It should be introduced from the age of 15 and no younger, when a child can critically absorb the information they are presented on different religions, and make it clear that many people in the world follow one or the other often due to geographical locations or societies, but the choice to do so or the one that seems right to you is YOUR choice alone to follow.
Implement this and I’ll be all in favour of it. Spiritualism should also be included, not from any one religious point of view but the shared ideas on it and historical early believes in the spirit and how it is connected to everything around us, we all share the same air and same space and looking in at our self and nurturing our own strengths and uniqueness is necessary for a health life and to find happiness in the coexistence with others and nature. We all rely on each other for life and respect for that can lead to a better experience for all while we exist for such a brief moment of time

That is the most sensible comment I have read so far Damien.

There’s no accounting for total loonies! That definitely isn’t Catholic Church teaching. You could equally have an atheist who believes that all Catholics should be burnt at the stake, but hopefully people like that are in a very small minority.

maria, that most definatly IS the catholic churchs teaching, the vatican point blankly believe that homosexuality is a sin and can be cured, but lucily the people who think like that are in the minority, the only problem is they wear purple hats and wield all the power!!

The Church doesn’t teach that AIDS is God’s punishment for homosexuals. Whoever taught that was talking pure rubbish. It also doesn’t teach that homosexuality is a sin. There is a view of human sexuality which people can take or leave. No one is going to stand over you with a stick forcing you to act a certain way.

I knew (of) a Jehovahs witness who had to go to mass with them since no Teacher was left behind. But would obviously attend in a purely observational capacity, however on not blessing himself passing them blessed water things one of the more clueless teachers told him to, he said he was a Witness to which she said… ‘Don’t you have some God to pray to?’.

modern ireland hey!?

It would seem Catholicism wishes to retain its monopoly on aggression…

o,m,g that is the best , response. i have read all day , wow your some guy . keep up the good work . you know what your talking about .

I agree, however religion has played a huge role in history in terms of wars etc., and a knowledge of this should be taught so that students have a good working historical education, this is the only role religion should play in schools. So the study of religions yes, but doctrinal teaching, absolutely not!

To the believers you are preaching.

Santa lives in the north pole and he makes lots and lots of toys!!!!!!!!!!!

It’s actually factually incorrect to assert the role of religion in wars. There are no theories of war linked to religion. Popular self-serving misconception at best.

what about the crusades?

@David Lohan – I’d be with Ken on that one…. Are you trying to say that religion has never played any significant role in a war? Because that seems to me like a step to far in the other direction. Along with the Crusades, what about conflicts closer to home? 1641 Rebellion? Then Cromwell in Ireland 8 years later? …. Sure, often it was often a pursuit of power, property and other things, but religion has been persistently put forward to act as a justification for war. For example, Cromwell felt he had God’s approval to go against accepted codes of conduct in war. I am in no way religious at all, but I think an understanding of the belief systems that have shaped the world is more than a little helpful. What I don’t agree with is the indoctrination of children into any specific one of those systems.

Fair point Iain. This idea that we were thought ‘religion’ in school is very misleading. For the most part we were thought Catholicism. I have no problem with students being thought various beliefs from around the world in a balanced manner but if parents want their children to practice their faith they can do it in their own time.

Yes of course given there are 3.8 million self identified Catholics plus other faiths in this country according to the 2011 census, why shouldn’t there be some form of RE class as part of the curriculum? There are 4000 atheists in Ireland according census figures and I do wonder whether the lot of them spend their time online, haranguing religious people. I’m not particularly religious by the way I’m just sick to death of militants labeling anyone who has a religious belief or spiritual practice as anti science or socially regressive. Their arguments are churlish and utterly simplistic.

@ Gay Pea, the idea that most people in Ireland are Catholic is misleading. Aks any of your friends or colleagues who claimed to be Catholic in the last census a few questions and you may be surprised with the answers.

Ask do they refrain from sex before marriage because it’s a sin.
Ask do they refrain from contraception.
Ask do they believe they were born into this world a sinner that can only be wiped away with a priest pouring h2o on it’s head.
Ask do they think homosexuals are living life in sin.
Ask do they they think Adam or Eve were the first two people on Earth
Ask do they think the Earth was made in seven days.

I have asked these questions, and more and then asked ‘What makes you think you are Catholic due to your answers not being remotely related to Catholic beliefs?’

@Rob surely the 1641 rebellion, Cromwell and the ensuing 350+ years have had more to do with English colonialism, thirst for power and territory, than they had to do with religion.

From an Irish perspective I think it is too simplistic to paint our history as a religious conflict. There are numerous examples of prominent Protestant Nationalists e.g. Wolfe Tone, Thomas Russell, Henry Joy McCracken, William Orr, Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Archibald Hamilton Rowan and Valentine Lawless.

See Noel now you’re misrepresenting me which is what you guys always do. I said SOME form of RE class I didn’t say classes in right wing catholic doctrine. You are equating all religion, all religious people, all religious education with religious fundamentalism and that’s clearly bullshit. That’s why I don’t waste my time arguing over these kinds of issues with ill-informed people, it’s all black and white, there’s no reasoning.

We have an island mentality in Ireland that assumes no other countries have dealt with these issues before us, so we seek to constantly reinvent the wheel, lurching from one extreme to the next. You wouldn’t even think to look to Northern Ireland to see how they handle might handle RE up there for instance, given they’ve had to deal with years of sectarian conflict. No, that might be an intelligent, instead we’ll take the Jay Funk party line, all religion is evil having previously held the position all religion is good and we’ll have a good old row over it on Joe Duffy that is, until we’re bored with that and find something else to fight over. In the meantime nothing is ever dealt with nothing is ever satisfactorily resolved, still having the same media debates as we had back in the seventies and eighties. Groundhog day in Ireland.

@ David Lohan

Tell that to the crusadors, and to the English who lived in centuries past when the british monarchy kept changing religions. Tell that to those living in the North who suffered through decades of a sectarian war.

Scrap religion and replace it with social education.

