Should Religious Education be Mandatory in Schools?

[droomph]

From what I have heard (mainly from a select few) philosophy classes never give you "answers", so to say. What they do is present facts from different points of view and let's you choose which one you think is right.

On the same notion, I think that is how Religious Studies should be taught. I remember that my pastor said they invited a rabbi over to our church for Passover so we could understand Jesus' religion better (or something). While this may not seem like much (after all Christianity is basically a noob version of Judaism) it shows how easy it could be to make things relevant yet of value.

They shouldn't ever give an "answer", but rather, a "question" then "opinion"s. And from what little religious studies I had in middle school (we memorized the 10 commandments and then the five Pillars of Islam) it has made me understand their religion better. Now I know that most of the Muslims don't all hate America and want to blow up airplanes, but rather there are a select few who have radical views. And think about it. Most of us are Christians in America, and when the KKK and various Christian terrorist groups started acting up did they freak out about Christianity? No, because they knew that those weren't the values of Christians.

In the same way, if we had taught them about (and the key word here is about) Islam, do you think they would have freaked out about the dude with the turban next door? No, because they would know wether or not they, the Muslims, think blowing up buildings is part of their tradition. And they would have agreed to build that mosque at Ground Zero, because they knew that they are like us, but worships in a different way. No blowing up things - that is for the loony Muslims. And if we were to do this across the world, learning about every culture and religion, don't you think the world would be a better place?

So my point is, education promotes tolerance. And since America's main value is based off of tolerance, chances are education in that area might let us reach that goal faster.

Edit: Why would reading the Bible or the Koran be a bad thing? It only allows discussion, and explains why they think that way. For example, Ruth and Esther are great examples of not just Jewish values, but values everyone has got to follow! Yet, since it's in a religious text, we can't learn about them. Rather, we have to learn state-regulated bullcrap the bores people. And to be honest, the poetic forms of most religious texts are great examples not only for values, but for literature and ancient language classes and so forth. And while that power could be abused, students are usually smart enough to realize that they are to discuss, not simply be brainwashed by these things. In fact, most classes have "participation" grades so that they learn more, and I think it would be more than helpful here to prevent certain untrue and extremely racist ideas (like "Christians are better than Jews!") from sticking in their minds. Yes, the Jews crucified the Son of Man, God's ultimate gift to them. But through discussion, the more subtle point that everyone rebels and will be punished will be brought up. And stuff like that happens all throughout the texts, and by the end of your 12-year education, you are anything but brainwashed.

That being said you can certainly abuse these texts for negative purposes, like the brainwashing I mentioned earlier. But obviously there will be complaints, and there will be consequences. So extra vigilance will definitely have to be kept in place here. But hey, what's a little effort (extra surveillance of teaching methods) for a big reward (tolerance and world peace)?

 

[Ivysaur]

I took it in 11th grade alongside Philosophy and I found it very interesting.

I'm fine with that sort of class, as long as no religion is ever treated as "correct", as Alex said. I'd also add that it should be directed at more mature students rather than to kids in elementary school, because they are more likely to take everything as truths instead of legendary stories with morals in them. In that regard, I think that the best moment to study them in some degree of depht is when the kids are ready to study philosophy as well, because the cores of both are very similar.

 

[Sydian]

If you want to study religion, of any kind mind you, it should be your choice, or in the case of younger students, the parents choice. And when the child is old enough to decide whether they want to continue that education or not, they can make that decision. Though I think both Creationism and evolution should be taught at a higher age. When I was taught evolution after going to church all my life (and I wanna say this was first introduced 3rd grade of all things), it made no sense to me and I couldn't figure out where to piece it in and I just went on thinking Jesus hung out with dinosaurs. Hell, I still don't know how to piece it in. It's a bit weird to teach a young child both concepts, which is why I think it should be taught at a higher age where they can decide for themselves what seems most logical or how to fit them both together to where they make sense. And please for the love of God and dinosaurs, don't give me the "evolution is fact" sermon.

This probably makes no sense because I went off about evolution. Basically, religion should only be taught in religious-based schools, and if it's public, it should be by a student's choice.

 

[Dakotah]

No, religious studies should never be mandatory. And it should only ever be offered in high school and post secondary schools where it would be an optional course.

 

[mew42003]

I think it should be up to the kids to decide what their stance on Religion is. Being forced to practice something just because your parents/family do it isn't right. Everyone is entitled to their own views on these matters. It could be beneficial if children learned about the customs of each religion early on (so as not to become biased or stay ignorant), but the parents of these kids who are devout in their faith would not agree. Unless we get all parties to compromise, it will never happen. Its sad, really. People love to fight and discriminate over small differences. World Peace will never happen unless that changes.

 

[Cherrim]

World Religions as a course should be mandatory. Honestly, just throw it into every elementary school's social studies curriculum and we're golden. Field trips to visit places of worship to learn more about it from the religious leaders, lessons in class from an impartial textbook, and activities based on traditions from the religion. Everyone learns more about the history and customs of a religion, kids have a bit of opportunity to explore their faith and see if they find something that matches their belief system, and they learn to be tolerant of other faiths because they know exactly what those other faiths entail.

Plus, religions are really interesting when you get into the whats and whys of them! It's not even like this kind of thing would affect anyone's standing religion. Unless your kid is so dumb/closed-minded that he or she can't take in information about other religions without feeling the need to convert to them or something, all they'll be doing is learning. And that's not a bad thing.

Religious education that focuses only on faith and instilling it should be kept to religious schools (which should still have the above curriculum regardless of denomination, imo).

 

[SneakerTheOtter]

If religion is going to be taught at schools, then many religions should be taught, and not just one. I came from England, so religion was a mandatory subject, and we only studied Christianity. I don't find that fair, because I would've liked to learn about Buddhism or something else as well ._.

 

[Shining Raichu]

Studies of Religion was a course offered as a Year 11/12 elective at my high school, and I chose it because I thought it seemed incredibly interesting. Unfortunately, the way the schedule worked out, I couldn't do it and had to pick something else. But the point is, I was interested in it and I chose it. It wasn't forced upon me.

I think the only subjects that should be compulsory at school are the skills that will help everybody through life: English, Mathematics and some sort of overall Wellbeing course that covers things like health and kindness toward others. Every other subject should be optional, and I do include Science in this. Beyond the very basic, every student should be able to customise their educational experience based on what they feel will be of benefit to them specifically.

So no, regardless of how many religions are studied or how un-biased it is, religion should absolutely not be compulsory in schools. Very few things should.

 

[droomph]

Well I agree, SR, that you should not have many mandatory classes in school.

However, what I don't agree with, is that you don't think Religious Education should be one of the few mandatory ones.

Maybe it's because of the "Religious" in the class name, but if you think about it, what it is, is basically teaching tolerance. And maybe in Australia your core principles are focused on only allowing one group of people to dominate (hey, I don't live there okay) but I'm positive that at least the US has a policy in the Constitution that explicitly gives religious freedom and tolerance as one of its core values of America. So if it's in the core values, it should be in the core cirriculum as well. After all, weren't we the most open country in the world at one point? We should strive to maintain that position, and since the world is opening up, it's not just the US now - it's the whole world that should teach tolerance in school.

Edit; also

California state standards

• 6th grade - Ten Commandments; Judaism
• 6th grade - Eightfold Path; Buddhism
• 6th grade - Family values; Confucianism, Taoism
• 7th grade - Nature and Formation of Japan; Shintoism
• 7th grade - Five Pillars of Islam; Islam
• 7th grade - the Hajj; Islam
• 7th grade - Story of The Disciple Mohammed and his followers; Islam
• 8th grade - Puritanism and England; American Colonies, 17th Century America
• 8th grade - Immigration's numbers; Modern-Day America

 

[Bluerang1]

Edit; also

California state standards

• 6th grade - Ten Commandments; Judaism
• 6th grade - Eightfold Path; Buddhism
• 6th grade - Family values; Confucianism, Taoism
• 7th grade - Nature and Formation of Japan; Shintoism
• 7th grade - Five Pillars of Islam; Islam
• 7th grade - the Hajj; Islam
• 7th grade - Story of The Disciple Mohammed and his followers; Islam
• 8th grade - Puritanism and England; American Colonies, 17th Century America
• 8th grade - Immigration's numbers; Modern-Day America

Amazing! Exactly what I am trying to get at and like I was taught in London. I have forgotten some specifics of certain religions but I do know their beliefs and respect them for that. It makes one more tolerant and understanding.

 

[Dakotah]

I would be personally offended if any public school mandated religious studies. Only if my child was interested in the subject would I allow it, and only then if the course material covered many religions rather than one or two only.

 

[Nihilego]

Omg. Califiornia have got the right idea there. What droomph just outlined is what I feel is the perfect way to teach religious material - many different religions over a long time.

I would be personally offended if any public school mandated religious studies. Only if my child was interested in the subject would I allow it, and only then if the course material covered many religions rather than one or two only.

Out of interest, would you be offended if the school mandated another subject such as history which your child wasn't interested in? Or would the issue lie only with religious studies?

 

[Dynomuff]

I Don't mind tbh, even though i'm not interested in most religions

 

[Oryx]

World Religions as a course should be mandatory. Honestly, just throw it into every elementary school's social studies curriculum and we're golden. Field trips to visit places of worship to learn more about it from the religious leaders, lessons in class from an impartial textbook, and activities based on traditions from the religion. Everyone learns more about the history and customs of a religion, kids have a bit of opportunity to explore their faith and see if they find something that matches their belief system, and they learn to be tolerant of other faiths because they know exactly what those other faiths entail.

Plus, religions are really interesting when you get into the whats and whys of them! It's not even like this kind of thing would affect anyone's standing religion. Unless your kid is so dumb/closed-minded that he or she can't take in information about other religions without feeling the need to convert to them or something, all they'll be doing is learning. And that's not a bad thing.

Religious education that focuses only on faith and instilling it should be kept to religious schools (which should still have the above curriculum regardless of denomination, imo).

As someone who went to a Catholic high school, I can't speak for the schools for younger children but my school was actually pretty respectful of the fact that people chose the school often due to academic opportunities and not because they shared the faith. So the classes for religion (that were required, one every year) were still focused on Catholicism but were knowledge-based and not faith-based. The history of the bible, how people practice the faith, etc, nothing pushing people to actually become Catholic.

I have to agree with RL on the religious studies, and I actually find it a bit strange that both your child has to be interested in it and it has to cover 3+ religions for you to accept it, Jay. What if your child is in high school and has decided he wants to study one religion in particular so he takes a course in just that religion? Would you not allow him to? I guess I was raised with pretty much 100% freedom when it comes to my parents dictating what courses I would take so I just can't understand if you have an intelligent kid, telling him he couldn't take a course he wanted to take, haha.

I wouldn't be against having a Philosophy of Religion course instead though. I've taken both Theology and Philosophy of Religion, and they're very different things. Theology is from the inside; you imagine how people worship as a believer, and not from the outside. Philosophy is from different philosophers, some within religion and some outside it, applying logic and philosophical arguments to different parts of religion.

 

[Dakotah]

Out of interest, would you be offended if the school mandated another subject such as history which your child wasn't interested in? Or would the issue lie only with religious studies?

Schools currently mandate courses such as language studies (English and French), mathematics, science, athletics, history, sex education (grade 5 and above), and social studies, so no, I would not be offended if another secular topic was mandated (i.e. shop class). My issue is with organized religion alone.

I envision this scenario: my child would be a part of a non-traditional household, given that his or her parents would be a gay couple. In the course of learning about certain religions, my child would most likely learn of most religions' condemnation of homosexuals. He or she then could then think that all people of those religions hate gay people and my child could become frightened that people might harm myself or my boyfriend (or husband should we be married).

This is, of course, a hypothetical situation in my part, but this is sort of happening right now here in Ontario, and in the U.S., where children of gay couples are being told in school, by teachers and staff, that being gay is wrong.

So no, I would most certainly be offended if anyone were to mandate religious studies as part of my child's education. I would rather my child make up his or her mind whether it is a subject they wish to study, and only after I'm certain they are able to mentally comprehend that belief is not reflective of reality. Hence I think the course should only be offered as an optional class in high school and in post secondary schools (colleges and universities).

Religion belongs in the home and in church. Not in the classroom.

 

[Mana1]

I envision this scenario: my child would be a part of a non-traditional household, given that his or her parents would be a gay couple. In the course of learning about certain religions, my child would most likely learn of most religions' condemnation of homosexuals. He or she then could then think that all people of those religions hate gay people and my child could become frightened that people might harm myself or my boyfriend (or husband should we be married).

o_o;; Sorry but that's your job to teach your child otherwise. They're much more likely to think that people hate gay people from the TV or other news outlets than they are in a classroom. Believe it or not but gays aren't of that much importance in the study of religion - and most teachers would actively avoid such a controversial topic anyway.

Religion belongs in the home and in church. Not in the classroom.

Cooking belongs in a restaurant, not in a classroom. History belongs in the past, not in the classroom, etc.

Again, it's education not religious preaching. It is not an organised religion teaching it, in fact I know two Religious Education teachers personally and both of them are Atheist.

 

[Oryx]

Schools currently mandate courses such as language studies (English and French), mathematics, science, athletics, history, sex education (grade 5 and above), and social studies, so no, I would not be offended if another secular topic was mandated (i.e. shop class). My issue is with organized religion alone.

I envision this scenario: my child would be a part of a non-traditional household, given that his or her parents would be a gay couple. In the course of learning about certain religions, my child would most likely learn of most religions' condemnation of homosexuals. He or she then could then think that all people of those religions hate gay people and my child could become frightened that people might harm myself or my boyfriend (or husband should we be married).

This is, of course, a hypothetical situation in my part, but this is sort of happening right now here in Ontario, and in the U.S., where children of gay couples are being told in school, by teachers and staff, that being gay is wrong.

So no, I would most certainly be offended if anyone were to mandate religious studies as part of my child's education. I would rather my child make up his or her mind whether it is a subject they wish to study, and only after I'm certain they are able to mentally comprehend that belief is not reflective of reality. Hence I think the course should only be offered as an optional class in high school and in post secondary schools (colleges and universities).

Religion belongs in the home and in church. Not in the classroom.

However, people that have a working knowledge of the basics of religion are far better off than people who live in ignorance of it. For example, I know many people (some on PC even) that make claims that show they have no knowledge of how Catholicism actually works. Although I'm agnostic, I have enough background in Catholicism that I end up having to set them straight, because they weren't ever taught about religion and what it really says in doctrine.

In addition, I have to say that in all my education I haven't once had a teacher even mention gay people to a class. Or abortion for that matter, and all of these were long, in-depth Catholic-specific classes (not the kind that are being spoken about here, but the kind that gets deeply into theology so would be much more likely to bring up that issue). Think of it this way. The students would probably be studying at least Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and smaller religions such as Wicca. In only a year or two. In reality, when you look at religion from an overhead perspective and start from the basics, being against gay marriage is just a footnote in the overarching theology of Christians. Instead of that, I'm sure the class would instead focus on the New Testament, the early history of the believers when they were persecuted, some basic doctrinal things (how people become saints, where people go when they die, consubstantiation, etc), and then on to the next religion.

I also agree that it shouldn't be taught until later though, at the very earliest the beginning of middle school but preferably 7th-8th grade and above. Before that too many children are just too impressionable and a lot still believe that everything a teacher says is right just by the nature of them being a teacher.

