Religion in School

jacknuig

First of all, I'd like to apologize for posting a thread which has probably already been touched upon. I read a somewhat interesting article, about going back to school. I'm sure many will find something wrong about this post, but it's just my opinion.

At this point, I'd like to say I don't identify with any religious belief. Although I was brought up a Catholic, I don't identify as one. And I respect all religions even if I don't believe in them! Personally, I believe if I were to have kids, I'd happily send them to a religious school, and I wholeheartedly believe religion should be part of the curriculum. I would not impose my beliefs upon him (whether it's Atheism or Catholicism). I'd leave it up to him/ her. I would never understand why a parent would opt out of religious studies. By doing so, the child will never gain an insight into the many various religions. Throughout my time in school, I learned about Islam, Buddhism, Hindu, Atheism etc. By the time I graduated, I could make an informed decision on what I believed in. If my parents opted me out, I doubt I would of been arsed to learn these religions outside of school. And this may be controversial, but I believe the idiots who label Islam as terrorists would benefit on an education in religion. By taking your kid out of religion classes, surely you prevent him/ her making an informed decision? I saw some comments labeling Religion as an indoctrination, but as a kid, I never really took the belief from the stories, more so the morals.

As for the article itself, although it raises valid points I can't help but think it betrays itself with the exaggerations and overly dramatic statements.

"you may need to prepare your child to deal with these images of torture and this teaching."

"This is so disturbing that you might want to take some time off work to keep your child at home while this is being taught."

So, would you like to see Religion removed from the curriculum?

gifted

Amen to that. Lol lol

Arcade_Tryer

jacknuig wrote: »

So, would you like to see Religion removed from the curriculum?

No.

Religious indoctrination removed? Yes.

rainbow kirby

I'd like to see children learn about religion in a "This is what Christians/Muslims/Hindus etc believe" sort of way, and they should also learn about ethics, but I do not believe that faith formation should ever be part of the school day and religion should not take up as much class time as it does.

Fleawuss

I'd like to see religion removed from AH.

jacknuig

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

No.

Religious indoctrination removed? Yes.

Hmm, I never felt like I was being indoctrinated. I went to a Catholic School and imo, they put more emphasis on other religions. If I was being indoctrinated, surely they wouldn't teach other religions? Although I know this may not be the case in other schools. In any case, they failed, as I definitely don't identify as a Catholic!

failinis

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

jacknuig wrote: »

So, would you like to see Religion removed from the curriculum?

No.

Religious indoctrination removed? Yes.

Exactly this.

I studied RE up to my A level and we only learnt about Roman Catholic faith and minor minor details on Judasim. I would have liked a far more wide range as I felt I only learnt a little bit more on the Catholic faith.

jacknuig

Fleawuss wrote: »

I'd like to see religion removed from AH.

Aw, if it's the wrong place sorry, I was only looking for a discussion!

Zaph

Religious Studies I'd have no problem with, learning about world religions can be very informative. Unfortunately in Irish primary schools an inordinate amount of time is taken up with faith formation and preparations for communion and confirmation. This has no place in a school in modern society. It's the parents' responsibility if they want their child to be members of a particular faith, and judging by the linguistic and mathematical skills of some of the newer members of staff where I work there are a lot more important things the time could be used for.

freshpopcorn

I loved religion in school, I hope if I have children that they'll get to enjoy it as much!

Chancer3001

Ah but shur the communion is a great day out

El Weirdo

jacknuig wrote: »

Hmm, I never felt like I was being indoctrinated. I went to a Catholic School and imo, they put more emphasis on other religions. If I was being indoctrinated, surely they wouldn't teach other religions? Although I know this may not be the case in other schools. In any case, they failed, as I definitely don't identify as a Catholic!

You didn't do your communion and confirmation through the school?

Chancer3001

I actually think removing communion and confirmation from school would be of huge benefit to the Catholic Church.

It would mean church classes being set up to prepare them for this. More attendance at mass.

More chance to educate the kids on what it is they want to educate them on.

