Teach Religion 101 in schools?

[StrangeSox]

i wouldn't be against something like this, but i think it would be difficult in practice. to me the best approach would not be religion, per se, but a discussion of faith and spirituality. the discussion would have to include all religions and all belief systems, imo, including atheism and agnosticism.

 

unfortunately i doubt it could be pulled off. is a christian teacher going to feel comfortable relating the tenets of the koran? would a muslim be comfortable explaining a belief system that does not include a higher power? i doubt it.

 

most often i think the class would be colored by the teacher's individual views and that's dangerous.

 

That's basically my reservations about it, too. There's way too much room for bias from the teacher.

 

Elective, yes. Mandatory, no.

[vandy125]

That's basically my reservations about it, too. There's way too much room for bias from the teacher.

 

Elective, yes. Mandatory, no.

 

Maybe this is a poor analogy (you can point that out to me later ), but isn't there a lot of room for bias for any type of social science? We trust our teachers to be able to do other things correctly with some oversight, why not this? At what point are you drawing the line and saying "too much".

[StrangeSox]

Maybe this is a poor analogy (you can point that out to me later ), but isn't there a lot of room for bias for any type of social science? We trust our teachers to be able to do other things correctly with some oversight, why not this? At what point are you drawing the line and saying "too much".

 

I draw the line at religion in public schools.

[Rex Kickass]

I totally support the concept of a required comparative study of world religion in secondary education. Curriculum would need to be closely monitored, though.

 

So many things that shape our world's history, and current events have everything to do with the understanding or misunderstanding of religion.

[vandy125]

I draw the line at religion in public schools.

 

So, even a discussion about different religions is off-limits? It is no surprise to me that people don't have any reasons or thoughts behind what they believe and just blindly state they believe A, B, and C. We never teach them to look at what they believe and what others believe.

 

There just seems to be a blind personal belief system that is being taught. Most students don't know about any other way of thinking or any other options. They are not being allowed to form opinions. If you ask questions about their beliefs, it turns into "How dare you question my beliefs?" when you may just be asking for information as to why they think something. Its the default response to a question that you have not thought deeply about.

[mr_genius]

i wouldn't be against something like this, but i think it would be difficult in practice. to me the best approach would not be religion, per se, but a discussion of faith and spirituality. the discussion would have to include all religions and all belief systems, imo, including atheism and agnosticism.

 

unfortunately i doubt it could be pulled off. is a christian teacher going to feel comfortable relating the tenets of the koran? would a muslim be comfortable explaining a belief system that does not include a higher power? i doubt it.

 

most often i think the class would be colored by the teacher's individual views and that's dangerous.

 

yea, it would be more trouble than it's worth. our public schools have enough problems teaching kids, don't need to throw divisive religious discussions into the mix. how about spending additional resources making sure high school kids can actually solve an equation that would be considered fairly simple to a student in other first world countries. we are so far behind in math and science i would rather see more math instruction over a class about allah, or jesus, or whoever.

[StrangeSox]

So, even a discussion about different religions is off-limits? It is no surprise to me that people don't have any reasons or thoughts behind what they believe and just blindly state they believe A, B, and C. We never teach them to look at what they believe and what others believe.

 

There just seems to be a blind personal belief system that is being taught. Most students don't know about any other way of thinking or any other options. They are not being allowed to form opinions. If you ask questions about their beliefs, it turns into "How dare you question my beliefs?" when you may just be asking for information as to why they think something. Its the default response to a question that you have not thought deeply about.

 

I don't think that it fits into the mandatory curriculum. Maybe as a smaller part of a history or social studies class. As an elective, I think it would be great.

 

Critical thinking and rational thought should be covered in other courses. I don't see how adding in a comparative religion class (and taking out something else to make room) would be a net gain.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I totally support the concept of a required comparative study of world religion in secondary education. Curriculum would need to be closely monitored, though.

 

So many things that shape our world's history, and current events have everything to do with the understanding or misunderstanding of religion.

 

I wouldn't get up in arms over it but I'd rather see it be an elective. I agree with you point about religion being a motivator of world history, but I see a class like this as being above and beyond the core standards and more like an AP-level course. Making it elective also gets around most of the complaining about forced exposure to any sort of religious message that would invariable arise if it was compulsory.

