ANSWERS: 43
  • Not teaching about religions, but advocating adherence to one is.
  • Depends on the morals they teach I suppose. The teacher should be unbiased and not try to convert but to educate - the whole point of education.
  • I don't think it is morally wrong if it is taught in general terms, encompassing ALL religions. I do not feel that one religion should have dominance over the others, for that. For every minute spent on Christianity, there should be one spent on Wicca, one spent on Buddhism, Islam, and all the others. If, by religion, you mean Christianity, then yes, it is wrong. Not everyone is a Christian. And to focus on just that, would be preaching, not teaching. Oh, and when you do focus on Christianity, you have to break that up as well. Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormans, Catholics, Baptists, and so on, all believe differently. And don't forget Atheism and Satanism. Those are belief systems as well.
  • If it's presented for informational purposes, I see it no different than teaching Philosophy.
  • I don't see anything wrong with teaching religion in public schools. I think it only becomes wrong when the teacher tells students that they should believe in a particular religion, or they should adhere to any religion. For example, if the teacher just says: "The Bible is the Holy Book of Christians. It has an Old Testament and a New Testament..." That's perfectly fine. But I think the moment the teacher forces a student to believe in the Bible, that's when it becomes wrong.
  • Not as long as it's not one sided. If you teach one religion, then you teach them all. I know many don't believe in religion, but I believe it's up our children to decide and teaching them will allow them to make the right choice once their old enough.
  • No, the role that religion has played throughout history is more than sufficient justification to have it taught in school. But it constitues an "establishment of religion" to have only ONE religion taught, or even to slant the teaching toward one religion over the others.
  • Good answers so far. I'd like to add, religionS OUGHT to be taught in schools. Religion is a HUGE part of history. we can't understand ourselves & our world if we throw the baby out with the bath water while trying to be politically correct. ...freedom of religion means all religions are allowed to exist, publicly as well, without persecution. forcing people underground to be PC is contrary to the idea
  • It depends on how it is approached. To teach it as a way of life would be very wrong at many levels. The study of religion and what it is would be a good thing.
  • No, and you do get public, religious schools, you know. I go to a public, Catholic school. Religion is a part of life, and it should be taught about. All types of religions.
  • It's not morally wrong but it's wrong at every other level
  • Not morally but ethically wrong, yes. If you mean that "teaching" is the same as indoctrinating, then is unacceptable. If you mean "teaching" as understanding the religious phenomena that covers the evolution of ALL religions, which I don't think you are talking about, but taking Sunday school into public schools, then it clearly goes against the nature of education.
  • if it is just a public school it is not alright bc of atheist hindu jewish and more but a public religion school it is ok
  • Of course teaching religion in public schools in morally right. Espousing religion in a public school is not. Unfortunately, too many people can't see the difference.
  • I'm writing from the UK where religion is taught in state schools - and, yes, I think it is morally wrong. Religion, even if taught as history, is a matter of conviction and belief, not for education. Time would be better spent studying philosophy, rather than something that many children, particularly in this country, see as nothing more than superstition.
  • Teaching it and preaching it has a very thin line. I do not think it should be taught to anyone till they understand what is to be objective to protect them from being indoctrinated.
  • Is teaching religion in public schools morally wrong? This question is asked in many different ways always by religiously minded individuals. I put to them would you sit through the entire Sunday mass if I came down there and taught you about evolution every Sunday,Easter and Christmas. I willing to bet the better part of the congregation would get up and walk out. Please stop asking these loaded questions and take your own advice. Do onto others as you would have done on to you. We do not try to influence your institutions so leave our children out of it. In response to a rebuttal refer to my first answer.
  • I dig the whole "separation of church & state" deal. ;-)
  • No, it is essential to understand relgion in order to understand history and so forth. You can't ignore it. However it should be taught without prejudice i.e. not as "this religion is true" rather as "This is the religion, its ideas and philosophies and the impact it has made on society". I don't want my kids being taught that Jesus Saves or equivalent but neither do I want them to be ignorant of an important part of history and modern life.
  • Yes,because one will likely left out.Especially the rare ones,like Wicca,and others.Thus all religions should be left out of the schooling systems.The student can always go to a religious school.
  • In the U.S? Teaching about religions is fine, in my opinion. That's part of anthropological and sociological studies. Teaching about any one religion or teaching religious doctrine as truth is morally irresponsible and wrong, in my opinion. And no, I'm not an atheist. Just a believer in the Constitution of the United States of America.
  • In my opinion, yes. That's what religious schools are for, it's called the separation of church and state for a reason. If I had was required to learn something that wasn't beneficial to me in college even, I would pretty upset.
  • yes..schools are for teaching fact not fiction. Especially something as wide varied and unproven as religion. That's what churches are for, to teach religion...nothing wrong with touching on the basics for history's sake but dogma, law and theism are forms of conditioning and not everyone that goes to public schools are religious or of a christian religious background...if someone wants their kid to have a specific religious affiliation and learnings in school, they have religious schools, enroll them in that...but public schools in my opinion have no business promoting one religion over another...SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!!!!
