Is there anything constructive I can do about this discrimination?

smacl wrote: »

The syllabus as published by the NCCA for senior cycle religious education makes no references to Catholicism. It does give undue emphasis to Christianity, to the point that by my reading it assumes Christianity to be the one true religion while being careful to avoid explicitly stating this. It could be seen as replacing direct religious instruction with Christian apologetics and clearly conflates morality, truth and justice with religion, thus propping up the church while trying to appear pluralistic. I can't see any reason why this would be anything other than an optional subject for the religiously inclined, and would certainly see it as an intrusion on freedom of religious expression for anyone other than a Christian.

smacl wrote: »

The only people that need to get over themselves are those who would insist on making this format or religious education mandatory for those who do not share their religious beliefs. The thread relates to a teacher refusing to allow parents of a child to opt out of a religion class, which is in violation of their constitutional and human rights. Whether or not you think that Christianity as a philosophy has positive aspects is neither here nor there, I daresay you could find similar positive aspects in Islam, Hindu or wanting to become a Jedi knight for that matter. It doesn't give you the right to foist your beliefs on other peoples kids.

Frowzy wrote: »

I see everyone's point here, and I'm not religious myself. Two things spring to mind here as a parent of a child in LC cycle also:

(1) We can't opt out of everything in life.
Education for our children is obviously to teach them about life; as well as academic work they have subjects like PE, Religion, Computing and LCVP. Only LCVP is an exam subject but each of the other options equally teach our children about being adults as well as a life skill.
If we allow our children to opt out of everything then are we as parents teaching them to be intolerant of everything outside of their personal beliefs or interests? Sometimes in life we have to do, or put up with, things that don't directly concern us. That's life. It's an hour a week that may just teach our children that there are other viewpoints or life experiences outside of their tunnel vision.

(2) Religion these days isn't just about Christianity
In religion class these days students don't just read the bible or learn about the life of Jesus of Nazereth as we did in my days at school. Currently they are taught about all the other religions, beliefs and options out there. My personal belief is that to be a well rounded member of society that it is important that our children understand the viewpoints and beliefs of other religions/beliefs, otherwise how can they respect others viewpoints? And if they can't respect other people's viewpoints then how can they respect theirs to be respected.
Now I can only speak for my own child's school and they have a very fair and open curriculum for Religion class, perhaps it would help you if you requested a copy if the curriculum being taught.

This is just my perspective, and I know that in my child's school they have a very understanding Principal and Religion Teacher. I hope that you can work this out and achieve the best outcome for your own child. Twiddling their thumbs for the year is not the answer.

Frowzy wrote: »

I believe that what I said was that the subjects teach them about being adults as well as life skills.

If the Religion class is being taught right (i.e. Teaching about other religions and beliefs) students can learn understanding and tolerance as well as patience. Huge life skills which can be used in the simplest of situations such as staff canteens for example.

Of course as my post also said this will only work if the teaching is broader than learning about the life of Jesus of Nazereth.

Frowzy wrote: »

Apologies for being boring and pedantic by quoting two replies, however I feel that it's important to note that my posts have said that understanding, patience and tolerance are important. My belief, which I understand differs to yours, is that we can only be patient and tolerant when we understand where the other persons beliefs come from. Therefore a Religion class that teaches about other beliefs is helpful. Not being able to opt out of everything that differs from your personal beliefs can also promote understanding, patience and tolerance.

I totally get what you're saying about budgeting etc, in my day we had civics class, and some of this was intended to be included in LCVP, but that again is an opt out subject, and whether or not these topics are included remains (for me at least) to be seen.

Of course as parents we cannot abdicate all of this type of education to the schools, some of these life skills are instilled mostly in the home. All the skills we've both mentioned above can be taught from a young age in the home also. This is where my point about whether allowing our children to opt out of anything that differs from our or theirs viewpoint may not be right (I'm not saying I'm right). However from class discussion children will learn so much about others viewpoints that they will not learn in our homes. Personally I think this too is important.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

To repeat myself: none of this (or what you said before) really answers my questions:
How does a religion class actually teach of this?
Why should it be taught specifically through religion classes when patience and tolerance go far beyond religious beliefs?
These are simple questions, your continued avoidance of answering these indicates that you don't actually have an answer to them. I don't know where you learned to debate, but where I learned taught me not to make claims that I couldn't justify just because I feel/want them to be right.

looksee wrote: »

Mod: Frowzy, if you have comments to make about moderation you should take them to feedback. Mark Hamill asked a question about your views and you refused to answer it on the basis that you had already answered it, which you had not in the context that MH was querying. Robindch simply pointed out that in a discussion forum you engage in the discussion.

Mark Hamill did not say that you had claimed that religion teaches patience and tolerance. He said that you had claimed these could be taught in religion class. His question is - why is a religion class specifically suited to this teaching, even allowing for the fact that other religions can be discussed? The syllabus makes it clear that this course is intended to be Christian, even Roman Catholic based. This is not necessary for teaching about different religions and/or moral and ethical behaviour.