Should Religion be Taught in Public High Schools?

I went to a public school. In my 9th grade world history class, we started with ancient civilizations and worked our way forward, and there was certainly time spent on various world religions where we talked about the founding of those religions (Dates, locations, important figures, texts) and the central tenets of those religions.

Ten Commandments
Eightfold Path
Five pillars of Islam
Four Noble Truths
The Dualism of Zoroastrianism
The Golden Rule

I'm sure I left some out, I just couldn't keep up the number scheme. Hinduism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism, Sikhism, and Jainism were all also discussed.

I kinda figured this was standard. Didn't seem controversial at the time, and looking back at it I still don't find it to be controversial.

sunrise123 said:

The #1 group that would be a problem from what I see is conservative Evangelical Christians who are afraid to expose children to any other point of view.

Click to expand...

I doubt very much that I will ever see the day when schools are allowed to discuss and analyse subjects like this - Comparing Jesus and Muhammad, Christianity and Islam

The world would be a much better place if they were.

Deeje said:

For comparative religion classes to be unbiased and free from what others think or assume that a religion teaches, I would say that having a representative of each religion to explain their beliefs and the historical basis of each one, be it ancient or more modern, with students being able to participate in respectful question and answer sessions, might be an enjoyable exercise for those who perhaps have no religious leanings at home.

Click to expand...

Why would that necessarily be unbiased?

Religion and spirituality are an integral part of man's history, so it should be explored and explained.

Click to expand...

Religion is optional. Spirituality... well, I'd need to hear a coherent definition of the term before I could say whether it's "integral" to our history or not. Nevertheless, we all encounter religious people every day, sometimes in contexts where their religious beliefs are relevant, and we will need to relate to them.

Edit: a basic understanding of other people's religious beliefs is probably roughly on par with, say, gardening in terms of usefulness in a person's life: definitely beneficial, maybe good for someone to pursue if they have an interest in it, but it probably won't be the end of the world if someone doesn't have it.

That way, kids can overcome a great many reasons for prejudice and bigotry, due to iognorance.

Click to expand...

Of course, the kids most at risk of this have their ignorance sheltered in religious private schools or home schooling.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Why would that necessarily be unbiased?

Click to expand...

Because it would be the religion's own version of itself, not someone else's twisted idea of it. I like to get my information from the horse's mouth. Second hand information or someone else's interpretation of other people's beliefs can be way off base.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Religion is optional. Spirituality... well, I'd need to hear a coherent definition of the term before I could say whether it's "integral" to our history or not. Nevertheless, we all encounter religious people every day, sometimes in contexts where their religious beliefs are relevant, and we will need to relate to them.

Click to expand...

An inherent need to worship is part of man's history. We are material beings, but with a spiritual side to our nature, unlike the animal kingdom. It is not really explainable to someone who is not spiritual. Non-spiritual people have no need to satisfy anything but their flesh. They don't really know what they are missing.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Edit: a basic understanding of other people's religious beliefs is probably roughly on par with, say, gardening in terms of usefulness in a person's life: definitely beneficial, maybe good for someone to pursue if they have an interest in it, but it probably won't be the end of the world if someone doesn't have it.

Click to expand...

Yes, if people have an interest in spiritual things, that is good...but its no guarantee that their spiritual side will be 'fed' the right 'food'. Just as we can eat junk food or good food.....only one will make us healthy...the other might keep us alive but not for long in good health.

There is good religion and bad, as seen by their conduct and attitudes. Blind faith is just scary. Jesus compared people to trees with fruit....a bad tree cannot produce good fruit and a good tree cannot bear bad fruit...if it does, it wasn't a good tree to start with. IOW don't just listen to what they say....look at what they do...how they live...what they promote. If it isn't peaceful, then steer clear.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Of course, the kids most at risk of this have their ignorance sheltered in religious private schools or home schooling.

Click to expand...

I guess that is the prerogative of the wealthy. Religious private schools can teach whatever they like up to a point.
Homeschooling is often out of reach when both parents have to work. Those stuck with the public system have little say in anything. Religious education belongs at home IMO.

Skwim said:

One class might be a religious studies course, which would look into the nature of religion, religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions.

Another might look at the various religions around the world, comparing and contrasting them.

There would be absolutely no proselytization or favoring one religion or denomination over any of the others. Please explain your choice.

.

Click to expand...

I went to a Presbyterian school. One of the first essay questions in World History was to compare and contrast the first five great religion of the world. It was the only question. I think it was s good one.

Skwim said:

One class might be a religious studies course, which would look into the nature of religion, religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions.

Another might look at the various religions around the world, comparing and contrasting them.

There would be absolutely no proselytization or favoring one religion or denomination over any of the others. Please explain your choice.

.

Click to expand...

I believe a class should not be mandated but I can imagine a class as an elective. I believe there is also a problem of accreditation. Would a school board or state agency have to approve the subject matter?

Carlita said:

As an elective with various religions without bias. As a requirement and only one religion, no.

Click to expand...

I am not exactly sure how that works in High School but in college a class will be taught if there are enough students interested in it. I see no problem with a one religion class. I certainly would not want to teach a class on Islam because I would not feel qualified to do so and why would a Jew want to attend a class that teaches Christianity?

