Religion In School

Funsterdelux

What is the current status with religion being thaught in both Pri/Sec schools?

Rev Hellfire

It's status is it's currently been taught.

Funsterdelux

well is it compulsory

Merrick

In my old school it's compulsory for Junior Cert. Luckily I escaped before they started doing that...

Funsterdelux

well the way the country is now so multicultured, I think that it should be the choice of the parent wether their child is thaught religion.

limerick_man

IN primary its really catholicism (sp?!?), in secondary its more islam, some jew, hindu, budist, christain, plus 'others' (including rasta, satanism, etc.).
I'm in TY now and atm we are watching The Life Of Brian, we also watch alot of Fr. Ted!
Although for us religion is not an exam subject!!!

Funsterdelux

i m a few years out of school and well I d an understanding with both the principle and the teacher about religion, so didnt really take any heed. So I wouldnt know too much about what they re teaching now, but it sounds ok, thats what they should teach a general subject.
But primary should be looked at.

Zombrex

Funsterdelux wrote:

well is it compulsory

Offically no, but it depends on what school you go to. AFAIK schools can teach what ever the feck they like. I was lucky enough to go to a non-denomonational primary school so missed the "joys" of a Catholic education

Cronus333

Its compulsory in my school but not taught as an exam course as the course is not biased enough towards catholicism or something like that.....

I was in a non-denom secondary school so it wasn't taught there. It's taught in most others though, afaik.

legspin

My sec. school was nominally RC but for the five years I was there I think we had about 3 religion classes. This is not an exaggeration

Asiaprod

legspin wrote:

My sec. school was nominally RC but for the five years I was there I think we had about 3 religion classes. This is not an exaggeration

Poor me, my school was Christian Brothers, I did not just have religion classes EVERY day but also I had a religious life style starting with morning mass inlatin at 6:30 each morning and culminating in the rosery evey night. I was a boarder so I lived in. For those of us coming up to our confirmation, all classes were suspeded for the final 3 weeks in favor of religious classes, but I think my school was an acception to the rule as most of the kids came from problem families where one or both parents had either died of dumped their kids. I guess we were teated as a kind of special Christian Brothers family. I have to say, that I do not have any resentment or bad feelings for my time there. Though I did meet my fair share of evil brothers and had my religion beaten into me, I also met some who were to leave a lasting good impression on me.

lacuna

Funsterdelux wrote:

well the way the country is now so multicultured, I think that it should be the choice of the parent wether their child is thaught religion.

I don't think it's for parents to decide for their child whether they should attend religion classes in school. How is the child supposed to decide whether the s/he believes in anything or not if s/he's not exposed to it in the first place? It's not the parent's right to decide that the child is not to believe in anything.

Religion classes are not only Roman Catholic classes in this country. Obviously, it's going to vary from school to school but even in my secondary school which was a Roman Catholic school (formarly run by nuns) we learned about various different religions and had to do projects on them. We were also encouraged to discuss the concept of faith and religion. I'm glad I attended those classes as it gave me the chance to look at different religions and choose which, if any, suited me.

If my parents were to have decided my religion then I'd be a devout Catholic now, which I'm not. It's clear that parents and their children often differ in their views. No parent should assume to decide for their child what they will believe. It is better to let the child be exposed to religion and make their mind up about it.

Just because you attend religion classes, doesn't mean you have to believe.

Raiser

There are many hours of my life lost.

Lost listening to twisted little men in black.

With their busy little hands in their pockets - spouting sh1te.

They always contradicted each other, rambling & theorising.

Nobody should have to suffer this type of idiocy.

Free the children from this muck.

robindch

> For those of us coming up to our confirmation, all classes
> were suspeded for the final 3 weeks in favor of religious
> classes

Unbelievable -- I had a two year spell with the christian brothers myself down the country (3rd + 4th classes, in the mid-seventies), and while we all knew what connecting with a well-swung 9 inch leather strap felt like, I don't recall suffering from that level of blatant indoctrination. Mind you, we still had the rosary, the angelus, prayers on arrival, at least one religion class per day and plenty of trotting up and down to the cathedral, past the bishop's elegant palace.

