Religion in primary schools

DiarmaidGNR

Someone recently told me that about 97% of primary schools in Ireland are catholic. Is this true?
If so, how is it legal for state funded primary schools to have a religious orientation?
When I was in primary school, not that long ago, we spent about half an hout to an hour every day on religion, - what a waste of time!
And get this! - In sixth class we were supposed to start science but we couldn't because "preparation for confirmation" was more important!!

And another thing, why is irish taught in primary school? Pretty much everyone I know says that teaching irish in primary schools is a waste of time. - 8 years of being taught by someone that scraped a pass in ordinary level, and then when you get to secondary school the irish teacher gives out about how badly irish is taught in primary school, and then has to start from scratch!!

Rob_l

DiarmaidGNR wrote: »

Someone recently told me that about 97% of primary schools in Ireland are catholic. Is this true?
If so, how is it legal for state funded primary schools to have a religious orientation?
When I was in primary school, not that long ago, we spent about half an hout to an hour every day on religion, - what a waste of time!
And get this! - In sixth class we were supposed to start science but we couldn't because "preparation for confirmation" was more important!!

this used to have a lot to do with it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
but has been removed from the constitution. However our consitution does begin with a prayer or a call to god.
http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/Constitution%20of%20Ireland.pdf

For the most part this nation is still considered catholic, and the church own the schools so might be some legal issue with just taking their property from them.

DiarmaidGNR wrote: »

And another thing, why is irish taught in primary school? Pretty much everyone I know says that teaching irish in primary schools is a waste of time. - 8 years of being taught by someone that scraped a pass in ordinary level, and then when you get to secondary school the irish teacher gives out about how badly irish is taught in primary school, and then has to start from scratch!!

For a different forum I think, Im not going to discuss education here!

Rev Hellfire

DiarmaidGNR wrote: »

Someone recently told me that about 97% of primary schools in Ireland are catholic. Is this true?

Unbelievable, that can't be true.

DiarmaidGNR wrote: »

If so, how is it legal for state funded primary schools to have a religious orientation?

Surely it can't be, why it would mean they'd be able to select based on their religious ethos or something.

DiarmaidGNR wrote: »

IAnd another thing, why is irish taught in primary school? Pretty much everyone I know says that teaching irish in primary schools is a waste of time. - 8 years of being taught by someone that scraped a pass in ordinary level, and then when you get to secondary school the irish teacher gives out about how badly irish is taught in primary school, and then has to start from scratch!!

Dear god, they're teaching irish and religion, the only thing worse would be if they thought religion in irish.

magicbastarder

most national schools in ireland are run by the church on behalf of the state.

The vast majority of national schools are State-aided parish schools, having been established under diocesan patronage with the State giving explicit recognition to their denominational character.

http://www.education.ie/home/home.jsp?maincat=&pcategory=11076&ecategory=11120&sectionpage=12251&language=EN&link=link001&page=1&doc=11574

Dades

This subject has been done to death here - but since there's no search - meh.
I've linked to a couple of more recent education related threads for reading.

Leave children alone until 18

Opting Out of First Communion

Leave the Irish 'issue' for another forum, thanks.

Zombrex

DiarmaidGNR wrote: »

Someone recently told me that about 97% of primary schools in Ireland are catholic. Is this true?
If so, how is it legal for state funded primary schools to have a religious orientation?

Why would it not be legal?

This isn't America, we don't have strict separation of Church and State. Quite the opposite in fact, a number of our public services are run by church organisations, such as hospitals and schools.

D4RK ONION

Agnostic teacher in training here. 97% is indeed about correct. As such, I will probably have little choice but to teach the allotted 2.5 hours of catholic indoctrination a week. It makes me a bit angry that the job I always dreamed of doing is tainted by this. But that's not even the worst part.

Thanks to an outdated rule I can be fired on the spot for not upholding the ethos of the school. That means being fired for
- being openly atheist/agnostic/not catholic
- having a child out of marriage
- being openly gay
No, I'm not wrong, this is an actual right of any Catholic school. It's obviously not enforced much, but it's there, and as such, if asked about my own religion during a job interview, I will probably have to lie.

(not gay and do not have a kid, just pointing it out :P)

Zillah

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Unbelievable, that can't be true.

