"atheism isn't something that is "taught""
If they don't have something to teach, they just don't do it, but they needn't prohibit others as an excuse.
You seem to be confusing secularism with atheism. They are not the same thing.
Ironically, a state that would enforce atheism (which in practice actually would actually mean
making religion illegal), then it would no longer be a secular state....
Secularism means that the state shall not mengle in religious affairs of its citizens. The state shall not tell them what they can and cannot believe, nore will the state promote one religion over another.
Giving a religious class in public school, would be doing
exactly that: promoting certain religions over others. Because the classes would have to pick a religion to teach. And you can't possible include a class for eveyr possible religion, as there aren't enough hours in a week to do that.
So the reasonable answer here, is that public schools simply shouldn't do religious classes. Note that I talk about
instructing a religion. I'm not talking about some socio-culture class where
religions are discussed / compared, etc. But that's quite something different from a for example bible class where kids are being indoctrinated into christianity.
Also, note that nobody is
prohibitting religious classes. People are quite free and allowed to send their kids to church on sunday for bible classes or what-have-you. They are completely free and allowed to hire a religious teacher to teach their kids whatever religion they like.
Public school simply isn't an appropriate place for that, because of its secular nature.
Nobody stops you from sending them to a privately funded catholic school, or whatever denomination you prefer, where they can get all the religious classes you want.
Why should the students be deprived of introduction to religions?
They aren't. They are completely free to get their introductions or indoctrinations. Public school just isn't the place for that.
Keeping the students ignorant is not appropriate.
My emphasis was on the following points:
- "As far as the Atheists, I am not against them in their persons and I am in favor of equitable treatment to them by every Religion.
Yet, you wish to subject them to mandatory religious classes in public secular schools. And I'm betting the religion that should be taught in your opinion, should be the religion that you happen to follow, right?
- The better idea as I visualize is that there should be periodically seminars in the schools/colleges in their halls on the subjects about religion/no-religions.
Why? Btw, most schools (here in belgium, anyway) actually organize such things all the time about a wide variety of subjects.
But there is a difference between holding debates or exploring cultural subjects on the one hand, and indoctrinating into a religion on the other.
- I don't say that there should be teachers to teach every religion in the schools. I say that there should be seminars in the schools/colleges where representatives of religions/no-religions should give lectures on the selected topics and then there should be provision of a question answer session for the students. These seminars should be conducted by moderators of the City officials.
Why?
As somebody has to manage such events to provide equitable opportunity to every religion/no-religion that is interested in the event. The issue of moderators could be sorted between the school/colleges and the cities locally.
Again, why do you insist that public secular schools should do this?
- My point is that the students get equal access/information to the religions of believers as also to the non-believers be they Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism or any shades of them. Under the name of Secular-ism, which means equitable treatment to everybody they should not remain ignorant of Religions/No-Religions."
I just don't see the point.
