![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
4thofelevenSo apparently the Humanist Society has developed a curriculum for a humanist alternative to religious instruction classes in Victorian primary schools. Now my first thought was that non-religious religious instruction struck me as a pretty strange idea, but after giving it a little bit of thought, I think it’s not that bad a proposal to teach basic secular ethics in schools – on an opt-in basis, of course.
The ministry in charge of the Christian religious instruction isn’t pleased, though. Their chief executive has said that “she did not think humanism fell under ‘the relevant legislation to be classified as a faith-based religion in religious instruction in the way that Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism’”
Well, maybe not – but once you’re allowing monotheism, polytheism, and a religion that teaches that the gods are a false path to enlightenment, maybe religious instruction is broad enough now to let some secular ethics into the room as well. And if not – well, maybe it’s time to start reconsidering if religious instruction should have a place in public schools.
At the very least, surely Access Ministries can see that humanist philosophy class would make a more logical alternative to Christian religious instruction than my primary school’s idea of offering non-Christians an extra half hour of Phys. Ed. instead? Why, yes, I did end up picking RE when given that choice; I don’t think the poor teacher knew what to do with me. In my defence, I wasn’t trying to be offensive – I mean, I was nine years old, raised in a secular household. How was I supposed to know that people considered Christianity something more than a rather dull mythology? Besides, Aslan and Bacchus hang out together in Narnia; why wouldn’t Osiris and Jesus know each other too?
The ministry in charge of the Christian religious instruction isn’t pleased, though. Their chief executive has said that “she did not think humanism fell under ‘the relevant legislation to be classified as a faith-based religion in religious instruction in the way that Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism’”
Well, maybe not – but once you’re allowing monotheism, polytheism, and a religion that teaches that the gods are a false path to enlightenment, maybe religious instruction is broad enough now to let some secular ethics into the room as well. And if not – well, maybe it’s time to start reconsidering if religious instruction should have a place in public schools.
At the very least, surely Access Ministries can see that humanist philosophy class would make a more logical alternative to Christian religious instruction than my primary school’s idea of offering non-Christians an extra half hour of Phys. Ed. instead? Why, yes, I did end up picking RE when given that choice; I don’t think the poor teacher knew what to do with me. In my defence, I wasn’t trying to be offensive – I mean, I was nine years old, raised in a secular household. How was I supposed to know that people considered Christianity something more than a rather dull mythology? Besides, Aslan and Bacchus hang out together in Narnia; why wouldn’t Osiris and Jesus know each other too?
no subject
on 2008-12-15 08:10 pm (UTC)This takes on a pretty funny cast if you don't have Australian provinces in mind, too. For a couple seconds, I was going, "Wait, they have schools recreating the 19th century in Australia? Or are they time-traveling?"