Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[miauw62]

I would actually be in favor of religious education in public schools, if it could be implemented so as not to favor any one religion.  Teach it from a historical/anthropological perspective, and cover all the major religions.

Actually, that's pretty much Religious Education in Belgium.

[Tellemurius]

Is Religious Education not part of the curriculum in the US?

AFAIK here in the UK every school, regardless of who it's run by, has to teach certain subjects to some degree; and Religious Education is among those.

Nope.  Think it's related to that freedom of religion bit.  Public schools can't talk about religion.  I wouldn't mind a >factual< class or two, just to spread understanding, but chances are they would just focus on a couple religions and piss people off.

Even the pledge of allegiance to the flag is controversial.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance  About half of that page is about the religious stuff, and people suing schools over two words in the pledge.

(EDIT: For context for you non US forumers, when I was going to grade school, every school day started with the reciting of the pledge of allegiance.  Don't know if they still do.)

think it went down to once a week now, i would be surprised if i can get them to recite fully (i remember a school that used to do a video for the pledge). Besides i dunno why it matters anyways, everything else is wishful thinking in government

[Graknorke]

I would actually be in favor of religious education in public schools, if it could be implemented so as not to favor any one religion.  Teach it from a historical/anthropological perspective, and cover all the major religions.

Actually, that's pretty much Religious Education in Belgium.

That's pretty much the definition of Religious Education.

[SalmonGod]

I would actually be in favor of religious education in public schools, if it could be implemented so as not to favor any one religion.  Teach it from a historical/anthropological perspective, and cover all the major religions.

Actually, that's pretty much Religious Education in Belgium.

That's pretty much the definition of Religious Education.

That's not what the majority of people in America think of when they think of religious education, at least in my experience.  I'm also on the Bible Belt.

[da_nang]

Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence.

[ChairmanPoo]

Hypothethical question: You  find that you've developed a mysterious condition consisting of hand tremors, bradykinesia, and rigidity right after you stopped taking your Parkinson medication. So, here's the question: do you *really* need me to tell you the obvious?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I would actually be in favor of religious education in public schools, if it could be implemented so as not to favor any one religion.  Teach it from a historical/anthropological perspective, and cover all the major religions.

Actually, that's pretty much Religious Education in Belgium.

That's pretty much the definition of Religious Education.

Definition of what it should be.

I find that most of the time, it focuses on christianity (in britain.)

And now you see why the US does not allow it. Any kind of specific "religious education" will inevitably spiral into endorsement of religion, be it implicit or explicit. Hell, even without it there are problems. I ended up in a Bible study class in high school because one of the classes I picked was full so they just shunted me into it without asking. The only reason I didn't make a bigger fuss about it was because the instructor and I became fast friends and I wrung some amusement out of messing with all the super Christian students' perceptions (which, incidentally, the instructor all but endorsed me doing in the name of intellectual exploration).

As long as we live in a religiously charged world, there is no way to objectively have religious education that does not violate the separation of church and state. Given how much money they get from the government anyway, this is also why there shouldn't be any private schools.

[Graknorke]

I would actually be in favor of religious education in public schools, if it could be implemented so as not to favor any one religion.  Teach it from a historical/anthropological perspective, and cover all the major religions.

Actually, that's pretty much Religious Education in Belgium.

That's pretty much the definition of Religious Education.

Definition of what it should be.

I find that most of the time, it focuses on christianity (in britain.)

Really? When I did RE it was hardly any focus on Christianity (I guess they assumed people already knew that.); it was a lot more on the smaller of the "big 6" religions, like Hinduism and Buddhism.
Not like I did anything but argue with the teacher though. The amount of time that science facts were presented as opinions...

[Loud Whispers]

I once mentioned to a psychologist that I wish humanity came with an instruction manual, to which she agreed whole-heartedly.

Oh yes. The augmentations you could make, the improvements, they would be at a finger's reach...

[Loud Whispers]

'press the red button to increase intelligence'

'Oh fuck! How'd I not notice that!?'

*Red button increases sarcasm levels to lethal point.

[nenjin]

The first classes I tried to go for every semester in college were religious studies. But they were almost always the first filled. Seriously. Who doesn't want to learn a whole semester about Christianity through the Middle Ages, the roots of Islam and the rise of the Islamic Empires, the earliest roots of Judaism, the Crusades, Renaissance-era theology, all the great schisms and councils, conclaves, scandals, heresies, religious wars NOT fought against Islam....I got a lot of that in my history classes anyways so there was plenty of overlap, but I found all of it fascinating. I got some of it to a degree in my highschool AP classes, too. But college is where I really dug in. I still have every single textbook I bought for those classes.

In American public education though, it's not just people don't want their kids being "indoctrinated" (which is code for "I don't want someone presenting alternative religious systems in any details so my kid can think for themselves.) I think it's also that some people don't want their religions judged in a qualitative fashion. It's an easy subject to misrepresent, regardless of who is teaching it or which religion you're talking about. I remember plenty of misunderstandings and debates even in college where the teacher had to stress "look, I'm not making a value judgment here." It's hard to even teach the facts of religion in America without making someone hostile.

Religion's status as a charged topic goes all the way back to our founding. The separation of church and state is written straight into the American Constitution.

