If that is the case, then the COI community would have no objection to removing the priority rule - right?
You seemed to know whether non-COI families were likely to be affected by this rule, so I thought that you might have some detailed knowledge.I have no idea - how would I know?
School enrollment policies need to be published. The published version for this school [broken link removed] lists number 1 as the COI community - they get priority.BTW, it is by no means clear that this is a 'priority rule' - the policy is simply mentioned as part of the admissions criteria. Does it explicitly say anywhere that COI members are are considered above all others? Maybe it is simply a percentage admissions quota?
You seemed to know whether non-COI families were likely to be affected by this rule, so I thought that you might have some detailed knowledge.
School enrollment policies need to be published. The published version for this school [broken link removed] lists number 1 as the COI community - they get priority.
Whatever the specific reason is, it doesn't justify religious discrimination on a state service. If there is a 'specific reason' for a COI-only bus or COI-only Motor Tax office, would that be OK?Maybe, but as mentioned, it is very unusual and there is a specific reason for it.
But you are convinced by your own assumption that RC children are NOT excluded, even though you have no knowledge of the situation?And BTW, any talk so far of RC children being excluded as a result has been prefaced by "I heard" or "apparently" etc. Hardly convincing.
No other state school (e.g. premises owned/built/managed/operated by the state) to the best of my knowledge discriminates on religous grounds. Jaybird's school is a parish school, not a state school. It is outrageous that a state school is discriminating on religous grounds.All schools have some sort of selection criteria - e.g. according to Jaybird's link, his/her local school prioritises RC children.
Local CofI school in my locality has a % of RC pupils (don;t know what it is but I do know some people attending whose kids would be RC. I understand there are 2 reasons....nice small school (reminds me of years ago, kids skipping, playing chasing & hopscotch) so the kids get plenty of attention. Also they have direct access to the local community college which is way over subscribed & they have first access.
Whatever the specific reason is, it doesn't justify religious discrimination on a state service. ...
Nope - it is purely religious discrimination - from the school website, the top priority for enrolment is;Small point maybe, but is it not the pupils of this nominally COI school that get first access - among which there are also RC children?
Church of Ireland and Protestant students attending Castleknock Church of Ireland National School.
So you attempt to fix a discrimination problem by discriminating? Ludicrous. The only real solution is to stop religious discrimination by all schools.I think there is justification. The state funds denominational schools in the area, but it happens that all of them are for Roman Catholics. So there is already religious discrimination in the provision of a state-funded service (as distinct from a state-provided service). This is permissible under the Constitution. So the granting of a degree of priority to COI children is clearly intended as a balancing measure.
You could imaginably have a situation where all the local RC schools admit only declared RCs, and COI children are crowded out of the only multi-denominational school in the area.
... So you attempt to fix a discrimination problem by discriminating? Ludicrous.
The only real solution is to stop religious discrimination by all schools.
The analogy doesn't really travel well. The toileting approach would indeed be ludicrous if (as occurs with schools), there were people of many other genders and no gender whose toileting needs were not being met.I don't think it is ludicrous, any more than it is to balance the provision of women-only toilets by also providing men-only toilets.
A quick scan of Article 42 of the Constitution doesn't throw up anything that would require change.That would involve steps that might not be possible: the expropriation of assets that belong to the Church and the changing of the constitution.
Indeed, one could make a case that the current situation is contrary to Article 42.3.1, as parents are obliged to violate the conscience by sending children to religious schools.Article 42
1. The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the Family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children.
2. Parents shall be free to provide this education in their homes or in private schools or in schools recognised or established by the State.
3. 1° The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the State, or to any particular type of school designated by the State.
2° The State shall, however, as guardian of the common good, require in view of actual conditions that the children receive a certain minimum education, moral, intellectual and social.
4. The State shall provide for free primary education and shall endeavour to supplement and give reasonable aid to private and corporate educational initiative, and, when the public good requires it, provide other educational facilities or institutions with due regard, however, for the rights of parents, especially in the matter of religious and moral formation.
5. In exceptional cases, where the parents for physical or moral reasons fail in their duty towards their children, the State as guardian of the common good, by appropriate means shall endeavour to supply the place of the parents, but always with due regard for the natural and imprescriptible rights of the
... As for the property, perhaps the Churches might pay up their debts in relation to the abuse scandals by handing over school properties.