Dear Foxy

I have run out of posts on your "Aussie Prejudice" discussion - so will respond to you tomorrow.

Now, this topic. I don't give a rats whether Middle Eastern countries ban Christian schools, in Australia we have freedom of religion, therefore if Christians, Buddhists and calthumpiams can build their religious based schools, so too can Muslims.

Personally I'd rather do away with private schools of all stripes - so that we would not have another level of segregation to deal with. I'm sick to death of the likes of Peter Sellick judging atheists and other non-Christians, last thing I want is some Iman telling me I'm a zombie as well.

If children are being bullied for their appearance or race, then that is what EDUCATION is for. From parents and teachers, they are the ones to teach that all people have equal rights, responsibilities and are entitled to RESPECT.

I still have doubts, why would the English tax payer need to fund such a school?
Yes we have private schools for every creed.
But some of our highest test results come from people who are not of Australian extract.
And from public schools.
Lets not forget the positives in public school

If this is actually THE Iftikhar Ahmad, I'd be surprised.

"Bilingual Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with bilingual Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school."

Yeah, this is where I have problems with the topic. What's next, Sharia courts in Britain?....oh wait...

How about creating AFTER school Islamic schooling for your kids?.

Given that adherents of any other religion - most predominantly Christianity - are legally able to establish religion-based schools in Australia, and I presume in the UK, I can't see any problems with Muslims doing so if that's what they want.

My only proviso is that, just like Christian schools, they shouldn't be taxpayer-funded.

In the United States an important step toward racial equality was the US Supreme Court decision in 1952 that segregated schools are inherently unequal. It was a step on the road to the presidency of Barack Obama. In the US religious schools are legal, but it is against the law to provide them with any government funding.

The USA has progressed from a country where Catholics could not attain high office and a federal law against lynching could not be passed to the election of a black president and a Catholic vice-president in a country which has a majority of white Protestant Christians.

Children have a tendency to bully those regarded as the Other. They also have a tendency to accept those who they are familiar with. It is unreasonable to put Muslim children in separate schools and then expect them and their non-Muslim associates to work together as adults without attitudes of suspicion and distrust.

One of the goals of education in a democratic society is to prepare children to enter that society as adults and in a democratic country be accepted for their worth as humans regardless of their ethnic or religious background. Segregation whether by religion, ethnicity or social class opposes that goal.

I have two grandaughters attending a State Senior High School in Sydney West of Years 11 and 12 with over 1,200 children and with probably 8 - 10% of students with Middle Eastern heritage. These children have adapted well because their parents are not pushing the exclusive nature of Islam into their childrens minds. They are among the most respected children in class.

Exclusine schools largely based in national identity breeds tribalism, which is the nature of the Middle Eastern conflicts. They seperate themselves on the basis of tribes and different views of Islam. If we want shools based in skin colour or national identity we will have imported the same conflicts presently rampant in the Middle East.

It is the way to breed further social conflict, not solve it.