Its Far more important!

Religion is destroying people all over the world.

@ Gay Pea, that’s a fair rant, a chara, not sure where to begin. Seems we’re in agreement on the fundamental point that some form of RE could work. I said in a previous post if some of the worlds major beliefs were thought in a balanced manner then fair enough but we weren’t thought religion, we were thought Catholicism.

I was merely pointing out to you then that most people I know who profess to be Catholic don’t believe in some of the basic ideas of what being a Catholic is. I don’t understand how people who don’t believe most of that churches teachings can profess to be a member.

I believe we can have a discussion on how it’s OK to not be a Catholic yet still be spiritual. For me there can be a clear distinguishable difference between the two. I believe some people think by saying they are not Catholic they think they are less Irish. It’s a hangover from a centuries conflict with the UK. You can pray, treat your fellow humans well, learn respect etc etc without having to subscribe to an organised religion. I’m not going to spend my time knocking the Catholic church, they do enough of that themselves. The latest incident being Fr. Flannery being censored by the Vatican for airing his beliefs on women being ordained. The cheek of him, professing equality among men and women… Only way the Vatican could respond was to gag him. That says it all.

Half the things you mention, Noel, aren’t Catholic beliefs. I don’t know many Catholics who think the world was created in 7 days and a lot of the attitudes seem to reflect lack of knowledge rather that dissent. As for the debate on women priests- it’s not an equality issue. If Fr Flannery wants to expound his views, he should do it in his own private time stressing that it doesn’t represent Church teaching. When I bring my kids to church, it’s not to hear someone’s personal rant against the Catholic Church. That’s not the purpose of the pulpit and is unfair to those in the congregation who don’t have the right to reply.

Sure Noel, and how do you think Father Flannery and the 800 catholic priests who publicly supported him would answer those questions you posed? Do you not think qualified experienced professionals clerical or laity should not be allowed provide classes spiritual education and guidance to children as part of the school curriculum? Sixteen hundred people in the pole above suggest it should have no role. So children should not learn about values, other faiths, meditation, prayer, reflection, social justice, that should be banned from the classroom because, they need to learn programming skills for the knowledge economy instead, is that what people are suggesting, no place at all w2q2

Sorry about the typos posted that before I’d finished.

@Gay Pea

“There are 4000 atheists in Ireland according census figures and I do wonder whether the lot of them spend their time online, haranguing religious people”

No there are not only 4000 atheists in Ireland. You are misreading the census results. The 4000 to whom you refer are the ones who incorrectly identified Atheism as a religion on the form in the section entitled “Other, WRITE IN YOUR RELIGION”" (emphasis not added by me that’s exactly how it was on the form).

The vast majority of atheists selected “No Religion”. which is the second largest religious grouping in the country.

@ Maria, when I was taught ‘religion’ in school as a child we were told God made the earth in six days and he rested on the seventh. I was told Adam and Eve were the first two people on earth. I was told if I didn’t confess my sins I’d go to hell.

Maybe the Catholic church have changed their views since?

If so, why? And what else are they going to change their views on?

Is it true they have changed their policy on purgatory? I remember when the babied who died before being christened were stuck there but apparently as of some years ago they changed that?

@James Burkill

I read what is written on the census, there are just under 4,000 self identified atheists in Ireland, even if there were 400,000 self identified atheists it’s still a minority, compared to 3.8 milllion and the rest. You can’t claim non religious people as atheists that’s crap, there are lots of non religious people who believe in a God for instance you’re just twisting things to suit yourselves because the census was such a slap in the face for you. Actually Einstein remarked on that, he make it perfectly clear he was not in your camp even though you tried to claim him for PR purposes. Some of you guys love banging on about evidence until the evidence goes against you and then you desperately try to spin it, exactly the charge you lay against the religious fundies.

@ Noel Cronin

Thich Nah Han the Vietnamese Buddhist spiritual leader is in town tonight and I’m sure he’ll speak to a packed house on social justice, the importance of mindfulness meditation for mental well-being, concentration and spiritual awareness. Every culture has their own form of religious practice with similar core principles once you get beyond the dogma, there is a rationality behind religious practice. It teaches people how to live well, in the Catholic religion we recite mantras (the rosary ) we use prayer beads like the Buddhists, as they do in Islam, in Judaism. To dismiss all that as complete nonsense and deny children any access to their own religious heritage I think is very shortsighted.

Just one further comment on David Lohan he’s perfectly correct in what he says, we only have to look North. Who in Ireland would suggest the troubles was a religious conflict, other that someone who didn’t really know anything about this country? It was a political conflict resulting from a social justice issue that required a political solution, it wasn’t because Sean from West Belfast disagreed with Sammy from East Belfast’s God and decided to launch a mortar bomb over the wall at him, that would be simplistic nonsense. Ironically the same people who would recognise such an interpretation as nonsense would be quick to blame religion for political or ethnic conflicts in other parts of the world, just because some pop science writer says so in one of his books.

@Gay Pea

One thing is clear here. While I was learning reading comprehension skills in my secular school, you were learning about wafers that magically turn into Deities.

I did NOT claim all of the “no religion” folks were atheists. I claimed that most atheists ticked “no religion”. If you can’t tell the difference then you are a very poor ambassador for the school system you’re advocating.

How Einstein comes into this I have no idea, but he did make his position in relation to metaphysics very clear. He specifically said he does NOT believe in a personal god and that he believes in the god of Spinoza, who was a Pantheist. A pantheist is much closer to atheism than he is to theism. But you probably didn’t learn about Pantheism or Spinoza at your school, am I right?

As for your interpretation of the census results, all I can do is reiterate what I’ve already said. I can’t force you to understand. But I will add that both Atheist Ireland and the Humanist Association of Ireland ran campaigns to encourage all non-believers to tick the “no religion” box on the census and I am one of the many atheists who did that on this and the 2006 census.

Sorry if it bothers you so much, but you’re simply wrong.