I wonder how much time, as a nation, we all burned doing this? When in North Korea last August, I saw the spectacular Mass Games and was told -- and how could I disagree? -- that it took an estimated two hundred million man-hours to put the whole show together. I don't think Ireland in the 70's could match that, but I'm still tempted to do some sums.

Asiaprod

robindch wrote:

I don't recall suffering from that level of blatant indoctrination. Mind you, we still had the rosary, the angelus, prayers on arrival, at least one religion class per day and plenty of trotting up and down to the cathedral, past the bishop's elegant palace.

Ah the infamous strap. This sounds like Monty Python "We dreamed of being hit with the 9 incher" only because we got hit with just about everthing else imaginable, canes, stick, hurley and most unusual of all for me, a stale loaf of bread from a distance of 10 feet. A Johnston, Mooney and O"Brien one (for those of us old enough to remember)---that one stung like hell. We had a science teach, won't metion Clarkey's name:), who could launch a wooden blackboard duster across a 30 foot room and never miss his target. Luck for me he taught Science, if he taught catacism I would not have lived long enough to make my Confirmation. He should have entered the Olympics with an aim like that.
The difference in teaching methods probably arose since I was a full-boarder, meaning I lived in school, only going home for 8 hours each Sunday. I will remember that Green Catacism book till the day I die, even remember the first question in it "Who made the World (refrain) God made the world, and the Brother droaning on how the Bishop would slap us lightly on the cheek and proclaim us Soldiers of Christ, while I though "if any Bishop slaps me on the cheek I'll nut the Fu**er right back.
Ah....the innocents of youth.....never did hit him back, froze on the stage so to speak

What religions are on the menu for the Junior Cert course?

I hope they're teaching pastafarianism.

Sangre

If a school receives public funding from the state then no matter what its denomination your child has a constitutional right to not attend religious classes.

Zombrex

Sangre wrote:

If a school receives public funding from the state then no matter what its denomination your child has a constitutional right to not attend religious classes.

True but unfortunately a religious state funded school still has the right to refuse to accept children based on religion, though I think this is currently being argued and might change in the future.

lostexpectation

well the way the country is now so multicultured, I think that it should be the choice of the parent wether their child is thaught religion.

I asked my mother who works in a school about this and she said well yes there people from all over in the primary school muslim, roma etc and they don't have to sit in religious classes if they don't want to, then I asked how many "Irish" (generational, argh) children don't attend the religious classes? She didn't know

lacuna wrote:

If my parents were to have decided my religion then I'd be a devout Catholic now, which I'm not. It's clear that parents and their children often differ in their views. No parent should assume to decide for their child what they will believe. It is better to let the child be exposed to religion and make their mind up about it.

Just because you attend religion classes, doesn't mean you have to believe.

I wonder how many parents brought up in other religions choose to opt out( their children) of religious classes if the choose a school that was set up by another faith group, perhaps a small percentage . if you catch my drift.

Sangre

Wicknight wrote:

True but unfortunately a religious state funded school still has the right to refuse to accept children based on religion, though I think this is currently being argued and might change in the future.

I seriously, seriously doubt that. Got any links?

Stephen

One thing that I think the Americans have got mostly right is their policy of separating church and school. I wish we had something similar here. We are a republic after all, which is supposed to have equal status for all people. Allowing a state-funded organisation to teach one particular group's views above others goes against that.
i.e. If a school receives ANY state funding, it should not squander any of it teaching religion. Let the parents instill whatever their preferred faith is into their child if they choose, but keep it at home.

Commence flames.

Yossie

Stephen wrote:

If a school receives ANY state funding, it should not squander any of it teaching religion. Let the parents instill whatever their preferred faith is into their child if they choose, but keep it at home.

Commence flames.

Sorry to pour cold water on your flames, but i couldn't agree more.

Zombrex

Sangre wrote:

I seriously, seriously doubt that. Got any links?

