Religion in Australian Schools

[Jewel]

Boost religion in schools, says GG (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,6994485%255E662,00.html)

MORE religion should be taught in schools to lift the nation's ethics and values, according to Governor-General Michael Jeffery.

Australia's new viceroy suggested schools should teach the core beliefs of "faith, hope and love".
He said the reduction or elimination of religion in schools had had a negative impact on society.

Maj-Gen Jeffrey has ignited a debate about the role of church and state, with some bodies critical of his opinions in one of his first public forays.

"The challenge for our community is to try to live by the simple, lasting values the great religions teach," Maj-Gen Jeffrey said in a speech to religious affairs reporters.

"(The challenge) is to instil in our children and our grandchildren the notion that society benefits if we live an ethically good life, including the recognition that with rights go obligations; to each other, to our communities and to our nation."


Oh goody. When will people figure out that you don't need religion to teach people to lead an ethically good life?? :rolleyes:

[reprise]

Gotta love the way Howard's choice of "non-controversial" G-G's bites him in the ass. Bring back Bill Deane. Please.

[Hypernovean]

Please don't tell me we've replaced an ex-bishop with a fundie.. :mad: :rolleyes: Does anyone really know what the G-G is for anyway? The position is irrelevant and obsolete, IMHO.

[BigBlue2]

Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got one. Primary and secondary education in Australia are State matters so the G-G's opinion doesn't mean squat. If parents want their kids to get schooled in superstition they can send the kids to a Catholic school, a Protestant private school or any of the other religious private schools that are around. I don't see Christian education in public schools taking off in a big way, mainly due to the large array of different religions and non-religions that form the background of public school pupils.

I loved the comments by the Australian Broadcasting Authority chairman David Flint (why he had to put his two cents in, I don't know):
"The teaching of religion is very important and one of the pillars our nation was built on – the Constitution itself refers to Almighty God"
Yes, God is mentioned - in the preamble of a constitution that was written in the dying days of the 19th Century. The selfsame constitution also says the following:
(Section)116. The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.
Shove that up your keister, fundibots.

[Chiron]

Watch me twist this around...
"The challenge for our community is to try to live by the simple, lasting values the great religions teach," Maj-Gen Jeffrey said in a speech to religious affairs reporters.

In the a (was it the most?) recent Australian census, didn't a significant portion of the population mark their religion as "Jedi"? That is, didn't this portion choose a joke choice in great enough numbers that, according to Australian law, "Jedi" should now be considered a state-recognized religion?
And what could be more great than a "religion" of people long, long ago (it happened a long time ago, and what our forefathers did should be good enough for us!) in a galaxy far, far away (since I don't know any of those people personally, I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of their sentiments)?

-Chiron

[Goober]

In the a (was it the most?) recent Australian census, didn't a significant portion of the population mark their religion as "Jedi"? That is, didn't this portion choose a joke choice in great enough numbers that, according to Australian law, "Jedi" should now be considered a state-recognized religion?
And what could be more great than a "religion" of people long, long ago (it happened a long time ago, and what our forefathers did should be good enough for us!) in a galaxy far, far away (since I don't know any of those people personally, I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of their sentiments)?
There was talk about it happening before the census, but I don't think it actually got off the ground. Pity.

[reprise]

I don't know where the UL that if a certain number of people put "Jedi" as their religion on the census form the government had to recognise it as a religion came from (although there have been similar campaigns in the US), but census figures have nothing at all to do with whether a particular religious organisation is afforded legal recognition by our government (relevant mostly to taxation advantages and the right of its representatives to perform legally binding marriages).

Technically, those who put "Jedi" down on their census forms as their religion could have been fined (and the ABS publicised that quite a lot before the census) but as that particualr piece of misinformation isn't going to have any impact on the provision of faciities to the community, it's hardly worth the while of the ABS to pursue the matter.

[Chiron]

Oh yeah, I know that there's no way the Australian government will recognize Jedi as a religion entitled to all the benefits a state-recognized religion would get through a census. Just thought I'd bring up the Jedi-census thing.

I don't know if that's actually what happened -- I just remember hearing something like that, that they did in fact put Jedi on the census and that a significant portion of the population chose it. I also remember hearing about the possibility of a fine.

But if it actually did happen (and is there anyone who has the facts handy?), might this have been what Governor-General Michael Jeffery meant by "reduction or elimination of religion in schools had had a negative impact on society"? I mean, after all, putting a joke for your answer is one of the 57.6 signs of the Apocalypse!

-Chiron

[reprise]

The G-G's comments would bother me a lot less if I didn't suspect that he wants one particular brand of religion taught in schools, that brand being Christianity.

One of the best schools my ever attended had a "religion week" a couple of times each year during which representatives of just about every religion represented in the community came to school and discussed with the students the basis of their beliefs.

Similarly, my youngest daughter's kindergarten used to acknowledge the special days of all the religions to which the children belonged. The kids loved December/January, when they celebrated Ramadan, Christmas, Hannukah, and Chinese New Year in rapid succession.

[Polycrates]

I can't think of a worse idea.
I went to primary school in a fairly white trash area of Sydney, and I remember our weekly scripture classes (I was still Christian back then in the sense that it was the normal thing to be and I hadn't really thought about the whole thing). About three-quarters of the class would stay for protestant scripture, and the other quarter would go off for some special Catholic scripture. And then there was one indian girl who was from a Hindu or atheist family or something who'd just stay and sit in the corner and read.
We were too young to really have a clue about the whole thing, and frankly nobody really cared about scripture class, we spent most of our time just trying to piss the religion teacher off.
But there's no better way to ostracise someone than to have scripture class that everyone participates in except for one person, especially if they're already ostracised because of their skin colour anyway.

And regarding the Constitution, the High Court has firmly established that s116 only prevents the establishment by the COMMONWEALTH of one religion as an official state religion. Anything less is fine.
The DOGS case (Ex Rel. Black v Commonwealth if I remember right) about funding religious schools, the leading s116 judgement, is really clear that s116 is pretty much worthless.
And the states can do absolutely whatever the hell they want to with regards to religion, and there's absolutely nothing to stop them (check out the Scientology (Prohibition) Act that was in force in SA for about 30 years). And the Commonwealth can use its s96 grants power to bribe/blackmail the states into passing those religious measures it wants anyway. Makes you feel all warm inside, doesn't it?

[BigBlue2]

Originally posted by Polycrates
And regarding the Constitution, the High Court has firmly established that s116 only prevents the establishment by the COMMONWEALTH of one religion as an official state religion. Anything less is fine.
The DOGS case (Ex Rel. Black v Commonwealth if I remember right) about funding religious schools, the leading s116 judgement, is really clear that s116 is pretty much worthless.
And the states can do absolutely whatever the hell they want to with regards to religion, and there's absolutely nothing to stop them (check out the Scientology (Prohibition) Act that was in force in SA for about 30 years). And the Commonwealth can use its s96 grants power to bribe/blackmail the states into passing those religious measures it wants anyway.
That's interesting, I didn't know that. I had assumed that Section 116 carried as much clout here as the Establishment Clause does in the USA.
Originally posted by Polycrates
Makes you feel all warm inside, doesn't it?
I can barely contain myself.

[NZAmoeba]

Well, he did say 'religions' plural...

I have no problem with religious studies as long as as many are taught as possible, they give great insight into foreign cultures.

heh, and the total pipedream would be where they discuss both the pros, AND cons of each religion, passages that are wrong, absurb beliefs, etc.