Kemosloby said:

No because they would not teach it right. They would end up conforming to the world and teach lies towards a One world religion. I.e. Religion would be heavily influenced by politics, so keep your schools out of my religion please.

Click to expand...

I believe that is the whole idea of an elective. People who have their own views don't have to attend. I believe the person it helps is the one with no religious background who would like to know what all the fuss is about.

Muffled said:

I am not exactly sure how that works in High School but in college a class will be taught if there are enough students interested in it. I see no problem with a one religion class. I certainly would not want to teach a class on Islam because I would not feel qualified to do so and why would a Jew want to attend a class that teaches Christianity?

Click to expand...

I wouldnt want a one religion class. High school manybhave comparative religion. In college I go to they have history of christianity as an elective. There arent any other religion classes unless its under say philosophy or similar. The Muslim would have to take christianity if the degree required one religious course. Its not the same as a christian school. So, like any other subject, its just the basics and not bias in itself. It depends on the Muslim and what teacher she has.

Muffled said:

I believe a class should not be mandated but I can imagine a class as an elective. I believe there is also a problem of accreditation. Would a school board or state agency have to approve the subject matter?

Click to expand...

If it's a course in a public school, I'd have serious problems if a school board was abdicating its responsibility by not approving the subject matter.

Deeje said:

Because it would be the religion's own version of itself, not someone else's twisted idea of it. I like to get my information from the horse's mouth. Second hand information or someone else's interpretation of other people's beliefs can be way off base.

Click to expand...

I've met people whose assesments of themselves were very biased.

An inherent need to worship is part of man's history. We are material beings, but with a spiritual side to our nature, unlike the animal kingdom. It is not really explainable to someone who is not spiritual. Non-spiritual people have no need to satisfy anything but their flesh. They don't really know what they are missing.

Click to expand...

What makes you think that it's inherent? It seems to me that if it was, we'd hear a lot less about bringing up a child in a faith or a church - it wouldn't be necessary; the child would just believe as a matter of course.

The fact that people have to be trained to believe suggests to me that it isn't inherent.

Yes, if people have an interest in spiritual things, that is good...but its no guarantee that their spiritual side will be 'fed' the right 'food'. Just as we can eat junk food or good food.....only one will make us healthy...the other might keep us alive but not for long in good health.

Click to expand...

If that were true, then unspiritual people would be noticeably more "unhealthy" than spiritual people. Do you think this is really the case?

There is good religion and bad, as seen by their conduct and attitudes. Blind faith is just scary. Jesus compared people to trees with fruit....a bad tree cannot produce good fruit and a good tree cannot bear bad fruit...if it does, it wasn't a good tree to start with. IOW don't just listen to what they say....look at what they do...how they live...what they promote. If it isn't peaceful, then steer clear.

Click to expand...

Jesus also attacked people with a whip and told his followers to buy swords, so I assume "peaceful" is relative.

I guess that is the prerogative of the wealthy. Religious private schools can teach whatever they like up to a point.
Homeschooling is often out of reach when both parents have to work. Those stuck with the public system have little say in anything. Religious education belongs at home IMO.

Click to expand...

Finally something we agree on.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

I've met people whose assesments of themselves were very biased.

Click to expand...

In order to hear about what a person believes, it is important to allow them to speak for themselves. If their audience was permitted to ask respectful questions, then they would reveal by their answers that what they teach is beneficial or not. It is important to know what you believe but more important to know why. "Because my religion says so" is not a satisfying answer IMO. People need to provide their own defense.....it doesn't mean everyone has to agree, but at least they got their information from the horse's mouth.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

What makes you think that it's inherent? It seems to me that if it was, we'd hear a lot less about bringing up a child in a faith or a church - it wouldn't be necessary; the child would just believe as a matter of course.

The fact that people have to be trained to believe suggests to me that it isn't inherent.

Click to expand...

Human history attests to the need in humans to worship a higher power....whatever they may conceive that power to be.
Nature teaches us that we are not the most powerful things in existence and some assumed that powers larger than our own were possessed by more powerful yet unseen beings.

Humans were created as 'blank canvases'. If you don't teach a child to speak, they never will. If you don't teach them manners, they will act like animals. We need to teach our children everything we want them to be....kind, courteous, respectful, thoughtful....none of that comes naturally either, but its what separates us from the animals. Why did God need to have such specific laws? Because if he didn't, humans left to their own devices would just do more harm than good.....a bit like what we have seen in the last 100 years or so....in the period where evolution began to take over human thinking....when God disappears, humans have only to answer to other humans. Our moral compass gets put out of whack.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

If that were true, then unspiritual people would be noticeably more "unhealthy" than spiritual people. Do you think this is really the case?

Click to expand...

I was speaking spiritually. Jesus assigned the spiritual "feeding" of his household to an appointed slave. This slave was then responsible for feeding all his fellow slaves their "food at the proper time". (Matthew 24:45) He tied this 'feeding' in with other features of the "last days" to indicate that his return was close. Only those who partake of this spiritual food would flourish and become spiritually healthy.