@Frank Bradley – I agree completely. 1641 was largely about the Anglo-Irish Catholics regaining influence, but in the case of the rebellion and Cromwell’s arrival religion was used as justification, whether it was genuinely at the root of the conflict or not. But no one fully understand conflicts such as these without an academic understanding of the religious beliefs of those involved.

What school was that, Noel? It seems to have been teaching stuff that wasn’t commonly taught in any other schools unless you are way older than you look.

@ Maria, it was a Catholic run school. It was the only primary school I went to so I’m not sure what teachings they had in other schools but I’d of thought they more or less all sang of the same hymn sheet.

Can you answer the question regarding purgatory?

Do the babies, being born sinners, go straight to heaven now or are still stuck in limbo?

@ Gay Pea, once again we are in agreement fundamentally that the various world religions could be taught in schools in a balanced manner. It’s misleading to say we were taught religion in school when we were only told about one.

This Buddhist guy sounds like an interesting man and I admire that sort of approach when in comes to praying or reflecting or whatever you want to call it. As I said earlier you can be spiritual and a promoter of social justice without subscribing to an organised religion.

I don’t think the Catholic church and social justice go hand in hand when you have a core group of men at the top of the organisation living in palaces and mansions in one of the richest countries in the world while they try to preach to they rest of the world on issues such as humility and fairness.

@ Gay Pea, furthermore, I never said children should be denied access to practice their faith. There are chapels, churches, mosques, prayer rooms etc all over the country. Every parent has the right to bring their children to these sacred places to practice their faith.

I believe an overview of the world’s religions and how they developed could be taught in schools.

But I also believe if parents want their children to practice a particular religion they can do it in one of these sacred places in their own time.

@James Burkill

Again Table 36 page 104 there are 3095 atheists in Ireland, almost numerically identical, you’ll be delighted to learn, to the number of evangelical Christians in Ireland at 4195 – like yin and yang you (almost) balance each other out. You can’t say anything about those with no religion, what they believe or don’t believe, so you can’t claim them as professional atheists, the sensible thing to do have done was to have asked them to tick the ATHEIST box so there would be no confusion.

“Spinoza, who was a Pantheist.” ~ James Burkill

“As to the view of certain people that I identify god with nature (taken as a kind of mass or corporeal matter), they are quite mistaken” ~ Baruch Spinoza

@Noel Cronin

Sure Noel, you’re not denying them the right to practice their faith, just the right to an RE class.

Good night.

Again Gay Pea,

I’m all for kids getting education on religion, faith and beliefs.

But let’s not forget that Catholicism doesn’t have a monopoly on religion in this country.

If children were educated and informed from an early age about different forms of beliefs I have little doubt that as they got older there would be a more diverse spread of beliefs in this country, whether it be Hinduism, Christian, Atheist, Buddhist, Islam, Pagan, Humanist, Agnostic etc.

@Gay Pea

Gay Pea said…
“sensible thing to do have done was to have asked them to tick the ATHEIST box so there would be no confusion.”

*Face Palm*

THERE WAS NO ATHEIST BOX!

The figures you continually misquote, as I’ve already told you, are the number of people who wrote in the word “Atheism” on option entitled:

“Other, write in your RELIGION”

That is the exact wording, capitalisation of the word RELIGION and all. If you don’t believe me, have a look for yourself. It’s question 12.

http://census.ie/_uploads/documents/English_Household_form_with_do_not_complete_stamp_-_2011.pdf

The exact wording…

What is your religion?

1 – Roman Catholic
2 – Church of Ireland
3 – Islam
4 – Presbyterian
5 – Orthodox
6 – Other, write in your religion

7 – No religion

Atheism is not a religion, so most atheists don’t write “Atheism” on the form as their religion.

Gay Pea said…
“You can’t say anything about those with no religion, what they believe or don’t believe, so you can’t claim them as professional atheists”

You are the only person here who has attempted to claim that the census can tell us how many Atheists there are in the country. You, not me. I merely pointed out that YOU are WRONG.

In any case, what does the number of atheists have to do with this issue? Atheists are not the only group of people in the country who don’t want their taxes squandered by teaching children lies in the classroom. And many atheists agree that religious education should be part of the school curriculum, but that it should be taught objectively and covers all of the major world religions. In fact that is the official position of Atheist Ireland and the Humanist Association of Ireland. You’re barking up the wrong tree.

There are some very well sourced articles in wikipedia if you really want to know where both Einstein and Spinoza stand on religion. But in my experience, those who are not interested in truth tend to be more interested in quote mining and deception than learning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein%27s_religious_views
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinoza%27s_god

Wouldn’t the world be a lovely placed if we all loved our neighbour as ourselves? A message of love can’t be the cause of wars and inequality. It has to be some sort of failure to love that causes all the trouble and strife.

…and Harry Potter :)

Our religious education covered “social issues” too – but through a distinctly Catholic filter. All these years later, I find myself in opposition to the views taught to/imposed on us back then. I support the academic study of all religions on society – impact, importance, etc. But I woudl be very strongly opposed to only one religion being taught. I think the indoctrination of children is the parents’ job and, if they were to step up tothat plate, it might actually be a very positive development for families.

Sure, if schools had unlimited funds and pupils had unlimited time and brainpower, they should be taught everything. But surely there are more worthwhile subjects that are currently overlooked?

Limited brainpower? Cheeky fecker insulting children. I give them far more credit than you do. Children are highly intuitive and are more than capable of thinking. If anything our brainpower decreases as we age. It’s a good a way as any to teach basic morals and ethics.

There is no harm either if the children start to disagree with the content. We all should question the fundamentals of what we are taught at some point, it encourages critical thinking.

if they had unlimited time and brainpower then why not teach them:

1) Every language in the world
2) Every historical fact that ever happened
3) Advanced maths

etc etc – there is only a limited number of hours in schooling and as someone else remarked, given the current state of literacy it would be better to have more teaching of grammar and less about world superstition

You have a very poor opinion of advanced maths if you think it is as ludicrous to teach that as it is to teach “every language in the world”.