Unfortunately and despicably true.

Funglegunk

D4RK ONION wrote: »

Agnostic teacher in training here.

They teach agnostic now? Savage

Antbert

D4RK ONION wrote: »

Thanks to an outdated rule I can be fired on the spot for not upholding the ethos of the school. That means being fired for
- being openly atheist/agnostic/not catholic
- having a child out of marriage
- being openly gay
No, I'm not wrong, this is an actual right of any Catholic school. It's obviously not enforced much, but it's there, and as such, if asked about my own religion during a job interview, I will probably have to lie.

(not gay and do not have a kid, just pointing it out :P)

That is sickening. And what's more sickening is the fact that it isn't surprising. But 97%?! Since people are saying it with such conviction i'm inclined to believe it's true but... What about all the Educate Together schools springing up all over the place?

chachabinx

D4RK ONION wrote: »

Agnostic teacher in training here. 97% is indeed about correct. As such, I will probably have little choice but to teach the allotted 2.5 hours of catholic indoctrination a week. It makes me a bit angry that the job I always dreamed of doing is tainted by this. But that's not even the worst part.

Thanks to an outdated rule I can be fired on the spot for not upholding the ethos of the school. That means being fired for
- being openly atheist/agnostic/not catholic
- having a child out of marriage
- being openly gay
No, I'm not wrong, this is an actual right of any Catholic school. It's obviously not enforced much, but it's there, and as such, if asked about my own religion during a job interview, I will probably have to lie.
(not gay and do not have a kid, just pointing it out :P)

I don't think that they are allowed to ask questions like that in an interview though. They definately aren't allowed to ask if you are married or have kids. Not sure about the religion though.

When my parents went to the meeting before I started secondary they told them that if either parent was an athiest then I should be sent to the school... they both are & so was I even at the age of 12...

Still made my confirmation though... just to be in with the crowd ya know!!!

D4RK ONION

Antbert wrote: »

That is sickening. And what's more sickening is the fact that it isn't surprising. But 97%?! Since people are saying it with such conviction i'm inclined to believe it's true but... What about all the Educate Together schools springing up all over the place?

It's definitely above 93% anyway, I'm always getting the second number wrong. There may be educate together but I think you underestimate the sheer number of Catholic schools.

For your reading pleasure/horror
http://www.educatetogether.ie/reference_articles/Ref_Art_003.html
http://www.educatetogether.ie/1_educate_together/educatetogetherfaq.html (check out the questions "how are educate together schools different")

I've had to get used to it at this point, and I'm well able to get my "everybody loves Jesus" face on, but the alive-o programme makes it harder again.

I don't think that they are allowed to ask questions like that in an interview though.

If they're a Catholic school, and they're entitiled to know what religion I am, I will be training teaching the children it after all.

They definately aren't allowed to ask if you are married or have kids.

No, but that kind of thing is obviously going to emerge eventually, y'know? It's a lifetime job, keeping something as basic as "my girlfriend/life partner and I had children" a secret for 25 years could be tough! As I said though, the rule isn't enforced to my knowledge, it's just the fact that it's their and could be dropped on you at any time

Zillah

Antbert wrote: »

What about all the Educate Together schools springing up all over the place?

They are really really awesome, have a huge waiting list, and are dwarfed in number by the thousands of Catholic run schools all around the country.

Osgoodisgood

Wicknight wrote: »

Why would it not be legal?

No doubt,it's legal right now, but is it appropriate? Does it reflect the mood of the public? What benefit does having the church administrate and deliver curriculum offer that couldn't be offered by an Education Dept?

This isn't America, we don't have strict separation of Church and State. Quite the opposite in fact, a number of our public services are run by church organisations, such as hospitals and schools.

Same applies to healthcare. If some hospitals were currently run by any other 3rd party with a vested interest in the customers would we be ok with that? Or would we look at making some structural changes?

Antbert

I do wish Educate Together were non-demoninational, rather than multi-denominational. But I'm just nitpicking now. What I don't understand is, if Catholic schools aren't exclusively funding themselves (i.e. they get money from the state) then why are they allowed to indoctrinate? If they were completely self-funded then there isn't much that can be done about it, but they aren't.