[StrangeSox]

yea, it would be more trouble than it's worth. our public schools have enough problems teaching kids, don't need to throw divisive religious discussions into the mix. how about spending additional resources making sure high school kids can actually solve an equation that would be considered fairly simple to a student in other first world countries. we are so far behind in math and science i would rather see more math instruction over a class about allah, or jesus, or whoever.

 

 

Exactly. Like I said before, if 15% of students can't name at least one major world religion, we have much, much bigger problems than a comparative religions class.

[Rex Kickass]

yea, it would be more trouble than it's worth. our public schools have enough problems teaching kids, don't need to throw divisive religious discussions into the mix. how about spending additional resources making sure high school kids can actually solve an equation that would be considered fairly simple to a student in other first world countries. we are so far behind in math and science i would rather see more math instruction over a class about allah, or jesus, or whoever.

Logic H Science! The two subjects are not mutually exclusive. Other countries succeed educationally because they teach students to think critically. I think we forget that balance sometimes.

[FlaSoxxJim]

unfortunately i doubt it could be pulled off. is a christian teacher going to feel comfortable relating the tenets of the koran? would a muslim be comfortable explaining a belief system that does not include a higher power? i doubt it.

 

My freshman theology teacher did an amazing job teaching the comparative religion class, completely untainted by her on RC denomination. Certainly it would depend on the individual teacher, but for me the take-home message at the end of the year was how much the various world religions have in common, not how much they differ.

 

I would sit through that entire class again just for fun in a heartbeat.

[mr_genius]

Logic H Science! The two subjects are not mutually exclusive. Other countries succeed educationally because they teach students to think critically. I think we forget that balance sometimes.

 

i was thinking more along the lines of preparing students for engineering or mathematical sciences. religion class isn't going to do anything for that.

 

of course, critical thinking is a key to succeeding in almost anything.

[Soxy]

I took Comparitive Religion in college and it was easily in the top 5 classes I've taken. I feel like I'm much better at understanding a lot of the conflicts and the religious underpinnings to them. I wish that type of class had been offered in high school--but considering most of our history/social sciences teachers there were also coaches (and hired more for the coaching), I don't know how effective they would have been. But I think it would be great to have that option.

 

My professor was also amazing, he is Hindu but did a great job covering (fairly) 4 of the Big 5 (we didn't need to go over Christianity because that was covered in the required theology and bible classes).

[vandy125]

i was thinking more along the lines of preparing students for engineering or mathematical sciences. religion class isn't going to do anything for that.

 

of course, critical thinking is a key to succeeding in almost anything.

 

I agree that critical thinking is important, but I think that it is also important that we give our students some understanding as to why people behave the way they do. Help them to understand someone else's motivation. This is particularly important at this point in time with the conflicts that are going on. If we could listen and understand another's point of view, that would help out immensely.

 

Critical thinking does not help resolve conflicts if you cannot understand another's starting point.

[thedoctor]

My freshman theology teacher did an amazing job teaching the comparative religion class, completely untainted by her on RC denomination. Certainly it would depend on the individual teacher, but for me the take-home message at the end of the year was how much the various world religions have in common, not how much they differ.

 

I would sit through that entire class again just for fun in a heartbeat.

 

yeah, there's no doubt it would be more dependent on the individual teacher's personality. it can be done, i suppose, and done well.

 

i just have a picture in my mind of pat robertson standing in front of the class going "today, we're going to talk about islam."

[knightni]

They can introduce religions as historical and sociological subjects.

 

Let the kids decide for themselves.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

I had social studies from 5th - 8th but I don't recall any coverage of religions. Then again I went to a Catholic school so I am not sure if they would have - but it was covered to some degree when I was in high school (again a Catholic school).

 

Me too. I recall other religions being touched on briefly in junior high, but I definitely had a World Religions class in high school that was very interesting. Good stuff. And even though it was a Catholic high school, I recall no bias. Having a very good, respectful teacher was probably a plus.

[vandy125]

Me too. I recall other religions being touched on briefly in junior high, but I definitely had a World Religions class in high school that was very interesting. Good stuff. And even though it was a Catholic high school, I recall no bias. Having a very good, respectful teacher was probably a plus.

 

I am curious if anyone has experienced the opposite. Taking a world religion class where the teacher was very bias, and it led to issues. We have heard 2 accounts from the other side, and I am wondering if this teacher's bias that we should fear so much is as prevalent as we are led to believe?

