|
Post by Pem on Sept 2, 2008 12:25:31 GMT -7
Swedish government - it’s illegal for schools to teach religious doctrine as if it were true. The title explains it all, I wonder if similar laws will ever be passed elsewhere in the world? Source: frethink.com/?p=79
|
|
|
Post by electroshock on Sept 3, 2008 2:15:58 GMT -7
This an interesting step toward the world of "1984". soon, in all countries, they will begin employing it, until the government has direct control over what is and what isn't taught to the youth.
on a more serious note, this is interesting, because not only has it applied in public religious schools, but also private, in which the government has no direct control. in my honest opinion, i think it's a load of dingo's kidneys. the government can't tell you what to believe in.
i also think the wording sounds odd "can't teach it as if it were true". how else are you supposed to teach it? that'd be comparable to a biology teacher saying "these are animal cells, but they really don't exist." how are you supposed to teach something as if it were untrue?
|
|
|
Post by Pem on Sept 4, 2008 15:37:04 GMT -7
Actually it is quite the opposite, I would say, we are moving away from the times when religion and state were inseparable. I say this in the manner that the only reason that religion is taught in schools is because of huge domination by the church for many years.
You also need to understand that private schools are still bound by government regulations, a private school that teaches that unicorns can be found off the coast of California would not be very good for students. The government in this case is just ensuring that children receive unbiased education that they can be critical about. It is well known that children are very impressionable.
As for teaching something that is untrue, why is it difficult? Children are taught that Santa Claus brings presents, the tooth fairy will leave money for lost teeth, and many other things that we grow out of. To me personally I grew out of God when I got older. Schools need to be teaching things that are well grounded not just things that they would like to teach.
|
|
|
Post by electroshock on Sept 5, 2008 13:36:09 GMT -7
Not teaching something that is untrue, teaching it LIKE it wasn't true. Are you going to tell your children "look, this is the tooth fairy. s/he leaves money under your pillow for your old teeth, but s/he isn't actually real."
I see this as a merging of church and state, they fought internally, and state won. state now controls church, as apposed to just a switch in power.
|
|
|
Post by Pem on Sept 5, 2008 14:26:51 GMT -7
No the Church is separate from state, however like every thing else it must abide by the rules of the state, it just doesn't have the power to make it's own rules though the state anymore. As for you're teaching statement I'm not sure I follow 100% what you are trying to say. In the face of the secular world, there is no evidence for any of those things I mention nor is there for God, being that religion is all about those things. That is why it is not taught as being true as there is no evidence supporting such a notion.
|
|
|
Post by millis on Sept 8, 2008 12:49:57 GMT -7
wow, i missed a lot when i forgot to come here... Uhh, my opinion is that religion shouldn't be taught in school as fact. I dont consider there to be enough proof other than the wide variety of different religions out there that there even is such a thing as god, and children are, as pem said, impressionable. If taught it like it is true, they may take it as true. When really it should be the child that decides, when they are old enough, what they believe in.
I think what electroshock is trying to say is that it could be hard to teach it like it isnt fact, though its quite easy to do such a thing. They did it in biology, where i went to school, described the electron transfer chain in motochondrian membranes as a theory, which is all it is, as they're still quite unsure if the idea is fact. You could do that with religion by starting each explaination with "There are people who believe that such and such, but others think otherwise."
|
|
Light
Inquisitor
Posts: 59
|
Post by Light on Oct 15, 2008 19:38:15 GMT -7
Wow. I'm late to the party, but I just have to give my opinion on this little number. I'm all for separation of church and state, and it's great that they made it illegal in public schools, but illegalization in private schools is going too far. The ability to teach however their religion says to teach is the very reason many private schools exist. My own religious views aside, I believe this is bad news for Sweden.
|
|
|
Post by Pem on Oct 15, 2008 19:47:29 GMT -7
Not all private schools are religious mind you, and the law only says you cannot teach it as true. You would instead teach it as a non-scientific theory about life. It's when you teach anything as true and unquestionable that it becomes indoctrination. Sweden wants to raise a generation of critical thinking people who have not had ideas forced upon them as truth. That is why I support them in their move.