Equal Status Act 2000
Section 7

(3) An educational establishment does not discriminate under subsection (2) by reason only that—
...
(c) where the establishment is a school providing primary or post-primary education to students and the objective of the school is to provide education in an environment which promotes certain religious values, it admits persons of a particular religious denomination in preference to others or it refuses to admit as a student a person who is not of that denomination and, in the case of a refusal, it is proved that the refusal is essential to maintain the ethos of the school,

robindch

> "refusal is essential to maintain the ethos of the school,"

Ahh, my favourite meaningless hooray-word being used to justify discrimination with the full backing of the law! Wonderful -- thanks for the link.

Oh, and it's called the "Equal Status Act"? How touchingly Orwellian

bobbi

One thing that I think the Americans have got mostly right is their policy of separating church and school. I wish we had something similar here. We are a republic after all, which is supposed to have equal status for all people. Allowing a state-funded organisation to teach one particular group's views above others goes against that.
i.e. If a school receives ANY state funding, it should not squander any of it teaching religion. Let the parents instill whatever their preferred faith is into their child if they choose, but keep it at home.

i couldn't agree more. I didn't mind in school when they taught us about all different religons. I found that interesting but i think it should be the childs individual(or parents) right to choose to follow his/her beliefs so classes should not be compulsary.

Orion

Merrick wrote:

In my old school it's compulsory for Junior Cert. Luckily I escaped before they started doing that...

Oh no it's not! Religion is optional. Even at primary level. The problem is that the vast majority of primary schools are run by religious organisations. And the majority of people in this country are religious. So to 'opt-out' of religion class for your child actually makes the child 'different' and therefore subject to all the abuse that children give each other.

Another poster mentioned the American system and I completely agree - education and religion should be kept completely separate. If that means wresting control of our primary education system from the richest company in the world (and I don't mean Microsoft) then that's what has to be done. If you want your kid to be religious that's your prerogative but imo it should be taught at home not in public schools.

Orion

Wicknight wrote:

Equal Status Act 2000
Section 7

That doesn't just apply to children. A school can refuse to employ a teacher if his/her life doesn't fit the 'ethos of the school'. The wording of the alleged 'Equal Status Act' actually echoes the verdict in a Supreme Court case where a teacher in Galway was fired because she got pregnant by her partner - they weren't married :eek: And that didn't happen in the dark ages - it was in 1986!

lostexpectation

School principals seek scrapping of Holy Communion lessons
30/01/2006 - 07:44:52

The union representing Ireland's primary school principals is reportedly calling for the scrapping of lessons on Holy Communion and Confirmation.

Reports this morning said the Irish Primary Principals Network wanted parents to take responsibility for preparing their children for the Sacraments and for religious education in general.

It has reportedly pointed out that religious instruction is not practical in classrooms where anything up to 15 different faiths may be represented.

The issue is set to be a major talking point at the IPPN's three-day annual conference which begins this Thursday.http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/01/30/story242223.html

Funsterdelux

I must be psychic

Music to my ears

toiletduck

i had a wonderful religion teacher in second year (i went to a patrician school). he was an lappsed catholic and the classes were actually more philosophy orientated. we never went through the usually jesus stories. Instead we went through stuff like how everyone wants to obtain happiness, the mindset behind the people that allowed the holocaust to happen, the issues arising from the columbine school shootings etc. It was a wonderful class and we learned a lot about skepticism and acceptance. to quote this brilliant teacher "i know people who absolutely reject god, yet are better christians than daily mass goers. if ye choose to believe in a higher power lads then go ahead but look at life with a skeptical eye and come to yer own conclusions. dont blindly follow your ancestors faith"

Dades

The Big Bite on RTE this morning had a debate on the teaching of religion in schools. They had a couple of atheists (one declared humanist), an ex atheist (re)turned Christian, and another Christian lady that had me shouting at the screen.

Anyone see it?

Oddly enough, it turned into a "lively" debate on why the panelists believe what what they do, rather than a rational debate on what is taught in schools, state funding, "ethos" (;)) etc. The usual suspects such as the holocaust and the Tsunami were brought up, as well as a little bit of evolution v ID.

The Christian lady had me shouting as when asked any question, she would waste time reminding everyone of her relationship with God, and then go on to ask non-questions like well if God didn't make the world, who did? She even got the last word which was to recommend to the non-Christians that they try talking to God. Zero to contribute.

