I think it's an inevitable part of social studies... I just question whether it serves the purpose of secular education to pull apart all the ways religion touches on society, and combine them into one specific course.
Your Child's Religion Is My Business Too
- Thread starter s_lone
- Start date
I think it's an inevitable part of social studies... I just question whether it serves the purpose of secular education to pull apart all the ways religion touches on society, and combine them into one specific course.
Why do students in a public school system (secular) need to be exposed to this? Are we just to assume that people are generally stupid and incapable of learning things like this one their own? Or that parents fail at teaching their children tolerance? This is just another instance of the state overstepping its boundaries.
Well it seems obvious to me that some parents DO fail to teach their children tolerance.
The role of the public schools is to provide the best knowledge and thinking tools to children so they can grow up being well informed citizens able to function through the challenges of living in a large society. To me, a rich cultural knowledge of main religions is just one more good thing that children learn at school.
That takes nothing away from the parents role of educator. But in principle, it gives at least some form of standard knowledge to all children, who aren't always born in the best learning environments. Not all parents are equally competent when it comes to educating and nurturing their children. It seems that public schools can at least compensate for the social inequalities in terms of learning environments.
Last edited:
So we should implement religious tolerance classes because a few a parents fail to teach their children this? Seems rather extreme and draconian to me. One can also have a rich cultural knowledge without being instructed in all the worlds various religions.
Being taught about the various religions should not upset an atheist any more than being taught social studies or history.
Our world is made up of people who believe in different religions. In order to live in this world, people should have a basic understanding of what those religions core beliefs are, the same as we learn about different political systems and governments.
It is not to make one or the other look better, it is to understand that they exist.
Education is education. It usually provides examples of what to do. A lot of the time it also provides examples of what not to do. Hopefully the teacher will explain why there's a difference and what the difference is.
So to science (biological sciences at least) humans are humans regardless of views, skin-color, or gender and as such, are equal. Some religions teach differently. Hopefully the educators will point out the dissimilarities and the errors in maintaining the dissimilarities.
So to science (biological sciences at least) humans are humans regardless of views, skin-color, or gender and as such, are equal. Some religions teach differently. Hopefully the educators will point out the dissimilarities and the errors in maintaining the dissimilarities.
When you speak of ''another class'', I'm guessing you speak of private religious education such as Sunday school. The curriculum of public schools is supposed to represent the society at large. Only secularism can bring justice to all religious viewpoints in our multicultural state of affair. So while one is entitled to their opinions, one also ought to know the core values of the society at large and know that he or she has responsibilities to respect the civil rights of all.
In my opinion, equality of men and women is one of the non-negotiable core values of our society. A religious group can teach their children that women should be subjugated to men all they want, that still does not give them the right to subjugate women. At least not in this society. And secular public education can make that clear.
Religions not only have their own churches and their own sunday school classes, they also have their own private educational institutions.... I think public school systems should focus a bit more in improving sexual education classes and the content they discuss before they decided to toss in a class based on religion.
Regardless if it's supposed to be bias as a general rule, it simply won't happen, because all that will happen is that while it starts off balanced and "Fair" towards how it discusses each religion and their beliefs..... there will be those taking the course (as well as their parents who will hear after class what was talked about) who will find one thing or another offensive or is an unfair claim against their religion and then the drama ensues where it inflicts the religious differences and divides that are usually outside of school grounds.... tossed right into the school, creating more problems then this idea would ever solve.
And if it's not someone getting offended on what was said about their religion, then it'll be someone offended that their religion isn't being talked about enough.
If one wants to talk about religion, discuss it in an objective view in history class where they relate to the history being talked about..... keep it out of schools. They have plenty of places to teach their backwards thinking as it is.
This past Saturday while my wife and I were trying to watch a movie, for the first time in like 5-6 years living where I live, we were rudely interrupted by a bunch of Baptists who decided to drag out their guitars, microphones and amps just across the river from where I live by a ball field, and start blaring out music and singing about God this, Jesus saves that.... and it went on for three hours or so.
Even with all the windows closed on a nice sunny day in which we wanted some fresh air in the apartment for once, and even when we cranked the volume of the movie, we could hear that crap blaring bass through our walls.
They have their churches, they have their sunday schools, they have their private schools, they have their little get togethers in ball fields for all to hear and see their religion.... heck they even go door to door pimping out their damn religion to those who never asked for it to be pimped..... they don't need a class in public schools to do it even more.
If kids want to learn about religions in general, there's university courses already available.... teaching children this stuff in elementary or high school is not important nor required learning for heading out into the real world.
Besides, how big of a problem is it really? Are there piles of people out there who's never heard of religion before and have this dumbfounded look on their face when someone says the word "God"? :-?
God?
What is this God you speak of? :roll:
I don't think it's public schools and their students who need a class on Religion.... I think it's the Religions who need a class on Reality and the World Around Them.
No, I mean, within the school. You're talking about teaching kids to respect the civil rights of all, AND respect religions. But, you run into issues where religions are being practised in ways that do not respect the civil rights of all, such as Islam. How do you mesh the conflicting lessons there?
It makes more sense to me to discuss Islam in its historical context in history class, and discuss some of the points of Islam in its modern context in social studies as it comes up, and let students apply their critical thinking process to decide for themselves what they think of it. To 'teach acceptance' is contrary to critical thought imo. And to set it all aside into one lump of a course removes context.
So there should be no comparative religions courses. Interesting. I took one. I thought it was quite interesting. We had some pretty good debates in class, but I'm sure we all realised that it was just academic and not to be taken personally.
Does that opinion also apply to politics, sexuality, and other topics?
lol That was a pretty short rant for you, Prax? You in a hurry?
As I already explained, discussing religion in an objective view is exactly what the course mentioned in the OP is aiming at.
Ever take philosophy classes? When one learns about Kant, or Descartes, or Hegel, one is not asked to embrace their worldview. One is simply asked to absorb a certain amount of knowledge concerning these worldviews and perhaps be able to express an informed opinion about it.
This is the approach taken in the Ethics and Religious Culture class. The goal is to be informed about various religions, not to embrace them.
I wonder how my psych lab partner would have been able to get his doctorate and start teaching philosophy at a eastern uni without the courses in philosophy. lol
It was a government mandatory highschool course?
Heck, no. Neither was my comparative religions course. I thought we were talking about school in general. Sorry. lol
Thanks for your precisions. I can't pretend to be extremely well educated as to what exactly Islam teaches. But what I am certain of is that there are various interpretations of the Koran in the same way that there are various interpretations of the Bible. There are many Christians that have no problem whatsoever with homosexuality despite what a few sections of the Bible have to say about it. There are also many Muslims who believe in the value of civil rights and who respect them.
I'm not sure I agree with your statement that teaching acceptance is contrary to critical thought. I am very critical of many aspects of religion, but that doesn't stop me from having an acceptance of religious people so long as the favour is returned.
Philosophy is a mandatory class in CEGEP. A 2 year program between high school and university that seems to be unique to Quebec as far as I know.
In case you are curious, the other mandatory classes are French, English and Phys. Ed. (a gym class oriented towards a physical activity chosen by the student)
even in the context you used it, 'mandatory' wasn't mandatory... he never had to take it, he paid for the privilige to take it, and no one made him go to secondary school.
But, getting back to what I was originally trying to say, this is a government mandated course, not one students take out of curiosity. It introduces children to religion from a young age, and I can see where parents trying to raise their children without the influence of spiritual thought would object.
For me personally, this is stuff my kids will get in school, but, by my choice, not the government's.
But the government represents the people to a certain extent. To the best of my knowledge, the course seems to be supported by a majority of people in Quebec.