Isaiah 65:13-14 foretold...."Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: “Look! My own servants will eat, but you yourselves will go hungry. Look! My own servants will drink, but you yourselves will go thirsty. Look! My own servants will rejoice, but you yourselves will suffer shame. 14 Look! My own servants will cry out joyfully because of the good condition of the heart, but you yourselves will make outcries because of the pain of heart and you will howl because of sheer breakdown of spirit."

That is the contrast between one serving the true God and one not serving him. Spiritual malnutrition will result in "pain of heart" and a "sheer breakdown of spirit". People will struggle to understand what God is doing and why the world is in such a mess....and why he is not answering their many prayers.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Jesus also attacked people with a whip and told his followers to buy swords, so I assume "peaceful" is relative.

Click to expand...

Righteous indignation was warranted. The greedy sellers were turning God's house into a den of thieves. Jesus showed that God's worship is not an excuse to make money.

Jesus is the appointed judge of all. When he comes to judge the world, it will not be a slap on the wrist. (2 Thessalonians 1:6-8)

9-10ths_Penguin said:

Finally something we agree on.

Click to expand...

At last.

Skwim said:

One class might be a religious studies course, which would look into the nature of religion, religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions. Another might look at the various religions around the world, comparing and contrasting them.
There would be absolutely no proselytization or favoring one religion or denomination over any of the others. Please explain your choice.

.

Click to expand...

I think it's important to study the various religions in order to better understand the literature and Art of countries around the world. Learning more about other religions can also broaden your own spiritual horizon.

9-10ths_Penguin said:

If it's a course in a public school, I'd have serious problems if a school board was abdicating its responsibility by not approving the subject matter.

Click to expand...

I believe I would not want a school board deciding what is and is not Christianity or any other religion for that matter. If it were just a question of structure I suppose that would work.

Muffled said:

I believe I would not want a school board deciding what is and is not Christianity or any other religion for that matter.

Click to expand...

And I wouldn't want a church deciding what is and isn't in the curriculum of a public school.

Remember: simply not offering courses about religion is always an option. There's always lots of worthwhile, beneficial stuff that we could be teaching to kids but can't because of lack of available class time, resources, etc.

If it were just a question of structure I suppose that would work.

Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean by this.

When I look back on my primary school days, I can see now that I was being subtly indoctrinated with C of E religion. Granted there was no hatred for any other religion being taught at that time. I was a Methodist if I was anything.

It has taken me the best part of my life to shake off this non-violent indoctrination. No wonder there is all this hatred and violence wherever Islam reaches when they start this indoctrination at a very young age and far more aggressively.

The head of Ofsted in the UK has linked the failure to promote British values to schools caught up in the Birmingham Trojan Horse scandal.

“Not only were there issues with promoting British values in many of those schools, but in some cases members of the community were attempting to bring extreme views into school life,” she said.

“The very places that should have been broadening horizons and outlooks were instead reinforcing a backward view of society.”

British values should be at heart of curriculum, says Ofsted chief | Daily Mail Online

Some say that religious schools perform better that secular schools but they should be adequately monitored for any signs of extremism.

Skwim said:

One class might be a religious studies course, which would look into the nature of religion, religious beliefs, behaviors, and institutions.

Another might look at the various religions around the world, comparing and contrasting them.

There would be absolutely no proselytization or favoring one religion or denomination over any of the others. Please explain your choice.

.

Click to expand...

Religion is a word and is subject to definition but.......
kids should be given hope for the future......
and NDE accounts can transform how young people look at the value of their lives......

Christian Andreason's Near-Death Experience

h. Who goes to heaven?

In the end ... believe it or not (sigh of relief), everyone gets to come home! Heaven is a place of ultimate LOVE. When we have learned how to become individuals that base our entire existence and consciousness around manifesting LOVE, we then become capable of entering the domain of the higher Realms of Heaven. If we do not practice Love, we can only go so far and we will be made to incarnate somewhere out there in God's super Universe again and again (unlimited times) until we learn.

Click to expand...

I believe it was Dr. Melvin Morse in his book, Transformed By The Light who referred to a study done on
people who had attempted suicide.

One group was simply given NDE accounts to read as a therapy.... and zero people from this group attempted
suicide again during the duration of the study. NDE accounts can give young people a motivation to not take their own lives.......
so I assume..... they should also assist them to avoid destructive behavior patterns like hard drugs.

Transformed by the Light

The common trend of this thread is that teaching religion has educational value, but that the teaching will always be skewed by the teacher's biases. I just thought of a solution to this problem. Every day of the class, have a different religious leader teaching about their own religion.

Akivah said:

The common trend of this thread is that teaching religion has educational value, but that the teaching will always be skewed by the teacher's biases. I just thought of a solution to this problem. Every day of the class, have a different religious leader teaching about their own religion.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's necessary.

I think the overview of the various religions as they popped up along the timeline of world history was dealt with fairly by my teacher, without having religious leaders showing up to put in their two cents.

I'm not sure how much more religion there ought to be in a public high school than what is covered by the 9th and 10th grade world history courses.

Back in the day, we were not taught religion after we left primary school, which I believe was a good thing.