Please God - No! Not Intelligent Design nor Creativism, both without any basis and both refuting all we discover in science. Evolution should be taught only as a plausible theory and should be shown to be standing on very little evidence at the moment.

As somebody once said - 'we know nothing' - so let's wait and teach and inform our children about human conscience and consciousness to shape their future until we know more.

Sure. So are the teachings of Joseph Smith (getting magic goggles and golden plates from an angel...), any reincarnation stories or in fact ALL RELIGIONS.

There is no such thing as a scientifically correct religion. That's the whole point of believing - otherwise you'd simply know for a fact.

The only difference is that creationists are pretty much the ONLY religious people who believe they do need to make their religion scientifically plausible. I think all kids SHOULD learn about this movement and learn how to ask the right questions...

Example:

Show kids this:


And then ask them how God designed the pineapple or the potatoe...

[QUOTE=Treverus;1318905]Sure. So are the teachings of Joseph Smith (getting magic goggles and golden plates from an angel...), any reincarnation stories or in fact ALL RELIGIONS.

There is no such thing as a scientifically correct religion. That's the whole point of believing - otherwise you'd simply know for a fact.

The only difference is that creationists are pretty much the ONLY religious people who believe they do need to make their religion scientifically plausible. I think all kids SHOULD learn about this movement and learn how to ask the right questions...




I'm not quite sure if you are serious or not. I certainly didn't say that there exists a scientifically correct religion. I said that one day we'll have a much better picture of how everything has evolved. Bringing bananas as an example of God's genius is also somewhat far-fetched, they aren't much good to Eskimos! I'm sure it was meant as a joke.

Obviously if you believe something - such as Smith's magic goggles - then it is of a personal value. But I don't believe it (which doesn't mean it's not true) but I don't want our children growing up immersed in a web of confusion as I was, thanks to religion and its tentacles.

Let's stick to teaching children what can be shown to be valid and allow a substantial leeway into the mysteries of the human mind. Such excursions are far more sensible than the false promises expounded by 'God's Chosen'.

Both of our children have gone through the public school system here. We really don't have any problem teaching the concepts of the various religions in school at an appropriate age. However, we found that the only religions presented to our children were Catholicism and Protestant. Both our children had a visit from the local priest and local pastor in their classroom to talk about the religion while in grade school.

I was quite peturbed when our son came home and told me that the priest had asked the kids to raise their hands if they had "had the water". Then he said those that have are going "Up" and those who haven't are going "down". This was quite confusing to our son who, at the time, didn't even know what the water was.....

I believe it is impossible to teach students an understanding of world history without teaching the basic contexts of religions and how they have impacted the development of the modern world. However, I would sure like to see it expanded to include more religions than just those offered at the churches in our various villages and to be taught in a non-judgemental manner.

Well, kind of: I think the religion lessons at school should not only teach certain values as religious tolerance - it should also give them the skills to spot the religious nutters of the more dangerous kinds and learn to avoid them and discuss where tolerance should stop. Sects and their dangers were a major topic in my classes.

I actually believe this banana video to be genuine: Kirk Cameron seems to not only really believe this bizarrly stupid stuff - he is doing everything to get it into schools. And he even throws in Hitler! (for me, that's where tolerance needs to stop - you are free to believe whatever you want, but as soon as you try to get your religion into my science book, I'll hit you with it... ) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_294349.html

Hi,

All I meant with my post was that articles of faith such as Intelligent Design and Creationism should be covered in religious studies classes only. They should NOT be taught in science lessons.

The theory of evolution on the other hand is based on many decades of painstaking scientific research and it is very important that this IS presented in science lessons.

Cheers,
Nick

About "Evolution should be taught only as a plausible theory and should be shown to be standing on very little evidence at the moment. "

Where do you get the "very little evidence" point from?

Are you talking about one of;

• natural selection,
• genetic drift
• mutation
• gene flow

or all of them?

This is not about evolution, it's about whether we should teach religion in primary schools.

Dakota: really ? If we all love compared religion...then leave it for secondary school, or even college. It's NOT for a 7 year old.

Agreed. And the purpose of my post was to point out that if religion is taught schools, things like creationism should be a part of those classes and kept firmly out of the science labs. I had no intention of having a debate about creationism vs. evolution.

Cheers,
Nick

Yes, I got your point, it was very clear. I just meant to say the overall direction of the thread was veering towards evolution, creationism usw, while the topic was religion or not. Nonetheless I agree: if you're going to talk about creationism, intelligent design et al it should be restricted to Sunday School.

