong with having a good upbringing and being morally sound. But you don't have to be religious to have sound morals. On the contrary, when you bring religion into it, you're bringing in a particular ideology. Religion cannot claim to have a monopoly on ethics, on morals. There are millions of people who don't have any religious beliefs, who are atheists; nobody can accuse them of being amoral, of not having any ethics, not having any values. So that's just a defence they're putting up. You can have your children brought up with values of humanism, respecting other people's rights, with a sense of justice, and with everything that we want our children, the next generation, to have. Especially, in order for that to develop as fully as possible, you have to take religion away from it, because it's a barrier to progress.

Some might say that's your opinion. If you promote secularism in schools, you're treating secularism like a religion as well; you're imposing your ideology on people who want their children to be raised with a religious upbringing. What's your opinion on that?

Bahram Soroush: I could turn the question back at them. I would say why do you want to impose your religion on society? With secularism, society is saying we want people to have the right to think as they like; we won't interrogate people, ask them what their beliefs are, what their ideological affiliations are. People have the absolute right - and that's where rights should be absolute - to think and have whatever belief systems that they want to have. But at the same time, in order to maintain that, you should stop one section of society, particular sects, imposing their views and their way of thinking on the rest of us. Secularism would contain and accommodate that as well. So somebody in a secular society would have the right to be religious in their own private worlds. They would have the right to speak their mind and try to win adherents to their religion, just as we would have the right to criticise them and promote atheism, secularism and free thought. But when it comes to education, it is one of our achievements in many parts of the world that we have fought against the hold of religion which for so many years, for centuries, stifled free thought and human progress and happiness. Having a secular education is an issue of protecting children from the encroachments of religious bodies and sects.

One of the things people are saying is that there are so many Catholic schools, for example, in Europe, and there are so few Islamic schools. And they are saying that this is a form of discrimination against Muslims living in Europe. So as a way of redressing this discrimination, they say there should be an equal number of Islamic schools. What's your response?

Bahram Soroush: It may well be discrimination, but the way of redressing it, I would say, would be to stop all faith schools. They are arguing amongst themselves. But let's face this fundamental question: why have faith schools? This is indoctrination of children. We are saying, stop this indoctrination of children. When they are adults, they can choose whatever religious, political, philosophical beliefs and standpoints they want to have. But while they are children, society has a duty towards them. As we have laws against physical abuse of children, we should have laws against psychological, emotional and ideological abuse of children. Children don't choose to go to faith schools. Somebody else is deciding that. Somebody else is imposing their religion on them. So it's not even a question of free choice, which is one of the arguments they use as well. But whose free choice are we talking about? The parents' free choice. And a particular section of parents. Because the majority of parents decide to send their children to mainstream, secular schools. So we are faced with a small section of society who wants to have this prerogative for themselves to bring up their children as they like and have the sanction of the state as well. Even if they did not seek the financial support of the state, that would still be an infringement of children's rights. Children should have the absolute right, on equal terms with every other child, to a free and secular education. The rights of the child born into a family, whose parents have strong religious beliefs and want to put their children into faith schools, should be protected. They should have the right to an education that is free from any ideology. And religion is one of those ideologies.

But then, some would argue, isn't humanism a form of ideology? Isn't secularism an ideology?

Bahram Soroush: I'm talking about ideology in the narrow sense of the word; the ideas of particular groups and sects that are inherently divisive. I would define humanism as a set of values, a set of beliefs, the way we want to organise our society, which does not discriminate against certain people and does not curtail rights.

Some people will say religion is a set of values and beliefs that are positive.

Bahram Soroush: Yes, but it's very segregationist. Humanism, on the other hand, is all-inclusive. Unlike religion, it puts the human being at the centre. Its standpoint is against discrimination. It is against narrowing down and only protecting a small section of society; whereas religion and any other sectarian ideology build on denying that.

What would you say to the proposal to keep faith schools but make sure that a percentage of students are atheists and a percentage are of different religions to stop the segregation from taking place?

Bahram Soroush: We are creating a problem for ourselves and then trying to patch it up somehow. The issue of segregation is still there. The whole way of looking at it, I think, is wrong as well. Instead of viewing society in a holistic way, as human beings, being colour-blind, not distinguishing people on the basis of their religion, or their parents' religions, their beliefs, and where they come from, they look at it in a very divisive way. They categorise people and then say what do we do with these categories? In that way we build isolated schools and worlds for those children, isolated from the mainstream society. The rights of those children are infringed; their right of development and enjoyment on the same terms as every other child is infringed. By accepting faith schools, we are accepting that a section of our children should have fewer rights than other children. When it comes to children, we should leave aside all other considerations, including the religious beliefs of their parents.

Interview with Bahram Soroush
http://www.iransecularsociety.com/Faith%20schools%20mean%20fewer%20rights%20for%20children.htm

Posted by Julia at 10:02 PM

March 10, 2005

Ten dead in Nigeria cult clashes

Security has been increased around the university in the Nigerian town of Ekpoma after at least 10 students died in fighting between rival gangs.

Officials at the Ambrose Alli University said only one student had been killed after days of clashes.

But Edo state regional assembly member Patrick Ajuenede confirmed 10 deaths in clashes involving guns and machetes.

There has been a recent upsurge in violence between gangs, or cults, as student numbers have risen in Nigeria.

One of the Ambrose Alli cults is alleged to have hired mercenaries from another university to carry out the killings which were done in broad daylight over a period of four days.

Edo state governor Lucky Igbinedion has called a state security meeting.

In the meantime, correspondents say the students are continuing their end of semester examinations under a cloud of fear.

Cults first started in the 1960s as social groups but by the 1990s had become notorious for terrorising students and lecturers

Their activities waned after the authorities introduced stiff penalties, including long jail sentences.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4335527.stm

Posted by Julia at 07:18 PM