Some kids it's their first times in a church

In an ideal world, everyone would learn about the religions and their beliefs and not have to choose til you were 18. But I don't see that ever happening

jacknuig

El Weirdo wrote: »

You didn't do your communion and confirmation through the school?

I did it through the school yes, but that was by choice. Many of my friends didn't. My dad was a Protestant, my mum a Catholic, they gave me a choice.

luckaa

jacknuig wrote: »

Hmm, I never felt like I was being indoctrinated.

Think about this statement for a minute.....

jacknuig

luckaa wrote: »

Think about this statement for a minute.....

"Hmmm," = I'm thinking

"I never felt like I was being indoctrinated" = I believe I wasn't being brainwashed. It's open for discussion, as many seem to believe, and have stated that the were.

What you left out was my argument for not being brainwashed:
"I went to a Catholic School and imo, they put more emphasis on other religions. If I was being indoctrinated, surely they wouldn't teach other religions? Although I know this may not be the case in other schools. In any case, they failed, as I definitely don't identify as a Catholic!"

However, I acknowledge the way I phrased it was bad.

Academic

jacknuig wrote: »

Hmm, I never felt like I was being indoctrinated. I went to a Catholic School and imo, they put more emphasis on other religions. If I was being indoctrinated, surely they wouldn't teach other religions? Although I know this may not be the case in other schools. In any case, they failed, as I definitely don't identify as a Catholic!

Did they also cover atheism and agnosticism?

(Serious question.)

Cheers,

Ac

jacknuig

Yeah, they covered Atheism, to be honest, I think I had a sound RE teacher. We literally just studied other beliefs, as soon as we did that, we could do whatever we wanted in the class. Even though it was a Catholic school, and against the bishops wishes, we didn't have to do the Religion exam. Personally, I'm agnostic, and if it wasn't for my teacher who knows!

actua11

I think there is 'Old school' religious teaching and 'New School' religious teaching. It has moved far past the single Catholic doctrine to a much broader view of faith (or lack there of). Over a decade ago I was learning far more about Sikihism and the like through RE class than I was anywhere else be it through tv, books or elsewhere. Having that education of the broad range of religious traditions widened my view of the world, and I think helped me be far more tolerant of others than I may have been had I relied simply potentially biased opinions from elsewhere.

As for things like communion/confirmation, I think for those with a strong faith they carry religious significance but for many others they are like baptism or weddings as just being now simply being part of Irish culture and tradition.

Corkgirl18

The time allocation for teaching religion in Primary Schools compared to other subjects is absolutely crazy. In 2nd and 6th class it is even worse.
That time could be spent in a much more useful way.

I do understand why parents don't want their child to be present for Religion in schools. In the religious schools I've attended and taught in its very much just learning about Catholicism so it may be confusing for a child if you're teaching them one thing at home and in school they're being taught something else.

I think having a cultural studies class is the way to go. I attended a Convent school that I absolutely loved but we had to watch the Passion of the Christ, videos on failed abortions and ones showing people who regretted their abortions. Our teacher also spent time teaching us about how IVF is wrong. I wouldn't wish having to listen to that sh!te on anyone.

rjpf1980

In schools I would favor lessons in philosophy in particular the history of philosophy and ethics as well as logic. Religion would be covered by classes on the history of religion and comparative religion which would inform students about the development of religion in society and the emergence of the various faiths while subjecting them to critical analysis.

It would be up parents and clergy to organize teaching religion on Sunday at church - probably after services are over.

Problem solved.

In the modern world kids are being exposed to other ideas outside of formal schooling and are well capable of figuring things out.

Samaris

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=614

Not kicking you out, jacknuig, but you might find this thread interesting; it's a similar discussion that's been going on in the Atheism and Agnosticism forum for a while.