The humanist guy said he preferred not to call himself and atheist because of the negative connotations of the word, which I thought was a wasted opportunity. He was in a great position to change the perception of the word, rather than avoid it IMO.

I missed the beginning but I don't know where they got these people. Pity they didn't recruit a few here.

They also mentioned Darwin Day, which may of interest to some folks here.
http://www.museum.ie/events/details_events.asp?eventid=898&site_id=0

lostexpectation

toiletduck wrote:

"i know people who absolutely reject god, yet are better christians than daily mass goers.

nice to hear, but what exactly does that mean ?
it sorta the issue being discussed in the other thread right now?

robindch

> nice to hear, but what exactly does that mean?

Methinks it's the altruism trick again. I mean, for how many people in this country is the word "christian" synonymous with "decent person"? Probably what he was trying to say was "i know people who absolutely reject god, yet are better people than daily mass goers", which while hardly rocket-science, is something which does run somewhat counter to the thrust of much of the church's endlessly-piped pious propaganda.

BTW, I was going to make the same comment on this posting earlier, but there's only so many times you can say the same thing before you typecast yourself, ethos*-enabled or not

(*) retching sounds.

toiletduck

robindch wrote:

> nice to hear, but what exactly does that mean?

Methinks it's the altruism trick again. I mean, for how many people in this country is the word "christian" synonymous with "decent person"? Probably what he was trying to say was "i know people who absolutely reject god, yet are better people than daily mass goers", which while hardly rocket-science, is something which does run somewhat counter to the thrust of much of the church's endlessly-piped pious propaganda.

yep, thats what he meant!

MrJoeSoap

I was looking through my younger brothers (in 2nd year atm) religion book, and it has roughly a paragraph on Atheism, not sure how mch on Agnosticism. Can't get around to scanning it in right now because its late and the book is in his room , but I will when the chance arises.

Considering most major world religions get a massive chunk of the book, I reckon it would be fair to have more than a paragraph on Atheism and Agnosticism. Hopefully the little "insights" I give my brother into religion will lead him in the right direction, although I don't want to be too forceful!

Religion was a compulsary subject for me throughout second-level education, even through sixth year iirc. My schools website even blatantly mentions:

Class groups are offered prayer experiences, which help to develop their relationship with God. Classes take part in Eucharistic Celebrations, Prayer Services, and Meditation thus making prayer a part of the ordinary life of the school.

... as well as ...

The Chaplaincy team at X Community College provide a full retreat programme for the students in the College. The retreats provide the students with an opportunity to examine their lives in relation to the issues they face each day and where God fits into their daily lives. Senior retreats are conducted away from the school and are tailored to the needs of the students.

Eglinton

Well I hope they don't teach rubbish like this in Irish schools

http://www.bibleheadquarters.org/JesusandMohammed.html


For those of you that want a laugh, the rest of that site is worth a look. There's even a section on the evils of Harry Potter. haha

Zombrex

The Atheist wrote:

The humanist guy said he preferred not to call himself and atheist because of the negative connotations of the word, which I thought was a wasted opportunity. He was in a great position to change the perception of the word, rather than avoid it IMO.

Negative connotations of the word Atheist? What a moron ... :rolleyes:

Dades

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Considering most major world religions get a massive chunk of the book, I reckon it would be fair to have more than a paragraph on Atheism and Agnosticism.

Okay, maybe more than a paragraph, but not much more. They're only definitions, really. It might be too much to hope that they print the "top ten reasons not to believe in god".

Something like Humanism would be more worthy of space, as its a non secular belief system of sorts. Any mention of that?

"The retreats provide the students with an opportunity to examine their lives in relation to the issues they face each day and where God fits into their daily lives."

Ironic, considering they've probably printed a school timetable stating exactly where God is fitted into their everyday lives.

DeValera

I have religion once a week compulsory, but not as an exam. We have a hopeless, unqualified Music teacher for it. Its a bit of a free for all:D !!! We are only taught christianity (the religion that makes sex a sin and a holy act out of drinking alcohol) saying youre an athiest and that you dont want to learn this one-sided view. Requests to take an unbiased oudside look at a multitude of religions is always turned down.:mad:

Dades

DeValera wrote:

Requests to take an unbiased oudside look at a multitude of religions is always turned down.:mad:

Hi DeValera,
Do you go to a Catholic/Christian ran school?
Though something tells me even if they don't change the program, you'll get over your indoctrination.