ShooterSF

Antbert wrote: »

I do wish Educate Together were non-demoninational, rather than multi-denominational. But I'm just nitpicking now. What I don't understand is, if Catholic schools aren't exclusively funding themselves (i.e. they get money from the state) then why are they allowed to indoctrinate? If they were completely self-funded then there isn't much that can be done about it, but they aren't.

Because they are funded by a state whose public insist on putting themselves down as catholic on a census even if they don't actually follow said religion. So the state finances what is in "our" interests.

Data_Quest

ShooterSF wrote: »

Because they are funded by a state whose public insist on putting themselves down as catholic on a census even if they don't actually follow said religion. So the state finances what is in "our" interests.

Very good point IMO. The last census 88% of Irish people said they were Catholic so it is not surprising that such a large % of schools are Catholic. So please remember when filling out the census the next time: the government use these figures in their long term plans.

Dades

Data_Quest wrote: »

The last census 88% of Irish people said they were Catholic

You mean 100% of mammies put the whole family down as catholic.

Rev Hellfire

Dades wrote: »

You mean 100% of mammies put the whole family down as catholic.

I don't think we can lay the blame totally on the mammies of Ireland, if anyone 18 or over doesn't have the gumption to ensure the census is filled out correctly perhaps their mammy does need to be doing it for them.

After all you have to be resident in the house at the time of the census to be included on the sheet and quite a number of 18+ would have moved out due to college or work.

eoin5

Is there still some guy/gal from the diocese who goes around the schools to check up on peoples catechism?

Dades

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I don't think we can lay the blame totally on the mammies of Ireland, if anyone 18 or over doesn't have the gumption to ensure the census is filled out correctly perhaps their mammy does need to be doing it for them.

After all you have to be resident in the house at the time of the census to be included on the sheet and quite a number of 18+ would have moved out due to college or work.

Phrases such as "as long as you are living under this roof..." spring to mind.

There were about a million people under 18 in Ireland in 2007 - how many do think were charged with filling in their census form correctly? I don't think it's unreasonable to suspect that large numbers of this demograph were misrepresented.

If we broke down the census results presented for kids still living at home it would make an interesting comparison compared to, say, any of the religious polls in After Hours.

redfacedbear

Dades wrote: »

Phrases such as "as long as you are living under this roof..." spring to mind.

There were about a million people under 18 in Ireland in 2007 - how many do think were charged with filling in their census form correctly? I don't think it's unreasonable to suspect that large numbers of this demograph were misrepresented.

If we broke down the census results presented for kids still living at home it would make an interesting comparison compared to, say, any of the religious polls in After Hours.

I've no doubt that people like this have indeed inflated the numbers but I suspect that the larger number is made up of people who voluntarily describe themselves as Catholic even though they are nothing of the sort (imho). My missus, for example, doesn't believe in Jesus' divinity - let alone some of the nitty gritty of Catholic dogma, but she'll insist that she is put down on the Census as Catholic - I don't get it but it's her choice.

On the school thing; I've seen a survey result that stated that the majority of parents want to educate their children in a school with a religious ethos. Granted I think the survey was conducted by the Iona Institute so I can't vouch for its impartiality, but I don't think such a result would be surprising given the demographics.

D4RK ONION

eoin5 wrote: »

Is there still some guy/gal from the diocese who goes around the schools to check up on peoples catechism?

Yes, usually the parish priest does this. Pretty important it goes well from what I can gather.

Zillah

Northern Irish Person 1: So, are you Catholic or Protestant?
Northern Irish Person 2: I'm an atheist.
Northern Irish Person 1: Yeah but are you a Catholic or a Protestant atheist?

My point being, the religion someone claims to be more often than not has nothing to do with what they believe. This can be demonstrated easily by asking any young "Catholic" about their opinion on the divinity of Jesus, the authority of the Pope, the validity of transubstantiation, the assumption of Mary, the power of prayer, saintly intercession etc. Invariably they turn out to be agnostic, deist or non-specific theist.

CDfm

School without religion is like alcohol free beer.

Zillah

CDfm wrote: »

School without religion is like alcohol free beer.

School is like beer. School with religion is like beer with ketchup; sure you can still drink it but something has gone very wrong.

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

School without religion is like alcohol free beer.