[santo=dorf]

None.

 

Kids learning about religion in public schools does nothing for our society. The kids should spend another hour with math or grammar. It's more embarrasing to see people not know the difference between "they're," "there," and "their." People should also take a look at the video of Verizon not knowing the difference between .02 cents and .02 dollars.

 

I'm betting those percentages are a lot greater than 15.

Edited March 19, 2007 by santo=dorf

[Texsox]

Look around at all the religious references we have around us. In God We Trust, Our Pledge of Allegiance, to name two. So we want our children to be ignorant of the basis of those tenants? How many wars around us are started and fought, and re fought, because of religion? Yet, we want our children ignorant of those religions. Billions of people around the world study these systems of beliefs and it guides their governments, economies, and values. Yet, we want our children ignorant of these religions. I don't see the advantage.

 

Education should prepare our children to live in this world, it should help perpetuate our position as a major superpower and economic powerhouse. Wishing ignorance on our children to belief systems that most of the world understands, dare I even say embrace, does not help them in any way except shield them from the religious reality of the rest of the world.

 

And don't worry about a teacher evangelizing and corrupting your children by making them religious, there are enough less talented teachers that will turn your kids away from religion.

 

In my kid's Sophomore Literature class they studied the Old Testament. The assignments on those works were about the same as for any other work of literature. Sadly, they used the King James version because there are no publishing royalties to pay, making that translation available for a couple dollars instead of using an easier to read translation. (Same reason the Gideons and Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints give those away) And just like a counseled by kids as they struggled through an unreadable translation of Beuwolf, I had them read an alternative translation. Seemed better than just doing their homework for them.

[santo=dorf]

How about we practice what we preach and seperate state from religion?

 

I don't think not paying attention to something is "ignorant," and there are more important things students should learn in school other than religion.

[Texsox]

How about we practice what we preach and seperate state from religion?

 

I don't think not paying attention to something is "ignorant," and there are more important things students should learn in school other than religion.

 

You are correct if religion didn't have an impact on how people behave in the rest of the world. Social Studies knowledge is missing a lot when religion is dropped.

 

The state would not be creating or mandating one religion. Learning about religion is like learning about laws, economics, or any other subject. Learning about Islam, for example is far different than converting to Islam. Understanding other cultures and religions is important in a global economy. While the rest of the world understands that, we are sticking our heads in the sand and believing that understanding the world's religion isn't important. How can someone understand world events without understanding the underlying belief systems of the countries that are involved?

 

This isn't about converting, it's about studying something that effects the vast majority of humans on this planet.

[dasox24]

I think an elective world religion class would be a perfectly appropriate offering within the framework of any public school social studies program.

 

Bible as literature would be less appropriate at the K-12 public school level and I think you could take issue with federal funds going toward any course offering that seems to give a preferential treatment to the written works of a single religion, but it would bean interesting elective offering from a college literature department.

I agree completely. I took a World Religions class in high school, and it gave me so much more of an understanding and respect for people of other religions. I think a class would do wonders for some people, like one of my friends who told me the other week that I was going to hell along with anyone who didn't believe in his religion. I then asked if Gandhi was in hell right now even with all the good things he did, and he responded with a firm "Yes," which I found discouraging that someone would believe that just b/c Gandhi was Hindu.

[southsider2k5]

How about we practice what we preach and seperate state from religion?

 

I don't think not paying attention to something is "ignorant," and there are more important things students should learn in school other than religion.

 

Ignorance is a lack of knowledge, or a willful lack of desire to improve the efficiency, merit, effectiveness or usefulness of one's actions. Ignorance is also a "state of being ignorant" or unaware (not knowing).

 

Nope, that is pretty much exactly what it is.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorance

[Texsox]

I think some people are confusing trying to convert someone or recruiting to studying about something. The best analogies I can think of is a government class that discusses the GOP and Dem parties. The history, key figures, important events, philosophies, etc. Another would be studying the five branches of the military. One can talk about them without recruiting. Again, the history, key figures, etc. The same is done with world religions.

 

Try and discuss history without mentioning religion. Explain to me the Six Day War without mentioning religion. Or the Munich Olympic tragedy. Slavery.

 

 

How about we practice what we preach and seperate state from religion?

 

I don't think not paying attention to something is "ignorant," and there are more important things students should learn in school other than religion.

 

Like spelling.