|
|
|
Post by dallen9 on Feb 24, 2009 17:51:05 GMT -7
First of all The Question is Should They teach Beliefs in an Educational environment? And if So, should they state it as in a true standing? Believe it Or not Everything Taught is In a truthful standing, and so to say you can not Teach religion in a truthful standing Violates Religious freedom. So Pem His Point is they've Violated Religious Belief is that not what they've done?
|
|
|
Post by electroshock on Feb 27, 2009 22:37:51 GMT -7
Well, mustn't you take all facts a belief? take Math as an example. In math you cannot prove that 1+1=2, because what are "1", "+", "=", and "2" are all vague ideas that cannot be specifically defined. You must believe that 1+1=2 in order to continue your expanding on simple operations. All of mathematics falls to pieces if 1+1≠2.
|
|
|
Post by millis on Mar 2, 2009 23:56:52 GMT -7
apart from the fact that no one could ever prove that 1+1≠2, and if they tried, they'd be laughed out of the mathematical community. @d: Its not a case of violating religious rights. Religion was never taught as fact when I went to school. It was a case of 'this is what Hindu's believe, this is what Christians believe etc.' And, before you question that, my teacher was a Christian she just didnt like enforcing beliefs on other people,t herefore didnt try and press the subject when teaching it. Its simple enough to teach something not as a fact but as a theory, I believe my teacher did it very well. Violating religious freedom would be saying 'everyone is now Buddha, you cannot appeal, you cannot learn anything else, you cannot practice anything else, you are Buddha now'. People are still allowed to express their views and opinions in a class where it is taught as a theorym so I don't see how you can claim a religious freedom violation. You're still free to believe and further research whatever you believe to be real, after all.
|
|
Light
Inquisitor
Posts: 59
|
Post by Light on Mar 3, 2009 15:41:52 GMT -7
Well, of course no one could ever prove that 1+1≠2, how's that any different from religion? Even Pem has to admit that he can't prove there is no god. The thing about your teacher doesn't really say much, as she could easily be fired, and possibly sent to jail (I'm not sure of the details on that sort of thing), if she so much as hinted that her Christian beliefs were fact. Then again, that might be different in the UK, but I kinda doubt it... Alright, let's say some Christian parents want to send their child so a nice, wholesome Catholic school, 'cause the kid might accidentally develop some free thought if s/he goes to a normal school where s/he's not additionally brainwashed. If this school teacher says "Christians believe that..." the child hears the tip-toeing around the truthiness of the statement, and can't help but wonder why she's so careful with her words. If the child continues to believe, (and considering how strongly the parents must believe to send the kid to a school like that, s/he probably will) s/he'll develop a sort of resentment for the government that forces the school to act skeptical of it's own beliefs. I think I lost my train of thought at some point, so sorry if that doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by electroshock on Mar 3, 2009 17:10:48 GMT -7
Light, i think what you're trying to say is that should a government do that, a child in a school based on a specific religion may develop a certain sense of hatred and mistrust toward said government. Is that right?
|
|
Light
Inquisitor
Posts: 59
|
Post by Light on Mar 3, 2009 17:39:16 GMT -7
I think I was originally trying to say something about the parent's freedom to brainwash their child with religious teachings in school if they want, but kinda forgot why I was vouching for that halfway through. But yeah, that's what I started trying to say after I'd forgotten about the other thing. I definitely should not try to think when I've had eight hours of sleep in the past sixty. Honestly, that could apply to anyone with any connection to the school. It is, in a sense, part of the freedom to practice one's religion that one who is truly dedicated can spend a greater part of his life practicing it than just Sunday mornings. And until a child develops his/her own thought (which can be long past the time they can be called a child, depending on what the parents do), the right to decide how dedicated the child is to his/her religion rests with the parents.
|
|
|
Post by electroshock on Mar 4, 2009 13:07:40 GMT -7
i do agree with you, but it isn't right for a parent to force a child into something without their consent. It's oppression no matter what you say.
|
|