 

[Dakotah]

o_o;; Sorry but that's your job to teach your child otherwise. They're much more likely to think that people hate gay people from the TV or other news outlets than they are in a classroom. Believe it or not but gays aren't of that much importance in the study of religion - and most teachers would actively avoid such a controversial topic anyway.

Have you SEEN some of the shows on TV lately? They're the most gay inclusive/friendly shows out there! So much so, all we hear about are religious groups whining and complaining that there are too many shows portraying gays in a positive way!

Again, it's education not religious preaching. It is not an organised religion teaching it, in fact I know two Religious Education teachers personally and both of them are Atheist.

Again, I want my child to determine for him or herself when they are ready to tackle that subject. I am an Atheist myself, and I have some very strong feelings about organized religion. I'll just leave it at that.

However, people that have a working knowledge of the basics of religion are far better off than people who live in ignorance of it. For example, I know many people (some on PC even) that make claims that show they have no knowledge of how Catholicism actually works. Although I'm agnostic, I have enough background in Catholicism that I end up having to set them straight, because they weren't ever taught about religion and what it really says in doctrine.

I'm not arguing that, though. I'm arguing that when it comes to religion, as it deals with faith and belief, it should be a subject offered to those who have an interest in it and not forced on them. It should be an elective course, not a mandatory one.

I also agree that it shouldn't be taught until later though, at the very earliest the beginning of middle school but preferably 7th-8th grade and above. Before that too many children are just too impressionable and a lot still believe that everything a teacher says is right just by the nature of them being a teacher.

Yes, after a child becomes a teenager or young adult. A child of 6 or 7 barely maintains knowledge of the math they learn in school, except when it comes to determining how much candy they have. Then they become like IRS auditors, strict and unforgiving.

 

[droomph]

Alright Jay I was taught Greek Gods last year. Was I particularly happy to learn about a fake religion? No. But I got over it, and I'm still a Christian, not some Olympia-worshipping freak. It's about learning their values, not worshipping it. I learned about hybris and Niobe and how that caused her to fall from glory, how you should love others, like in Narcissus, and how Zeus finds man disgusting and will destroy them one day.

So by the same note I think teaching different religions isn't going to affect any child in any way. The important word here is "teach". If it is "preached", like at a sermon, then obviously the child will become very influenced. But we're not preachy preaching, we're teachy teaching. We must make that distinction first.

And jsyk being gay is okay in 99% of religions, including Christianity. So yeah it's not something you should care about. And as Toujours said lots and lots of religions are skimmed over and there are never any debates other than Q&A time. Nonetheless it accomplishes what it was set out to do, which is to promote tolerance.

Though I also agree that it shouldn't be taught until middle school. Little children aren't going to have to worry about religion and the world issues yet - that's why they're so innocent, and we should hold on to their unbiased opinions until they start forming their own and start thinking for themselves, at around adolescence. We should provide them with critical information of the world in an unbiased way at this point so they don't grow up to be racist.

 

[Dakotah]

Alright Jay I was taught Greek Gods last year. Was I particularly happy to learn about a fake religion? No. But I got over it, and I'm still a Christian, not some Olympia-worshipping freak. It's about learning their values, not worshipping it. I learned about hybris and Niobe and how that caused her to fall from glory, how you should love others, like in Narcissus, and how Zeus finds man disgusting and will destroy them one day.

I just bolded the part in your statement that's concerning. By what basis do you determine which religion is a "fake" one? I guarantee you, at the time, it was just as real and just as widely practised as Christianity is today. Would you like to take a shot also at the Norwegians too for having dared worshipped Odin and Thor and the other Norse gods? What about Muslims today, are they practising a "fake" religion also?

While you've demonstrated you learned much during your religious studies, by your comments, you've also demonstrated that you hold other religions in contempt, and are more then willing to express that contempt.

Which leads me to ask, just what is it that you were learning when you took religious studies? It certainly wasn't tolerance.

This is why I would not want my child to attend such a class. Too many people willing to condemn others for practising the wrong religion, or for not practising any religion at all.