I rate teaching children moral and ethical values quite highly. It is easily as important to me as literacy. Maybe it’s because I see a lot of crime in my local area, and I know some parents are incapable of passing it on. What’s the problem with with imparting some Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not lie messages? Putting it in story form for kids is what religion classes do at that level. Every book I read to my children isn’t a reference book. Should all fiction be banned as well, in case anyone ever belives it?

I agree in terms of teaching moral and ethical values, and using fables and stories to do so. But to limit those stories to purely biblical ones, and to simultaneously claim these stories to be more than just what they are; parables, fables and metaphors, is not something I support.

You have a very low opinion of languages if you think it’s ludicrous to teach them… well, anyway, my point was that everything is somewhat important, the point is that we have to choose what is more important.

I learnt ancient Greek in secondary school for five years, three hours a week – way more than we devoted to chemistry. Is ancient Greek utterly useless? No, of course, a lot of our philosophical and cultural history started in ancient Greece. But I think that chemistry would have been more useful.

I agree that within the general teaching of literature and stories, and the lessons we can learn from them, one can find an hour or two a year to dedicate to the Bible and maybe the same to the Mahabharata? Anything more than that, I think, is a bit of a waste of everyone’s time :-)

I think she meant that it’s ludicrous to teach every language in the world. I doubt she meant that teaching a few relevant languages (European) is ludicrous. French and german are very handy to have here in ireland

If it really was “the teaching of something”, no problem. Religion in school has neither the intention or outcomes with regard to knowledge or thought…

Catholicism didn’t sin, people sinned!

wrong again maria, the people who were all powerfull and used their position within the catholic church sinned, their sins were then covered up and hushed by their superiors more powerfull then them in the catholic church to such an extent that the pontif knew of their sins and still nothing was done, which means that the whole of catholicism has sinned

Maria, was the Pope and the Bishops not “Catholicism”? Did they not sin? If the leaders of an organisation cover up and therefore encourage more rape does that not mean that the organisation itself is sinning?

I would suggest having a class on thinking, I don’t mean just moral issues. But really try to engage Irish people to analyse things in general, these comments sections might be easier on our eyes then. :)

Not only 84%, it was 5% higher than the previous census. Given the bad PR the RC Church has had in the meantime that figure can only be regarded as amazing much to the chagrin of the various Catholic haters on this site.

@Tertullian:

Catholic haters? The term is (no doubt, unintentionally) ambiguous. Catholics are among the greatest haters of all (and not just on this site)…

Oh, and, yes, the figure is amazing but not as amazing as the fact that adults still apparently believe in the utter twaddle of the christian faith!

That’s great for parents who want the Educate Together model of education, but other parents don’t and it shouldn’t be foisted on them. A Catholic ethos doesn’t have to take a huge amount of time-it’s more about a way of living one’s life and many parents feel they should have the right to choose a denominational education.

Why should it not be ‘foisted’ on parents? Is religion not a personal thing? We live in a society of multiple religions (look at the census!) and I think it is serving the child far better to be teaching them about world religions. They should be enabled to understand spirituality in all it’s forms. Parents should manage their children’s religious beliefs and practices within the home. Or is too much effort to do that?!

Joanne, I believe it’s all down to choice and substantial numbers of parents want denominational education. I really think we have to have more than one model to suit the various requirements of parents and their children. In my view, you can have a particular ethos and also teach children about different religions and beliefs. Both are perfectly compatible. I don’t believe religion is totally personal as, in lots of religions, faith is community based and the focus is on looking outwards towards the world, not just on what we do behind closed doors. I’d hate my children to think that their values are just for the home, to be forgotten the minute they walk out the door.

Maybe in the form of cultural studies, where religion may be discussed as opposed to taught; but not religion as a subject itself.

I presume you, Ronan, were educated in a religion free school system and so escaped the horrible experience of being “brainwashed”. As regards teaching children about hellfire and damnation, I doubt if you will find any Catholic school who does that. You seem to be profoundly ignorant of what RE is all about.

Apologies. I don’t know where the “Ronan” came from.

Tertullian, you seem to be profoundly ignorant of a lot more than RE!

No actually, I was raised by Catholic parents and attended a Catholic school run by Marist priests, so I’ve first-hand experience when it comes to religious brainwashing, to this day I can recall the childhood fear I had of hell and even though it was fairly irrational, as a kid at the time it was all very real. Now on saying that I do realise that schools aren’t regularly teaching kids about hellfire & damnation, but the threat is still there, ask any 10 year old “Catholic” child what hell is and they’ll quickly tell you.

Leaving the teachings of hellfire & damnation aside, religion pollutes a child’s mind with lots of other bullshit, homosexuality is a sin (punishable by death in the bible), men are superior to women, excepting truths without evidence (faith) is a virtue etc. etc., filling a child’s mind with this kind of dark age nonsense is a form of child abuse and the most unfortunate thing is that the parents think they’re actually doing some sort of good.

Would love to know the exact figures of those who claim that teaching our kids about God/Jesus is filling them with nonsense and lies are the things of myths and legend, yet Santa still turns up every christmas, and the tooth fairy calls around when their childrens tooth falls out.

Are you going to keep your children in a bubble where they don’t see other people practising their religion? My kids are Catholic, but I’ve no problem with them seeing their friends take out their prayer mats, lighting candles to Vishnu or discussing their views on Karma. We shouldn’t have to be in our homes to express what we are and religion, for many of us, is part of what we are.

@ Roderic

The difference is that they eventually find out or are told Santa and the tooth fairy aren’t real whereas the God myth is reinforced if they express any doubts. If people still believed in Santa as adults then it would be a problem…

@ Maria – I do not plan on having my children in a bubble at all! Of course not.