Our children won't be doing Catholic or Protestant religious instruction (which are the only two types of 'caté' on offer) as we didn't feel comfortable with the idea of some random zealot coming into the classroom during school time and presenting their own beliefs as the 'truth'.

In the Canton of Fribourg, public primary schools teach something called Enbiro which is basically a study of the history of the major world religions. It's taught as part of the syllabus by the classroom teachers and even though there's still an emphasis on different strands of Christianity, at least there's an acknowledgement that other forms of belief exist.

In BL, the RE teachers are not allowed to teach about conversion, or how to be converted. I know because one of my friends is such a teacher.

For us it isn't so much a concern that the kids would end up being 'converted', just that it seems inappropriate for public schools to allow untrained people to come in during school time to present their own interpretation of the Bible etc. As far as I know, the religion teachers don't follow a particular syllabus and so they basically make it up as they go along - perhaps they're knowledgeable about the history of their religion but they may not be and they almost certainly don't present any kind of comparative perspective.

You should keep in mind, tool that according to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church evolution is a fact. They believe that Evolution is a process inside God's creation, which was installed by God.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

As the same views are shared by most protestant churches in Europe the chance that children would be taught Intelligent Design is rather small. Of course its possible that the Religion teacher does not understand anything about science and thus teaches things that are wrong or only gives the story of the Bible. But teaching such things as Intelligent Design is not sanctioned by any major church in Switzerland.

By the way, both Creationism and Intelligent Design are rather an American thing and generally only Fundamentalists (i.e. people who believe that anything written in the bible has to be understood literally) will insist on them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design#Europe

In the German Wikipedia the only German group mentioned who support Intelligent Design are Jehovah's Witnesses
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_Design#Europa

I would love to see religion abolished from the schools; religion as a belief has no place in schools.

This doesn't mean to abolish the cultural understanding of religions; in fact, the proposal of subbing with philosophy should actually mean history of religions, with perhaps a bit of a focus on the judeo-christian traditions; I realize that the bible stories are part of our culture and history, and without them it is difficult to make sense of world history, art history, philosophy, even geography and psychology.

I guess I mean to say that we should teach comparative religions.

Any faith based teaching belongs home.

Again, in BL at least, the teachers must be trained, and must teach the approved interpretation. The local priest/pastor is the person who decides what the approved interpretation is. His bosses also have to approve what he approves.

As I understand it, the purpose of the lessons is to give the kids a grounding in a faith they're already supposed to have. It isn't education about religion, it's religious instruction. The classes are not mandatory, so I really don't see what the fuss is about.

The objection that I have is that there is supposedly a separation between Church and State and it seems odd that religious instruction is given a place in the public school system. Yes, it is possible to opt out and that's what we've chosen to do, but I still have an issue with the fact that the teaching occurs during school time on the taxpayers dime.

My husband and I were wondering about the role of religion in public schools and just found this thread. Like the rest of you, I have many thoughts on the subject. ;p

I believe religion must be taught in schools. Taught in terms of education. Not practiced (sidenote: I'm referring to teacher-led practice as opposed to a student choosing to practice by praying in school, for instance).

You simply cannot effectively teach students and be ignorant on religions and unwilling to discuss them in schools. A comment earlier about kids not challenging religion is simply not true. They do and it's exactly why you can't ignore religion in the educational context of a school. In the UK, for instance, the Muslim population has surged significantly. Students are indeed challenging teachers on evolution, which is a mandated part of the curriculum.

Religion is already in schools. It's a part of who someone is and they bring this belief system with them to the desk. It doesn't go into hiding during lessons and must be acknowledged and discussed as needed to ensure that the curriculum is taught.

Simple......unless you are a religious affiliated institution, religion should not be a part of public schools. Not a knock on religion or faith, but people should not be forced to learn about beliefs that they do not share.

Those challenges come from being taught non-sensical drivel at home by unlearned parents who prefer to believe that their mums sprang from the rib of Adam, because genetic mutation is too hard to comprehend.

But that belief system doesn't have to be coddled and taught to. It deserves to be enlightend and contrasted with other beliefs; to be shown that there are other faiths in the world that are equally as beautiful... or equally as ridiculous.

Teaching religion in school has value. Teaching in a religious context and validating or forcing conformity to a religion is what I don't agree with.