  • Who decides the curriculum. How do they maintain objectiveness. Do you teach all the carnage along with it. Does every religion get equal time that would take away from other studies. In which order do you teach about it. You may teach what religion is What can it teach children that would give them a political advantage? Politics and religion do not make good bedfellows. What insight do you have that can not possibly be obtained without religion. You can teach history and tell what parts religion played in it. It is a subject that has way to many facets to go into to have any real benefit to anyones grade school academics. It may fare well to those intending to pursue a career where it is of importance to study it in college or in university. It just has no place in "Public Schools" The logistics of creating an agenda that would suit all walks of life that attend public schools is just to great to make it feasible.
  • The government should not be teaching religion. This severely damages the freedom of religion. However a religious organization renting space in a public school and "teaching religion in public schools" is acceptable. The entire world agreed to include freedom of religion in the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights. See Article 2: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html The citizens of the United States think this freedom is just as important as the freedoms of speech or the press. All are part of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html Even the Catholic Church seeks and supports the freedom of religion for all human beings. In the Vatican II document, Declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae (Human Dignity), the Church states: The human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits. For the entire document, see: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html With love in Christ.
  • yea schools shouldn't teach religion cus students are from different religions
  • Teaching ABOUT various religions and religious beliefs is not morally wrong, so long as accurate information is taught. Actually teaching the religion is morally wrong. It is morally wrong to use public funding to inculcate any religion into a captive audience.
  • Definitely, it's like you're making someone choose a certain religion. Religious educations in general (about all religions) though should exist
  • It should be taught from a historical standpoint, but certainly not as any form of indoctrination. It's one thing for the education system to include social sensibilization in its teachings, and is very acceptable, but I really don't know about stuff that goes beyond what you need to know to live.
  • No. As long as they are willingly to teach other lifestyles and religions then I see no problem with it. Religion tends to be a huge part of a countries past, teaching about it isn't wrong..but tyring to convert is.
  • Not in my opinion (and I'm an atheist). I would call the class "Theology and it's impact on the modern world," or something of that nature. Not religion. There's no denying that religion has had an ENORMOUS impact on society as a whole all throughout the world. There is no reason why we shouldn't teach this. HOWEVER, and I emphasize this, there should be NO selective teaching in that class. Meaning, that each religion should get its time. Some offshoots and smaller religions you may have to lump together, but they should be taught that they still are there. It should go without saying, but there shouldn't be any preaching either. The teacher would have to be especially unbiased and completely objective.
  • no, it is a free county even though sometimes it doesn't seem that way.
  • Yes, the separation of church and state is imperative in democratic society.
  • what do you teach
  • That depends heavily on the morals involved, doesn't it? It's probably a-okay to people of that particular religion.
  • No provided merely the beliefs of all main religions are taught , and the teacher remains impartial.
  • No it's not wrong at all it is the right thing to do but in this day and age you will be persecuted
  • Yes, if every student is forced to attend the religion class, but I don't see a problem if religion were an elective like wood shop or band and students can choose to enroll in a religion class...
  • >>morally wrong That would depend on your personal morals. For most of us I don't think it's a moral issue but a constitutional matter. Every country has its own constitution, so the answer could be different in every country. In a Middle Eastern Islamic theocracy, for example, teaching religion in public schools is not only morally acceptable but may be required. The best break for the Democratic Party in the U.S. was when the religious right took control of the Republican Party in the late 1980s. Kevin Phillips has written extensively on this subject: "Theocons and Theocrats" By Kevin Phillips http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060501/phillips
  • There is a difference between teaching it and advocating it. Teaching has to do with history, and it's totally fine.
  • Not telling about the religions and saying it's up to everyone, just like politics and philosophy or which soccer or ice hockey team you want to support..., but indoctrinating into one religion (or political ideology or whatever) is what I call wrong.
  • Not any more than the theory of evolution is, for info and facts.
  • What would be determined as "religion"? If you mean theology, I wouldn't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with religion being taught as it would be up to a current school board to decide what religion would be taught. I have been under an impression, that public school was the terminus for children to learn the things they would need to not just survive, but to continue to learn. It seems to me that teaching religion would go against those goals. Religion does not teach you how to survive (or to be flexible), nor does it teach you how to learn new things. It seems to me that decisions about religious background education should be up to parents to teach to their children. If teaching religion falls to parents, then parents can decide which religious dogma, or religious theory they will pass to the kids. Education should concern itself with fact, not supposition; at least this should be the case until high school. Once a child has gone on to high school, and has some moral grounding, that child should be able to study whatever they want to study, or have the aptitude for. I do not want my tax dollars (which are considerable for someone who has no kids on the system) to pay for religious education.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy