Religion and schools...

[Catharsis.]

I can't find a half-decent article on it, I'm afraid, but I wanted to see what people thought of the controversy regarding religious orders in schools.

Some other countries have their own examples, but the case in Ireland is that most, if not all, public primary schools are Roman Catholic. Recently, some "Educate Together" schools have been established, which are comprehensive, but they are few and far between. They didn't exist when I went to primary school, so I went to a Catholic school. I currently attend a Catholic secondary school, which is also in the public school system, but that's more to do with academic standards than religion.

That wasn't a problem for me, as I come from a Catholic background, though I don't consider myself religious anymore, but the year I left the school (also the year I was confirmed), half of the people in my class weren't Catholic.

The question I'm asking here is, do you think schools should still be allowed, in this day and age, to identify as being a certain religion? Personally, I don't think it's right for schools in the public system to do so, especially when, depending on what catchment area they're in, students may have to go to a certain school, no matter what their religion. However, if parents want their children to be educated in a Roman Catholic school, they should be able to send them to one if they so wish. Any opinions?

[CorrieUSMC]

In public schools, I don't think Religion should play any part in it. Separation of Church & State. Why should my tax dollars go to a school system that runs on beliefs I don't believe in? Why should my Kids have to adhere to a Religious rules and such, or if they are another religion they can not wear their religious items. Private schools? They can say prayers to God all day they want.

[Adam the Fish]

Religion has shaped, and continues to shape (both positively and negatively) our world and societies across the globe.
More than ever, with multiculturalism growing, tolerance of others is vitally important.
For these reasons, religion - whatever beliefs individuals might hold about it and its effects - is too important not to teach in schools.

However, that in no way means that schools should identify as a religion or even revolve in any manner around it outside of Religious Education.

The experience of, for example, going to Church cannot be recreated in a classroom and perhaps the experience would be lost should schools no longer identify as a certain religion.
Nevertheless, I do not believe that schools should identify as a religion. They are there to educate.
That means that - like absolutely everything else - information should be presented in an objective manner. Said information should have fact behind it. Fact is something with corroborated, physical evidence.
It is a fact that many people internationally are Christians. It is not a fact that the Christian God exists.

Schools - and I think particularly primary schools, where pupils are inclined to pretty blindly believe their teachers (and therefore be indoctrinated by any non-objective teaching) - exist to give the facts, and let pupils learn to think for themselves. They are not to teach children what to think.

In any case, it can lead to awkward situations.
If a teacher in a Christian school blurts out, "Ohy God!", then that teacher either has to say "I'm a hypocritical sinner, children, and say things you're not allowed to," or blatantly lie. Neither are particularly favourable.

Especially with growing multiculturalism, schools need to cater for all and be objective, not force ideas upon children who are yet incapable of much free-thinking.
In any case, from my experience, it doesn't work anyway. Nearly everyone I know who went to a Christian school is every bit as atheist or agnostic as everyone else in the class, if not more sceptical and bitter.

I'll be interested to see other responses...

[Ennui.]

I think they should be separate. There's no need to teach religion in a public school. I go there to learn my basics like math, science, social studies, and English. If I wanted to learn religion, I'd have had my parents enroll me in a private Catholic school. If a private school wants to identify as a religion they can do it, and then their parents will be able to send them there if they want them to learn it. I don't want to be forced to learn something that I'm unsure I believe in myself, I want to believe my own opinions. If my parents wanted me to learn it, they'd have sent me to a Catholic school.

[Coffee.]

I think schools can exist that are religiously based but they shouldn't run on public funds. However, Ireland is a Catholic country, isn't it? The United States is a secular country (contrary to what some people like to whine about during Christmas. ) so it would be ridiculous to have public money going to religious schools (although religious insititutions are not taxed, which I do not understand in the least bit.). But in a country that is an actual Catholic country, it might be different.

[Catharsis.]

Originally Posted by Coexist.

I think schools can exist that are religiously based but they shouldn't run on public funds. However, Ireland is a Catholic country, isn't it? The United States is a secular country (contrary to what some people like to whine about during Christmas. ) so it would be ridiculous to have public money going to religious schools (although religious insititutions are not taxed, which I do not understand in the least bit.). But in a country that is an actual Catholic country, it might be different.