Funsterdelux

Anyway they should be teaching real subjects like more languages, and stuff, coz thats when the mind is like a sponge, so instead of brain washing we should be inspiring.

JustAnother

Wicknight wrote:

Offically no, but it depends on what school you go to. AFAIK schools can teach what ever the feck they like. I was lucky enough to go to a non-denomonational primary school so missed the "joys" of a Catholic education

The secondary school I attended for five years had religion classes - I was suprised to learn a couple of years ago that it was supposedly non-denominational. Granted, it was owned by a family as opposed to a church, but religion was a topic. No, I didn't try to opt out.

Húrin

Funsterdelux wrote:

What is the current status with religion being thaught in both Pri/Sec schools?

Religion, namely Catholicism is fairly pervasive in public schools in Ireland, though that will further decline as Ireland becomes more secular and multicultural.

arctic lemur

Funsterdelux wrote:

well is it compulsory

no actually there is a clause in the white paper (i think in 2000) that allows parents to let their children opt out of RE. I remember that much from college (i Did RE and Philosophy)


Sorry, white paper in education.

Funsterdelux

Ive got it, they should teach it as part of history class, or in the same manner.
No brain washing, generalised incorporating all faiths.

Valmont

lacuna wrote:

I don't think it's for parents to decide for their child whether they should attend religion classes in school. How is the child supposed to decide whether the s/he believes in anything or not if s/he's not exposed to it in the first place? It's not the parent's right to decide that the child is not to believe in anything.

Religion classes are not only Roman Catholic classes in this country. Obviously, it's going to vary from school to school but even in my secondary school which was a Roman Catholic school (formarly run by nuns) we learned about various different religions and had to do projects on them. We were also encouraged to discuss the concept of faith and religion. I'm glad I attended those classes as it gave me the chance to look at different religions and choose which, if any, suited me.

If my parents were to have decided my religion then I'd be a devout Catholic now, which I'm not. It's clear that parents and their children often differ in their views. No parent should assume to decide for their child what they will believe. It is better to let the child be exposed to religion and make their mind up about it.

Just because you attend religion classes, doesn't mean you have to believe.

Right on bro, people seem to have already made up their mind and assumed that religion classes are focused around the catholic faith when it couldn't be further from the truth.

My sibling just completed the junior cert religion course and it basically outlines a number of faiths, their beliefs and practices. It doesn't lean towards any one or the other. The purpose of the course is to educate young people on what religions are out there. Whether they decide to follow is entirely up to them. It is a good option in my opinion.

Valmont

Funsterdelux wrote:

Anyway they should be teaching real subjects like more languages, and stuff, coz thats when the mind is like a sponge, so instead of brain washing we should be inspiring.

In your haste to rebel you have forgotten to verify the nonsense you are spouting. Do you even know what the curriculum is? You are just assuming that the sole purpose of the subject is to recruit more followers into the catholic faith.

The aim of the subject is to educate young people on the cultures, beliefs and practices of different ethnic groups throughout the world. That's it. Let them make their own mind up after that.

Funsterdelux

Valmont wrote:

In your haste to rebel you have forgotten to verify the nonsense you are spouting. Do you even know what the curriculum is? You are just assuming that the sole purpose of the subject is to recruit more followers into the catholic faith.

The aim of the subject is to educate young people on the cultures, beliefs and practices of different ethnic groups throughout the world. That's it. Let them make their own mind up after that.

No, I dont know what the curriculum is, that was the idea of the thread, in your haste to reply you forgot to read the start of the thread, though maybe you didnt. I knew what it was, Im the LAST generation, you see.

Valmont

Funsterdelux wrote:

in your haste to reply you forgot to read the start of the thread, though maybe you didnt

*note to self* *read entire thread before replying*

robindch

If the baleful influence influence of religion is generally receding in Irish schools, the following story suggests the opposite in the USA:

http://www.jewsonfirst.org/06b/indianriver.html

Reports here and here suggest that the details are accurate. Must be awful there.