Expressing religious beliefs can sometimes lead to friction. In an ideal world we should be all able to express our beliefs in harmony without consequence. We do not live in an ideal world. There is a huge amount of bigotry in a lot of religions with strong views on women, contraception, homosexuality etc. I do not want my children exposed to hate and bigotry. I have no problem with my children being educated about the religions that are out there as awareness but not as a teaching of this is how you should live your life. The classroom is NOT the place for my children to see people express their religious beliefs! The classroom is for educating my children with far more important things that will help them grow, mature and have a clear view of the world.

@ Lorcan – EXACTLY……

lest we forget ;-)

How do you know?

A scientist HAS actually come up with a formula that proves that it is ilogical to assume that something which we believe is unprovable does not actually exist. So if you Andrew and Giovanni insist on this argument prove it. There is a lot more evidence out there that Jesus did exist and that God does actually exist, than not.

Roderic …. and Ganesha, the Elephant God, is there proof he exists?

Philosophy is mostly bunkum. Do you mean Science? Philosophy underlines much of Theology and has proven pretty useless in understanding the universe. Nearly all the subjects of Philosophy have been replaced by Science and all the big questions answered by Scientific study.

William, you are mistaken. The principles of logic, which form the foundations upon which the whole edifice of modern science are built, are a philosophical construct. Science has stemmed out of the work of the greatest thinkers, the great philosophers, Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras…….algebra and mathematics were evolved by Persian philosophers, alchemy gave birth to chemistry, etc etc. It is arrogant to assume that modern science is anything other than the offspring of thought.
At any rate, most of the most exciting scientific discoveries have not been lab based- they have been discovered by great thinkers while following wild flights of fancy and have frequently been described as akin to mystical experiences.
One of the most important things that philosophy can offer the modern world is the skill of debating. Reasoned, well formed argument according to principles of logic would make a refreshing and enlightening change to the arrogant mud-slinging that most people seem to get by this on these comment pages!

Anne, I did say “mostly bunkum”. Logics in Trinity, up to recently at least, was run by a priest. That says a lot about the philosophy of logic.

Philosophy pre dates Science but very little of Science is based on Philosophy. Maths was never really part of it. Why did the philosophers fight Galileo? Most of what philosophers guessed was wrong and their invalid beliefs held for thousands of years. Ethics without Evolution is meaningless. I didn’t say anything about labs. Your comment, “..they have been discovered by great thinkers while following wild flights of fancy” is contradicted by Einstein when he said his work was 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration. Science is hard work, Philosophy is navel gazing. Why are we here and what’s our purpose is now a scientific endeavour. Philosophy today is about as useful as a wooden wheel.

William, Einstein isn’t a good example for your argument as the theory of relativity was presented with no reference whatsoever to any science that had preceded it- Einstein was an office clerk, not a scientist- he realized the theory of relativity whilst imagining himself racing across the Universe on a photon of light. A good example of how exceptional science owes more to the imagination than to the scientific method!

I think there is a danger with fundamentalism of any kind, and I include scientific absolutism in that. Science does not hold the holy grail. The Big Questions it has not answered, and that is even if you keep the big questions within it’s scope. Other Big Questions such as those of the nature of Beauty, Love and how we can create more Harmony in our fractured world, it doesn’t even acknowledge.

Science without the imagination is a dead duck.
A World with 3000 TV channels but without mystery and beauty is a dead world.

Science has achieved lots of technological and medical advances but it is not on the pedestal you seem to think it is. Philosophy does not claim to be ‘right’ about anything- it is a training of the mind not another dull dogma.

Ps Priests also make up most of the Psychoanalytic movement in Dublin- I think we can agree that that says more about the country than anything about the subject.

To conclude. I think all fundamentalism is misguided.
Anyway, if you were familiar with modern science you would be aware that certainty is beginning to slip away there too and reality in fact seems to conform more with what the mystics believed than anyone could possibly have predicted! eg quantum entanglement etc…..

Einstein had a good degree in Maths & Physics before he started his research. His day job was a clerk for a while. Einstein’s earlier work was to improve upon Newton’s Theories which were found wanting in certain conditions. Theoretical Physicists are not Philosophers and don’t see themselves as such. The basis for their work is hard graft using maths and logic and they work hand in glove with experiential Physicists who validate their work. Often they will come up with plans for experimenters to test their theories. John Bell from Northern Ireland is a prime example.

Science is indeed studying issues such as Beauty and yes also Love. I’ve read numerous articles about the bio-mechanical issues associated with falling in Love. Love of parents for their offspring is an obvious Evolutionary benefit. Love blindly evolved as did our perception of Beauty. The Philosophers wasted their time for millennia thinking about these issues. Darwin, a scientist, solved most of them in one book.

Quantum Entanglement (John Bell again) has nothing to do with mystics. That’s more bunkum. As is the notion that we live in a “fractured world”. All statistical indicators point to an ongoing improvement in the human condition.

the article actually states

“of all the parts of a school curriculum Religious Instruction is by far the most important” and goes on to say that “a religious spirit should inform and vivify the whole work of the school”.

It’s kind of funny you say maths is more useful, seeing that the majority of maths teachers are not qualified to teach maths. From about 52,000 students who sat Leaving Certificate maths in 2011, just over 8,000 sat the higher-level paper. While 10% of students failed maths at ordinary level, a total of 4,367 students failed maths across all levels. Science is just regurgitating facts, where in it has an important role, most subjects taught are taught with rote learning practices. There needs to be a drastic change in the way subjects are taught, moving away from exam based rote models, into something learners will actually remember. I only remember snippets from my school days, despite achieving quite highly as regards LC points. I don’t feel it should be scrapped, just it’s role diminished somewhat. I do feel one of our greatest selling points is the spectrum of an education we receive, even if 11 years later the knowledge is somewhat fleeting.

In your opinion, William. An opinion which is not shared by very many people, thankfully. Although, I’ve no problem with the Harry Potter books!

It’s not an opinion, I can prove it.

Well, go ahead! Make my day!!