You're absolutely right. It's missing the mind altering component :P

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You're absolutely right. It's missing the mind altering component :P

I thought you would see it my way:P

Its been a while Sam - hope you are keeping well.

Cuts to protestant schools criticised

PAMELA NEWENHAMPluralism in Ireland would suffer without Protestant communities and their schools the Archbishop of Dublin, Dr Diarmuid Martin has said.
Responding to remarks made by the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Dublin, the Most Revd Dr John Neill, accusing the department of education of a determined and doctrinaire attack against Protestant schools, Dr Martin said “I believe there is a public interest in guaranteeing the right of the Protestant community to education”.
Speaking on RTÉ’s Morning Ireland, Dr Martin said “without the Protestant communities and without their schools I believe Ireland today, or pluralism in Ireland would be poorer and I hope some way can be found to guarantee that that tradition can continue”.
Under a deal done in the 1960s with then minister for education Donogh O’Malley, Protestant fee-paying schools received the same funding and teacher numbers as non fee-paying schools, protecting their ethos as the minority tradition in the State.
But the extra funding and teacher numbers were cut in the last budget and Minister for Education Batt O’Keeffe said his actions were in keeping with the advice of the Attorney General under article 44 of the Constitution, that “to continue the grant that was available would be unconstitutional because it was being given to the Protestant denomination and being refused to the Catholic denomination”.
Fine Gael education spokesman Brian Hayes TD today said Dr Martin “has shown good authority and a commitment to pluralism in education by the support he has given to the Protestant schools of this country”.
“I am appealing to the Minister for Education to back down on this issue and to stop the inevitable collision course that he has set for himself between his Department and the various Protestant churches,” he added.
Labour Party spokesman on education and science Ruairi Quinn accused the Minister of undermining the constitutional right of Protestant families to send their children to a school that caters for their faith, adding he “is doing irreparable damage to the relations between the State and the Protestant community in this country”.

Though not Protestant I do think this cut in funding is wrong - if the only aspect is to preserve their community and identity.

The travellers as a community get funding, immigrant groups and asylum seekers get funding.

So how do you see it.

Dades

CDfm wrote: »

So how do you see it.

Abolish the right to discriminate on the basis of religion, remove single-faith religious education from state schools, fund all schools equally, and let the priests and parents have the kids back when the bell goes.

That'd be a good start.

Max Power1

Dades wrote: »

Abolish the right to discriminate on the basis of religion, remove single-faith religious education from state schools, fund all schools equally, and let the priests and parents have the kids back when the bell goes.

That'd be a good start.

That would be a controversial move there !

eoin5

CDfm wrote: »

I thought you would see it my way:P

Its been a while Sam - hope you are keeping well.
Though not Protestant I do think this cut in funding is wrong - if the only aspect is to preserve their community and identity.

The travellers as a community get funding, immigrant groups and asylum seekers get funding.

So how do you see it.

Preservation of community and identity a poor reason in this case. They can certainly do that without extra funding, so many others are.

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

I thought you would see it my way:P

Its been a while Sam - hope you are keeping well.
Though not Protestant I do think this cut in funding is wrong - if the only aspect is to preserve their community and identity.

The travellers as a community get funding, immigrant groups and asylum seekers get funding.

So how do you see it.

Dades wrote: »

Abolish the right to discriminate on the basis of religion, remove single-faith religious education from state schools, fund all schools equally, and let the priests and parents have the kids back when the bell goes.

That'd be a good start.

Seems like the most sensible option. As we've said before there is no catholic, protestant or atheist way to teach maths, science, history and geography etc. I see it as pointless and wasteful to have separate schools teaching 95% the same things and it promotes sectarianism, isolation and lack of understanding of other groups. Schools should be for learning the state curriculum and if people want a definition of community that includes only people who follow their religion/belong to their ethnic group and excludes everyone else they can pay for it themselves and/or do it in their own time. As usual, making discrimination illegal as it should be is the solution to this problem

robindch

Sam Vimes wrote: »

we've said before there is no catholic, protestant or atheist way to teach maths, science, history and geography etc.

Maths, perhaps no, but in increasing order of importance, the teaching of geography, history and science have all been bent to the cause of religion by fundamentalists who control schools.

To pick one at random, Patrick Henry College -- a high-profile post-secondary college in the USA which, last time I looked, seemed to be trying to set itself up as the Republican Party's version of France's ENA --- runs its own history courses here, here and here, for example. To say the least, PHC does not take a critical view of religion.

Zillah

He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.

That is to say, you can put a partisan agenda to work on almost any topic. History especially. Just imagine a dishonest Catholic teaching a class about The Middle Ages or modern Irish history.

Rev Hellfire

Zillah wrote: »

Just imagine a dishonest Catholic teaching a class about The Middle Ages or modern Irish history.

Revisionism is hardly confined to the church, that applies to any 'dishonest' person or anyone with a particular agenda.
Schools by there nature at indoctrination centres, be it for a religion or the herd mind of a given society.

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Seems like the most sensible option. As we've said before there is no catholic, protestant or atheist way to teach maths, science, history and geography etc. I see it as pointless and wasteful to have separate schools teaching 95% the same things and it promotes sectarianism, isolation and lack of understanding of other groups. Schools should be for learning the state curriculum and if people want a definition of community that includes only people who follow their religion/belong to their ethnic group and excludes everyone else they can pay for it themselves and/or do it in their own time. As usual, making discrimination illegal as it should be is the solution to this problem

I hope you dont mind me saying but at some level this sounds very Marxist and generic.Though you might say egalitarian.

Some institutions form the basis of a sense of community in our society and foster a sense of identity and diversity.

Why should we loose these.

eoin5

CDfm wrote: »

I hope you dont mind me saying but at some level this sounds very Marxist and generic.Though you might say egalitarian.

Some institutions form the basis of a sense of community in our society and foster a sense of identity and diversity.

Why should we loose these.

How do you suppose we go about deciding what institutions to allow funding to then? Its a very slippery slope. Anyways, there will always be identity and diversity, and shouldnt new communities should have an equal chance?

CDfm

eoin5 wrote: »

How do you suppose we go about deciding what institutions to allow funding to then? Its a very slippery slope. Anyways, there will always be identity and diversity, and shouldnt new communities should have an equal chance?

Its not my proposal- but why should established communities suffer for the new world order.

Sam Vimes

robindch wrote: »

Maths, perhaps no, but in increasing order of importance, the teaching of geography, history and science have all been bent to the cause of religion by fundamentalists who control schools.

To pick one at random, Patrick Henry College -- a high-profile post-secondary college in the USA which, last time I looked, seemed to be trying to set itself up as the Republican Party's version of France's ENA --- runs its own history courses here, here and here, for example. To say the least, PHC does not take a critical view of religion.

Maybe I should rephrase, those classes shouldn't be taught any differently :P
Which really highlights the problem of allowing religions to control something that has nothing to do with them. No one with any agenda should have control over schools

CDfm wrote: »

I hope you dont mind me saying but at some level this sounds very Marxist and generic.Though you might say egalitarian.

Some institutions form the basis of a sense of community in our society and foster a sense of identity and diversity.

Why should we loose these.

To rehash exactly the same arguments from last time

Because your catholic sense of identity should not be fostered to the exclusion of people in the community who don't follow your religion

You can have have all your community events in the school and you can have your religion class if you want but a situation where you have free schools all over the country and everyone else scattered across the country has to beg a bankrupt government for some scraps isn't right. The only thing you'd be losing is the right to exclude others from a public service that they pay for

And if you want to exclude people you can pay for it yourself

CDfm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

To rehash exactly the same arguments from last time

Because your catholic sense of identity should not be fostered to the exclusion of people in the community who don't follow your religion

You can have have all your community events in the school and you can have your religion class if you want but a situation where you have free schools all over the country and everyone else scattered across the country has to beg a bankrupt government for some scraps isn't right. The only thing you'd be losing is the right to exclude others from a public service that they pay for

And if you want to exclude people you can pay for it yourself

But you want everyone to think the way you do and take away the right of parents to decide the religious orientation of their kids.

I really applaud Educate Together and like their ethos.

I cant see why everything has to be homogenous and generic.

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

But you want everyone to think the way you do and take away the right of parents to decide the religious orientation of their kids.

I really applaud Educate Together and like their ethos.

I cant see why everything has to be homogenous and generic.

It's easy to say you don't want it to be homogeneous when you have about 90% of schools in the country. It is homogeneous except for the few groups who've managed to scrape enough together or badger the government into providing something for them probably miles from their homes

The state curriculum is homogeneous and generic so there is no good reason for them to be taught separately and a lot of reasons not to such as the examples robindch gave. Educating kids together promotes tolerance and understanding, eliminates needless waste and gives everyone an equal right to the public services they pay for, including people's right to educate their children in their religion. But if you don't want your kids taught in a "homogeneous and generic" school, if you're so against having your kids taught in the same school as members of other religions and you want to keep your discriminatory privileged position that allows the exclusion of all ideologies but your own you can pay for it yourself just like everyone else has to.

Just look at what you're saying here. I'm asking for equality, equal access given to all groups including yours, and you're calling it "taking away the right of parents to decide the religious orientation of their kids". You are not losing the right to decide your kids' religion, all you're doing is affording others the same rights you have, you're losing the privilege of exclusion. If you think I'm trying to take your rights, what are you doing? Should excluding someone from a public service they pay for be a "right" in the 21st century?

robindch

CDfm wrote: »

But you want everyone to think the way you do and take away the right of parents to decide the religious orientation of their kids.

Woah there

Firstly, nobody's taking any rights away from anybody.

Secondly -- and much more interestingly, since this is where your unconscious bias shows -- parents do not decide the religion of their kids, any more than they decide their political outlook, or what joke they might find funny.

Parents are there to provide a loving, safe and educative environment for their kids so that can grow up to be able to deal with the real world.

Kids' brains are held in trust and should therefore be treated with respect, rather than as just one more thing to place under religious control.

eoin5

CDfm wrote: »

Its not my proposal- but why should established communities suffer for the new world order.

You could just as easily say why should established communities continue to reap unfair favouritism.

The only points youve made are diversity and identity but surely people will be more diverse if theyre not getting religious instruction in classrooms. Identity is a wooly subject, some people might find they click with a music style more that a religion. Theres plenty on the table to help people define themselves, I dont see why anything have to be favoured by a state in this regard.

CDfm

a bit nietzchean

education imparts knowledge and cultural values.

so we want our cultural values taught in schools

cant see why not

marco_polo

CDfm wrote: »

a bit nietzchean

education imparts knowledge and cultural values.

so I want my cultural values taught in schools

cant see why not

Much better.

CerebralCortex

CDfm wrote: »

a bit nietzchean

education imparts knowledge and cultural values.

so we want our cultural values taught in schools

cant see why not

Culture changes all the time and people are responsible for those changes whether they're aware of it or not it doesn't need to be thaught in school. What's more I think you're are confusing it with hertitage and not all heritage is good.

CDfm

marco_polo wrote: »

so I want my cultural values taught in schools
Much better.

exactly- from a cultural perspective thats what you want irrespective of what the parents want or the community wants

Sam Vimes

CDfm wrote: »

a bit nietzchean

education imparts knowledge and cultural values.

so we want our cultural values taught in schools

cant see why not

I have absolutely no problem with your cultural values being taught in schools. My problem is with your cultural values and yours alone being taught in public schools, meaning you get your values taught for free all over the country and everyone else either has to consent to your values being taught to their kids (assuming they even get that choice since they can be excluded) or beg the government and/or pay to provide something so they can bus their kids ten miles down the road, not even to get their values taught but just to avoid having yours taught

It's very simple, if you want the right to exclude other people and values you pay for it yourself just like everyone else. Public services are meant for the public, not just those whose parents follow a particular religion

Your exercising of this "right" (by which I mean the right of exclusion, not the right to teach your values) that is only a right because of a specific exemption to discrimination laws is having a severe detrimental effect on others. As some guy you might have heard of once said: "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

PDN

CDfm wrote: »

a bit nietzchean

education imparts knowledge and cultural values.

so we want our cultural values taught in schools

cant see why not

But you want me to pay for it.

Can't see why.

Sam Vimes

PDN wrote: »

But you want me to pay for it.

Can't see why.

A much more succinct way of making the same point

ArthurDent

CDfm wrote: »

a bit nietzchean

education imparts knowledge and cultural values.

so we want our cultural values taught in schools

cant see why not

so which CULTURAL values would be missing by removing doctrinal instruction from schools?