Careful now. I'd say given recent events involving the Catholic Church in Ireland, as well as the fact that due to our dodgy welfare system and overly-lenient immigration laws economic expansion during the Celtic Tiger, we now have a range of different nationalities amongst the population of this island, plenty of people would beg to differ.

[NonIndigenous]

Schools are about education.

Churches, mosques, synagogues, Aztec temples and pyramids are about religion.

[Yours Truly]

Geez, Gareth.. I think we're on the same wave-length here, haha!

I was raised in a Roman Catholic school as well, however it was a private school.. Not public! I'm totally against private schools getting government funding.. That's ridiculous. -- There are some people in America who are mad that public schools aren't affiliated with any specific religion (for the most part).. And some say you get criticized if you show any outward signs of whatever religion you practice, in a public school.. however that was never the case at any of the public schools I went to after I left the private one I grew up at (because of bullying.. Ha! "We accept everyone! Treat others the way you would want to be treated!" -- bullshit. )

I don't consider myself religious anymore either, and neither do half the people I went to the catholic school with.

(Side Note: I would have lost my mind if most public schools here were affiliated with the Catholic Church, so props to you for not completely losing it! )

Do I think they should still be allowed to identify as being a certain religion? I think they should be allowed to, sure! But they shouldn't be recieving any government funding, and they shouldn't identify as a public school.. And if they do identify as a public school and recieve government funding, there should be other options school-wise for kids in the same district to go to, so they don't have to be put in a religious setting if they don't want to, or their parents don't want them to be. No one should be forced into learning about/practicing a religion they don't whole-heartidly believe in. Bottom line.

It's one thing to offer a religion course, or even to require a world-religions class to be taken to graduate or whatever, to have that educational portion.. But as for the affiliation with one specific religion? I don't think it's a good idea. It's just grounds for discrimination against people who don't identify with that specific religion, and a waste of time for those people as well who are forced to go there when there are no other options school-wise.

I don't know, just my thoughts. (:

[Age of Ignorance]

The first thing I'd like to personally address is the fact that, at least in my country, secularism applies only to the daily occurrences in Parliament, the requirements to be elected, and the oppression of certain religious orders. The Constitution of the Commonwealth quite clearly states:

"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth." (Section 116)

I'd also like to point out that, as far as I can tell, the "secularism" of the United States also applies in the same or similar fashion: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (1st Amendment)

I think it's quite obvious then that, in Australia and the United States, contrary to the beliefs of many, "separation of church and state" is not an argument that can be relied upon in discourse of this debate.

With respect to my own personal opinion, I do not believe that religious exercises should be taught or practiced in public schools at all. I do not believe that public schools should be able to affiliate with a specific religious order and I believe that any student, regardless of their religious affiliation, should be welcomed into the public school system. I do, however, believe it is a private educational organisation's right to affiliate with whatever religious order they feel; they are, afterall, privately owned and operated separately from public institutions.

[Age of Ignorance]

The first thing I'd like to personally address is the fact that, at least in my country, secularism applies only to the daily occurrences in Parliament, the requirements to be elected, and the oppression of certain religious orders. The Constitution of the Commonwealth quite clearly states:

"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth." (Section 116)

I'd also like to point out that, as far as I can tell, the "secularism" of the United States also applies in the same or similar fashion: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (1st Amendment)

I think it's quite obvious then that, in Australia and the United States, contrary to the beliefs of many, "separation of church and state" is not an argument that can be relied upon in discourse of this debate.

With respect to my own personal opinion, I do not believe that religious exercises should be taught or practiced in public schools at all. I do not believe that public schools should be able to affiliate with a specific religious order and I believe that any student, regardless of their religious affiliation, should be welcomed into the public school system. That's simply because I believe that public institutions should not have any bias whatsoever, and any bias would certainly amount to discrimination by the State (who, personally, ought to protect and welcome all). I do, however, believe it is a private educational organisation's right to affiliate with whatever religious order they feel; they are, afterall, privately owned and operated separately from public institutions.