William, in my opinion you consider religious education to mean Catholicism. You appear to have a very narrow minded view which I would not like to speculate as to it origins. How can you consider any education as child abuse or destroying a childs mind? As a parent I find your remarks about bringing up my children in my faith offensive. I will not say any more on this as I feel it is a waste of my precious time and I may be giving you credibility.

William

Will you ever hurry up and show us the proof you have

I think that we can all agree that one’s mind is precious; it may be the most complex thing in the universe. A mind that is corrupted by brainwashing is therefore a broken mind. No one should want their children to have broken minds. To cause a child’s mind to be so damaged that it spends its life following some religion for no other reason than it was brainwashed is abuse.

In the vast majority of cases around the world the children of Catholic parents become Catholics, Muslims become Muslims, Hindus, Hindus, Mormons, Mormons etc. In the past with old religions it was exactly the same.

Therefore in the vast majority of cases people are not of a particular faith for any other reason but their “education” into that faith.

All these religions contradict one another. Some have one god, others many. Their laws and rules disagree. All have different origin myths. At least most therefore must be wrong.

There is no evidence whatsoever that any particular religion is the correct one.

There is now massive evidence that we evolved, that the planets formed from atoms made in stars and that the stars formed from cooling Hydrogen gas. There is also massive physical and mathematical evidence that this naturally evolving universe came about as a quantum event needing no cause over 13 billion years ago.

Therefore the only logical reason that people follow “their” religion is that they have no choice.

The reason they have no choice is that they were successfully brainwashed and cannot choose.

To brainwash someone, especially someone defenceless such as a child, is immoral and a serious form of child abuse.

One reason Gerard that you remain a Catholic and get offended by statements such as mine is because you were also brainwashed as you probably brainwash your child in an endless cycle until one of your descendants has the brains and logic to overcome it. You also need to use some of your precious time. Btw the origins of my “narrow minded view point” is in an Irish Christian Brothers School. They failed to screw up my mind but I was lucky, I’m logical and naturally sceptical. Most people aren’t. Most people are gullible and easily led.

William you make me laugh. You assume I am a catholic. Never ASSUME as it makes an ASS of U and ME. Whe I referred to bringing up my children in my faith I did not specify. You are blinded by your posiition on catholic schools my friend. Let me pose a question to you. Do you believe any Government will change the school structure for Catholics given that 74% of the population are Catholics?

@Gerard

“I will not say any more on this as I feel it is a waste of my precious time and I may be giving you credibility.”

God love you, pet. You find his remarks offensive? Well, you’re entitled to be offended, just as anyone is entitled to offend you. It’s not illegal. Climb down off your crucifix and engage in a little adult discussion.

Gerard, OK, whatever religion you are. They all indulge in brainwashing their children. Ask yourself what you “teach” your children, is it really teaching them or telling them.

Education must teach people to think, to question, to doubt. Religion is the exact opposite.

William, my eldest son is 16 and his beliefs differ drom mine. So I am not brainwashing my children. I am teaching them to respect everyones beliefs.

You are being too vague to comment. You belong to one Christian sect and your son to one of the other 16,000? He’s realised religion is nonsense maybe?

It’s wrong to respect everyone’s beliefs. I presume you don’t respect the beliefs of dangerous cults? Do you respect the beliefs of Mohammad Atta? Do you respect the beliefs of Scientologists? Jehovah Witnesses who let their children die for want of a blood transfusion because of their leaders’ interpretation of their holy book? I have no respect for people who believe in nonsense. I have even less respect and outright condemnation of their more intelligent leaders who screw up people’s minds. The amount of suffering caused to ordinary people by religious leaders through the centuries has been colossal. I don’t respect them I despise them. They should be jailed for fraud. Selling access to a non existent heaven for your money and your crawling sycophancy.

@William

“I am teaching them to respect everyones beliefs.”

Really? No critical evaluation? Anything goes? So, if someone believe’s it’s ok to abuse kids…? Etc.

A belief does not automatically merit respect. A person’s right to believe what they (claim to) believe does. I’d rather you taught them to think…

*believes

(Dammit, The Journal, give us an edit feature FFS!)

and the red thumbers are out in force today …

i agree but one problem will always persist and that will be the opinion/point of view of the teacher,

point of view of the teacher is always an issue, I don’t want to be taught Irish history by a member of the IRA or the UVF. Maybe both? Everyone’s got an agenda. Education should include everything, and no one’s subject should monopolize. Again problem is Religion wants monopoly.

The Roman Catholic church has proved itself to be nothing more than worldwide pedophiliac ring! In my opinion, it should be deemed an illegal organisation!

just because something was done years ago it does not make it OK – hey I spent my whole childhood with no seat belt with 4 kids in the back of my parents’ car!

I am not a Catholic, yet I went to a Catholic school. Yet, if I were to go back to school again, I would choose a Catholic school over any non-denominational or educate together school anyday. Yes, we did have prayers every morning, and religion twice a week, but as long as they respected my beliefs (i.e. my not saying hail Marys, crossing myself, etc.), I had no problem respecting theirs (by standing up and staying quiet during prayers). In fact, I feel my exposure to the Catholic ethos gave me a better understanding (not agreement with) of the Catholic church, which is a good thing in a country that still professes to be overwhelmingly Catholic.
Everyone admits that the Catholic church, for good or bad, has played a major role in our history and our culture as a nation, and I feel that the Catholic ethos of my school was in a way very much part of my education for life.

And secondly, whether we like it or not, with so many Catholics still in the country, there is akways going to be a demand for Catholic schools, yet if we start differing between ‘Catholic schools’ for Catholics only, and non-denominational schools for everyone else, we will be just creating a division that needs not be there. As long as all religions and non are respected, I see no harm in respecting other faiths and using our exposure to them to learn.

Two commentators who couldn’t get to the end of my remark before hauling out the hellfire! I suggested that religion be used as a forum in which to educate students on all religions, from a respectful and academic viewpoint. I don’t think that sound too crazy and like it or not, Catholicism is one of those religions! The actions of a few should not condemn the many who hold such beliefs, and we should be mindful of that before we start spewing bile! For the record, I hold no religious beliefs, but I would not presume to enforce my opinion on anyone who had them. Which adds some weight to my original viewpoint in that if religion was taught to students as a whole, objectively and more academically, perhaps they would grow up with better sense to live and let live!

@Ryan – indeed religion should not be given such a prominent role in ANY school, not just the ones for non-Catholics.

I grew up in a predominantly Catholic country too, but elsewhere in the world, in Catholic and Protestant countries alike, schools are secular and State-run, even if they do sometimes allow for indoctrination classes. That is the normal state of education elsewhere in the world. The Irish system is quite unique.

But has it worked in those countries? Norway for example has a huge amount of conflict between religions for example. I think if it relgions were taught in a respectful manner in schools (not indoctrinated as you put it), tend the conflict that arises would be lessened. Throughout history, ignorance and misunderstanding has been one of the great catalysts for conflict. Why should we then say that people should not be educated in the major religon of the country, when it can help integrate people into a deeper understanding of one of the major forces that shaped our country.
There is no indoctrination of religion in schools. Exposure to a religion is not indoctrination. Yes, I think even Atheism should be discussed in schools. To understand Atheism, all you need to know is a person does not believe in the existance of a god. Religions in contrast have a miriad of different theologies and beleifs that, if we learn them in school or, better still, if we are exposed to them in practice, will only make us better prepared for understanding our society.

Yes, in my school’s case the “religion” classes were catechism and I would classify them as indoctrination.

My point however was that it is not the standard, worldwide, to have an education system which divides children based on the religious affiliation of parents.

Regarding Norway: if you want to open a wholly different can of worms about the issue of religion and immigration from Muslim countries, you are welcome to :-)

My experience was an open discussion of religion. I finshed secondary school two years ago, so I expect this remains the case.
My parents denomination is Presbyterian, yet I had no problem enrolling in a Catholic ethos school and having my own beleifs respected.
And I only used Islam and Norway as an example to try to illustrate my argument. I am sure there are many other countries and religions which could illustrate my point even better.

Muslim schools teach the Muslim religion, Jewish schools teach the jewish religion, so to state that no other schools in the world teach religion is utter and complete nonsense. You can be guaranteed that there are still more children being baptised as RC than not. You will find that there are still more children making their communion and confirmation than not.

My brother in law and his wife are dedicated aethiests, they got married in a registry office and did not have their 2 girls baptised. However, their youngest daughter who is 11 decided that she wanted to be baptised. Her argument to her parents was quite logical. Her argument was that as much as her parentd dont believe in God they couldnt prove he doesnt exist. Just because they dont believe in Heaven it does not mean that it does not exist. Her belief was that as both her parents were baptised into the Catholic Religion they would see one another in heavan when their time comes, but yet they didnt care that if heaven really does exist she wouldnt see them when her time on earth came to an end.
As she had sat down and logically thought out her argument they decided to go ahead, respect her wishes and belief and had her baptised.

ah *that* argument again…

Roderic, can anyone prove that The Elephant God, Ganesha, doesn’t exist? How about the Flying Spaghetti Monster? The Tooth Fairy, Santa and finally the little green monkey orbiting Pluto? Pathetic argument.

Or the self-creating Universe, William?

Maria. The Big Bang Theory has a huge amount of evidence to support it. Are you not aware of that? I doubt that there is a professional physicist in the world that doubts it or can supply contrary evidence.

William, one thing that phycists can’t explain was what set off the big bang. If it was nuclear gasses, combustion, etc., where did it come from? what made them in the first place? You forget that the big bang theory is still a theory…it hasn’t been proven. So, judging by your own ‘logic’, your argument is pathetic too.God does not need to be proven. But if things need to be proven to be believed, then you should not believe in the Big Bang either. Personally, I find it easier to believe in the existance of a God, than in the lucky chance that everything happened perfectly as a result of a spark in the void.

p.s. I am not saying that you should not believe in the big bang theory. But to poke fun at religion is rather self defeating, seeing that science hasn’t proven anything yet.

Ryan, you misunderstand the scientific word “theory”. You incorrectly think it means hypotheses. In science a theory must have proof and especially no counter evidence. You cannot prove anything 100% and that is the case with The Big Bang Theory but the evidence is so great that it is now accepted and at worst it would have to be modified but it cannot be untrue. There is no question of belief here. You obviously do not accept the Big Bang Theory because you haven’t studied it enough. Your reason for not believing it is down to a lack of knowledge. Those are the facts.

There is no difference whatsoever in me poking fun at religion and you poking fun at someone who say believed that human minds came from survivors from a billion year old intergalactic war who were dumped down volcanoes by the victors or that the Earth was flat or that it was 6,000 years old or that the Sun went around the Earth.

there is evidence? Show me! I actually have an interest in this sort of thing, so I wouldn’t say I haven’t ‘studied’ enough…I just question what I study. I am not saying it is untrue, but there are still major loopholes in the ‘theory’. One marvelous piece of counter evidence is, what initiated the process in the first place. We all agree that, for every action, there is a reaction. So, by the same logic, for every reaction, there is an action. So the Big Bang resulted because of some initial action. What caused that action? How were those elements that initially caused the action made? What made them, etc. etc.
I would be indebted if you enlighten me on this grave misunderstanding and ignorance on my part

Ryan, it’s obvious from your questions that you can’t have studied any of these matters. I cannot teach you physics in a thread.

“One marvelous piece of counter evidence is, what initiated the process in the first place”

There’s no such thing as “Nuclear Gas”. The Big Bang was not “set off”. Quantum Mechanics (QM) explains most of what occurs at atomic or smaller sizes. In QM an event can occur for no reason, no cause. In fact it’s happening continually. Particles come into being and generally disappear again for no reason. The initial even that created our universe was a quantum event. It occurred in a VERY small area. Before the matter disappeared it expanded and inflated and is still doing so today but is now much cooler and much more massive. So you can have something without a cause. The sum total of the energy and mass in this universe is zero. The statement “To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction” does not apply to the quantum sized world.