I'd also like to see a much smaller emphasis on religion in general, maybe have it as a module in a civics class, and covering a range of religions with emphasis on where and how they developed and diverged, along with ethics and the rest. It's a bit disgraceful that Irish schools devote almost over twice the time to Catholicism than they do to science. It teaches very little bar fear, especially if your family isn't Catholic.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

rjpf1980 wrote: »

In schools I would favor lessons in philosophy in particular the history of philosophy and ethics as well as logic. Religion would be covered by classes on the history of religion and comparative religion which would inform students about the development of religion in society and the emergence of the various faiths while subjecting them to critical analysis.

It would be up parents and clergy to organize teaching religion on Sunday at church - probably after services are over.

Problem solved.

In the modern world kids are being exposed to other ideas outside of formal schooling and are well capable of figuring things out.

Yep.

I love this "We aim to encourage children to reach a level of freedom of expression they can fell comfortable with" bull****

Really? And yet religion is compulsory and philosphy is non-existant in most Irish schools?

Explain to me how this endorses SELF-expression?

Eramen

It's fair to say that my religious education and self-improvement class opened my teenage mind a little. We also had a fantastic teacher who was also a brother.

I'll withhold the unique brand of sub-intellectual posturing and ideological viewpoints so common of the AH.

Simply: Religious studies should be improved, especially in light that we have a very ancient and esteemed tradition in Ireland that is both practical and emotionally mature. This can be of some use to people.

Samaris

Eramen wrote: »

It's fair to say that my religious education and self-improvement class opened my teenage mind a little. We also had a fantastic teacher who was also a brother.

I'll withhold the unique brand of sub-intellectual posturing and ideological viewpoints so common of the AH.

Simply: Religious studies should be improved, especially in light that we have a very ancient and esteemed tradition in Ireland that is both practical and emotionally mature. This can be of some use to people.

Well...IS it? If you have a good teacher, great. But most teachers have to teach religion at some point whether they agree with it or not, which either leads to no passion for the topic or a somewhat unhealthy passion and misunderstandings for Catholicism. For instance, I was informed at far too early an age that under this absolutely true and real system, one of my parents was going to hell (along with my siblings) and the other wasn't, because one of them was a good Catholic and the other wasn't Catholic at all. That's not a healthy approach to a young child, especially a particularly imaginative one and deeply distressed me.

Hibernia courses, one of the main routes into teaching, require religious studies for later infliction on kids. How can this be right? This isn't "sub-intellectual posturing", this is asking how can it be justified to teach children religious indoctrination (and it very often has been and still can be) as the same level of fact as maths, science and language?

(And sure, I'll admit I'm biased, but I'm not calling for a total ban on religion, just a saner way of putting it across and preferably that not in school, or at least to teach about religion in general, not just the ways and means of one specific one).

jacknuig

jacknuig wrote: »

So, would you like to see Religion removed from the curriculum?

No. Just the facilitating of Communion and Confirmations. They should be prepared for by the family and church in their own time.

BrokenArrows

I went to a catholic primary and secondary (im 31 now to give some time reference) and no other religion apart from minor aspects of the Jewish faith, was ever thought.

In secondary school our Religion and History teachers were priests and looking back now i think the history classes were swayed very much in the direction of catholic history rather than a broad understanding of all history.

I moved to England about 6 years ago and before then i knew practically nothing about the Muslim faiths. Because there is such a large community of Muslims over here i have learned a lot since. So essentially if i never left ireland i would be amazingly ignorant about the Muslim faith even though it is the second most practiced faith in the world.

From what ive heard the religion classes have changed a lot since i was in school and id expect them to keep changing in the future. But one thing is certain, religion classes with the sole intention of teaching Catholicism in order to make you a Catholic should not be allowed in state sponsored schools, and communion and confirmation should not be done through a state sponsored school which takes up a huge amount of valuable time.

Individual religious schools should still be allowed to exist but they should be forced to include all religions as part of their curriculum and should not receive any state sponsorship.

Moo Moo Land

There is absolutely no need for religion in primary schools. If your child came home and said the teacher does 30 mins on "the Supernatural" every day, you'd be asking questions fairly fast. Yet that's effectively what they are doing.

I think a subject in secondary school that covers all the major organised religions should suffice.

I am actually fairly confident that the current generation of young people will fix some of the idiotic aspects of Irish life.
.

Eramen

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Individual religious schools should still be allowed to exist but they should be forced to include all religions as part of their curriculum and should not receive any state sponsorship.

State sponsored schools indoctrinate people to be statists. Unthinkable. :pac:

Eramen

Samaris wrote: »

Well...IS it? If you have a good teacher, great. But most teachers have to teach religion at some point whether they agree with it or not, which either leads to no passion for the topic or a somewhat unhealthy passion and misunderstandings for Catholicism. For instance, I was informed at far too early an age that under this absolutely true and real system, one of my parents was going to hell (along with my siblings) and the other wasn't, because one of them was a good Catholic and the other wasn't Catholic at all. That's not a healthy approach to a young child, especially a particularly imaginative one and deeply distressed me.

Hibernia courses, one of the main routes into teaching, require religious studies for later infliction on kids. How can this be right? This isn't "sub-intellectual posturing", this is asking how can it be justified to teach children religious indoctrination (and it very often has been and still can be) as the same level of fact as maths, science and language?

(And sure, I'll admit I'm biased, but I'm not calling for a total ban on religion, just a saner way of putting it across and preferably that not in school, or at least to teach about religion in general, not just the ways and means of one specific one).

Your experience is just one of a long line in the culture war which has been waged over the last several hundred years in the West. Secularism vs Non-secularism. Rather than come to some sort of workable understanding between the two people have been radicalised to accept one worldview only. I expect this is continue for many more centuries as we seem to be nowhere near ready to accept a compromise.

This is a shame, and will lead to even more inner tug-of-wars like yours, more existential questions to be dealt with at a too-young age, especially as Europe inclines more towards Islamic values before the middle of this century if the demographics remain on course, which is very likely. They may even become our main values.

But a serious problem too is that society can't really have a 'pluralism of values/morals/cultures' if it wants to be successful. Pluralistic societies tend to break up, ghetto-ise and radicalise with each side fighting for it own cause. We're reached this break-up stage. For society to be united and to progress, there must be a set truth for every person, one rule and law that can be applied to everyone equally. Just as it would be counter-productive to teach all 'brands' of science as equally true, the 'alternatives' along with the conventional, it would be similarly counter-productive to teach all religions as equally true at once. It is signalling that 'no right or at least better way exists' - which is incorrect. At any given time and place, there is always a best way.

A society that no longer holds up a truth, law, a custom as correct and right no longer stands for anything at all, nor is it a society. Also consider the religiosity involved with many modern notions - which are based on nothing, should these be taught in schools?

'Universal' principles such as equality, freedom of identity/expression, ideological progress, permanent economic growth - all seem to be out of bounds to even the material explanations of the sciences, and are beheld to be completely self-evident in and of themselves. While in fact there is very little to no evidence to support their claims at all. Think about it. I'd consider belief in these political-religions far more dangerous. I feel a lot safer around the traditional ones that demanded one to be somewhat upright and productive, personally speaking.

rjpf1980

Eramen wrote: »

It's fair to say that my religious education and self-improvement class opened my teenage mind a little. We also had a fantastic teacher who was also a brother.

I'll withhold the unique brand of sub-intellectual posturing and ideological viewpoints so common of the AH.

Simply: Religious studies should be improved, especially in light that we have a very ancient and esteemed tradition in Ireland that is both practical and emotionally mature. This can be of some use to people.

The theology in the Catechism - where Catholic doctrine comes from is not explained in religion classes.

Why does the Catholic Church oppose euthanasia abortion homosexuality sex outside marriage masturbation etc and what does it teach about just war good government social justice secular law and so forth? Well the average Catholic in Ireland doesn't know because the rudiments of the faith are not explained. So called Catholics don't know what transubstantiation is or why Mary is ever virgin or why Jesus had to die on the cross. It is not taught in Catholic religious classes.

If people are coming out of school utterly ignorant of their own religion how ignorant must they be of other faiths and people like me with none?

If you have no grasp of philosophy logic and the history of Western culture and ideas you might as well be blind.

A Little Pony

I was in a Protestant school, dad was in the Orange Order but I have always been an Atheist. Every school morning you would go to assembly and do the lords prayer. I used to just keep my eyes open during it and not do it.

Eramen

rjpf1980 wrote: »

The theology in the Catechism - where Catholic doctrine comes from is not explained in religion classes.

Why does the Catholic Church oppose euthanasia abortion homosexuality sex outside marriage masturbation etc and what does it teach about just war good government social justice secular law and so forth? Well the average Catholic in Ireland doesn't know because the rudiments of the faith are not explained. So called Catholics don't know what transubstantiation is or why Mary is ever virgin or why Jesus had to die on the cross. It is not taught in Catholic religious classes.

If people are coming out of school utterly ignorant of their own religion how ignorant must they be of other faiths and people like me with none?

If you have no grasp of philosophy logic and the history of Western culture and ideas you might as well be blind.

Well you have to remember that in 50 -100 years the prominent ideas in Europe will have changed totally again, just like the one's today are substantially different from the ones we had 100 years ago. The ideals of the current political-religions, like their brand of equality, aren't exactly going to be 'indefinitely true' and are to be considered momentary. I think the RCC is positioning itself for the long-haul - as it always did historically - astute in the knowledge of the processes of time and how these things tend to change. Their aim is to 'be on the right side of history'.

Stern views on euthanasia, SSM, homosexuality, marriage, sex etc make sense in this regard and are reflected in their centuries-long policy-making. We can see from past events that when societies go through destructive catastrophes, it's the conservative, family-orientated and rural classes of people who usually survive and live on, while it's 'outsiders', 'bohemians' and 'metropolitan society' that perishes. Business and religions know this, hence will always lean towards the traditional values. Such catastrophes still exist, and will exist, and come sooner than one might think.

As for the rest of your post I completely agree with it. I'd also add that it's not religious education that failing, but the practices employed in our education system in general are not fit for purpose.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Eramen wrote: »

Your experience is just one of a long line in the culture war which has been waged over the last several hundred years in the West. Secularism vs Non-secularism. Rather than come to some sort of workable understanding between the two people have been radicalised to accept one worldview only. I expect this is continue for many more centuries as we seem to be nowhere near ready to accept a compromise.

This is a shame, and will lead to even more inner tug-of-wars like yours, more existential questions to be dealt with at a too-young age, especially as Europe inclines more towards Islamic values before the middle of this century if the demographics remain on course, which is very likely. They may even become our main values.

But a serious problem too is that society can't really have a 'pluralism of values/morals/cultures' if it wants to be successful. Pluralistic societies tend to break up, ghetto-ise and radicalise with each side fighting for it own cause. We're reached this break-up stage. For society to be united and to progress, there must be a set truth for every person, one rule and law that can be applied to everyone equally. Just as it would be counter-productive to teach all 'brands' of science as equally true, the 'alternatives' along with the conventional, it would be similarly counter-productive to teach all religions as equally true at once. It is signalling that 'no right or at least better way exists' - which is incorrect. At any given time and place, there is always a best way.

A society that no longer holds up a truth, law, a custom as correct and right no longer stands for anything at all, nor is it a society. Also consider the religiosity involved with many modern notions - which are based on nothing, should these be taught in schools?

'Universal' principles such as equality, freedom of identity/expression, ideological progress, permanent economic growth - all seem to be out of bounds to even the material explanations of the sciences, and are beheld to be completely self-evident in and of themselves. While in fact there is very little to no evidence to support their claims at all. Think about it. I'd consider belief in these political-religions far more dangerous. I feel a lot safer around the traditional ones that demanded one to be somewhat upright and productive, personally speaking.

Kinda going off topic here, but if you feel that customs and self-expression/identity are keystone here, surely you're bound to accept people expressing themselves religiously?