Consider it's a nation founded by people seeking religious freedom and freedom from religious persecution. There was extremism even in the earliest pilgrim communities, the kind you get when you have a people free to believe what they want with no one telling them what to do, almost belligerent in its freedom of expression. America has carried that same sentiment forward through its history. There's long been a sort of defensiveness in American Christianity, even though its the dominant religion in the land. When they took the 10 Commandments down in front of that court house, or when atheists try to get "Under God" taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance, Christians go right back to the pilgrim's desire to not be oppressed.

So you see there's actually two ways to interpret the separation of Church and State. One is that "There's no religion in the State." Ie. public schools can't teach religion. The other is that "The State can't touch religion because that's oppression."  Ie. the State can't make you vaccinate your kids because it's against your beliefs. Taking Under God out of the Pledge of Allegiance actually utilizes both trains of thought, because one side views it as a State endorsement of Christianity, while the other views it as the State trying to oppress Christians by taking it out. Both viewpoints are correct. And so some kids die because their parents don't believe in vaccines, and children aren't allowed to hear about religion from the people who, arguably, should be able to give them the most objective view of it.

Like most political things in America, it's a mish mash of contradictions, personalized interpretations and sacred cows. Which is why the solution we've come to is "Parents teach religion in the home, public schools touch it with 10 foot poll and if you really want to learn about religion, you go to a private school (many of which are run by religious organizations) or you go to college." 

Which still doesn't free us of the debate because of school vouchers (tax dollars for kids to go to private, often religious, schools.) We're right back at the Separation of Church and State. Americans are literally incapable of letting go of the religious topic. And that's not even getting into the anti-Semitism, Radical Islam or general bigotry.

And lastly, I have to give the disclaimer that there are plenty of moderately religious people who happily get along with their religion and others in the modern era. Though they speak and their words are recorded, for some reason they're always drowned out by either sides.

[Lagslayer]

Spoiler: Wall of Text (click to show/hide)

The first classes I tried to go for every semester were religious studies. But they were almost always the first filled. Seriously. Who doesn't want to learn a whole semester about Christianity through the Middle Ages, the roots of Islam and the rise of the Islamic Empires, the earliest roots of Judaism, the Crusades, Renaissance-era theology, all the great schisms and councils, conclaves, scandals, heresies, religious wars NOT fought against Islam....I got a lot of that in my history classes anyways so there was plenty of overlap, but I found all of it fascinating. I got some of it to a degree in my highschool AP classes, too. But college is where I really dug in. I still have every single textbook I bought for those classes.

In American public education though, it's not just people don't want their kids being "indoctrinated" (which is code for "I don't want someone presenting alternative religious systems in any details so my kid can think for themselves.) I think it's also that some people don't want their religions judged in a qualitative fashion. It's an easy subject to misrepresent, regardless of who is teaching it or which religion you're talking about. I remember plenty of misunderstandings and debates even in college where the teacher had to stress "look, I'm not making a value judgment here." It's hard to even teach the facts of religion in America without making someone hostile.

Religion's status as a charged topic goes all the way back to our founding. The separation of church and state is written straight into the American Constitution.

Consider it's a nation founded by people seeking religious freedom and freedom from religious persecution. There was extremism even in the earliest pilgrim communities, the kind you get when you have a people free to believe what they want with no one telling them what to do, almost belligerent in its freedom of expression. America has carried that same sentiment forward through its history. There's long been a sort of defensiveness in American Christianity, even though its the dominant religion in the land. When they took the 10 Commandments down in front of that court house, or when atheists try to get "Under God" taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance, Christians go right back to the pilgrim's desire to not be oppressed.

So you see there's actually two ways to interpret the separation of Church and State. One is that "There's no religion in the State." Ie. public schools can't teach religion. The other is that "The State can't touch religion because that's oppression."  Ie. the State can't make you vaccinate your kids because it's against your beliefs. Taking Under God out of the Pledge of Allegiance actually utilizes both trains of thought, because one side views it as a State endorsement of Christianity, while the other views it as the State trying to oppress Christians by taking it out.

Like most political things in America, it's a mish mash of contradictions, personalized interpretations and sacred cows. Which is why the solution we've come to is "Parents teach religion in the home, public schools touch it with 10 foot poll and if you really want to learn about religion, you go to a private school (many of which are run by religious organizations) or you go to college." 

Which still doesn't free us of the debate because of school vouchers (tax dollars for kids to go to private, often religious, schools.) We're right back at the Separation of Church and State. Americans are literally incapable of letting go of the religious topic. And that's not even getting into the anti-Semitism, Radical Islam or general bigotry.

+1

[Neonivek]

I think I finally found my personal worst forums.

I have one which is the worst because it is the worst forum I go to for the community (GameFAQs)

And another which is the worst because it has a draconian moderation team (Maybe later... I still go there and their chances of banning is high)

I don't know why civil varied discussion is such an alien concept.

[Blargityblarg]

I'm sort of surprised that Australian religious education is so far behind; ours is only 'compulsory' in primary (i.e. elementary) school (you can opt out but it's there by default) but it's entirely Christian in nature, with parables presented as facts. You can take classes on it in high school, but it's rarely offered except in religious private schools, where (I think?) it's mandatory.

[Putnam]

Australia makes me WTF pretty often.