You have illuminated my mind! i fully understand now how quantum physics coming from nothing, made an earth with a perfect ecosystem, intelligent creatures, just the right amount of oxegen, the perfect distance from the sun, and the existance of a universe unmeasurable in size.
Just one question. Why then does the Large Hadron Collider fire particles at immense speed at each other in an effort to understand the begining of our universe? Wouldn’t it be better just to create a void and see what happens?
Believe what you will, I just find it hard to believe the perfectness around me is down to mere chance.

Ryan, the Earth’s ecosystem wasn’t made in the big bang, it evolved. If you saw the original Earth before life you wouldn’t be as impressed. Your point is like saying that ears are amazing because they can hold up your glasses. The oxygen is created by life in a feedback system. If the Earth wasn’t where it was we wouldn’t be holding this conversation. It’s called the Anthropic Principal. Life is not mere chance, it was inevitable. On any planet with liquid water and stability life will probably evolve and create what you call the “perfectness”. This isn’t a belief, it’s what happened. Science has proved it, you just haven’t read about it enough to understand it. Oh, and it disproves all religious belief.

@Ailis:

“…should give students the chance to … respect all religions.”

Or to despise them…

Am I correct in saying that in Ireland you can have Catholic, Muslim, Protestant, Jewish schools but it’s illegal to have a non denominational or Atheist school?

Did you cover the “morals” of discrimination against Homosexuals?

I don’t remember exactly, but I’m sure it came up at some stage. I remember talking about homosexuality anyway, and it wasn’t in a negative manner. You obviously didn’t understand the point of my comment, being that I was in a Catholic school and I never got the impression religion class was pushing Catholicism down anyone’s throats.

Sure, why not? Except that atheism is as much a religion as not fishing is a hobby. And secular humanism is a sociopolitical and religious view, not a religion.

And atheist doctrine?
Atheism can not and should never be described as a belief system, it’s simply a label for someone who does not believe in organised religion. In my opinion the word atheism does not need to exist.

For example, there is not work for “someone who does not believe in Santa”, it is simply assumed that the person turned around and questioned the idea in a mature and logical way and decided it wasn’t correct for them to believe in it. I am still amazed by blind faith, it is human nature to be inquisitive and question everything around us, yet people bumble along believing in virgin mothers, walking dead men and the earth being less than 5,000 years old. Also please keep in mind I’m only referring to the Christianity with my points, but I am very much an equal opportunity atheist with any religion.

The burden of proof does not lie with me to prove a statement, it lies with the person who asserted that statement. For example someone states ” I believe in god”, and just because I ask “why?” there is no burden of proof laid on me to prove or disprove that statement.

lets do a POLL

what is RE class in school best remembered for

-A- religious education
-B- a prime oportunity to get the homework you didnt bother your arse to do the night before, done!!

A or B people, lets hear ye :)

I would wildly disagree with it being an “important part of life for the majority”, what are the church going numbers? Not people who say they are X religion but people who actually practice. Unless they practice I dont see how you can claim it to have any importance on your life, or for you to even be of X religion.

Do you think the majority of people ie. +2million practice religion?

Conor, the Christian churches have Played a huge role in establishing the values and philosophies of the western world. In Ireland belief in Christianity is declining but that does not mean it is not influencing how people behave. Muslim people here are influenced by their religion. If religion is not important, why so many comments.

“in order to understand the world.” I think the subject you’re thinking of there is science.

Terry, Philosophy existed long before religion (apart maybe from paganism, mythology, druidism) etc… You are confusing religion and morality. Religion is the organization of a set of beliefs around the same basic moral ‘trunk’ so that society may function. Most religions have the same basic creeds ‘how can we reconcile our individuality with society’. The development of religions into hierarchical structures and superstitious mumbo jumbo has created the problem of control and power leading to wars. Religion is used to control. Whereas you are right that ‘religions’ for the moment are our only way of moral instruction, reflection, and communal reflection (spirituality) is the only way to obtain true moral order (see post).

@ Terry, no problem with anything you said there, except I’m referring to now.

how would you say christianity influences the majority in Ireland day to day? What change in behaviour do you think they have because of it? Islam wise, I’m pretty sure I can point to changes of behaviours from the default that Islam would influence. However no christian I have known personally (in college) has not responded in ridicule to the suggestion that it would affect there sexual habits. they believe in God, they’re parents are catholic so they refer to that as their religion, but its not for any sensible meaning of the phrase.

That’s what I mean. History is irrelevant to this point.

Cathy, your points about religion being used to control the masses doesn’t really wash in democratic society where intelligent people freely choose to practise a religion. Religion guides our behaviour-it doesn’t control it and we’re not all mindless zombies being controlled by some giant puppet master. If anything, religion should make us question the society we live in and seek better solutions for society’s ills.

Cathy, Conor, interesting points. Re philosophy and earlier religions, Christianity has absorbed aspects of them and there are many overlaps between them. I appreciate the difference between morality and religion ok. However the majority here have been at religion classes and some of its teaching has rubbed off. Many people under 40, say are more influenced by TV programs than religion in terms of what is ok and not ok. Is this good? How would you like to see children’s sense of morality developed? Also, in school or only at home?

You like many people mix up “Catholic Formation” with religions as a subject.

“…stop the generalistion and stereo-typing of religious beliefs.” What does that mean?

For all parents of school age children who’d like to join a campaign for an Educate Together Multi-Denominational school in Dublin City:

http://www.et2ldublin.org
https://www.facebook.com/groups/educatetogethersecondary/

Unfortunately we can’t have non-religious schools in this country!

sorry this was not meant to be a reply to Tom’s comment…

TJD, can I be the first to welcome you to our planet. Presumably you have just arrived. :)

I went to a Christian Brothers School where I was beaten until I stood up to them in my mid teens. I was fed a load of codswallop and punished for asking questions. I was told that only Catholics went to heaven and spent several years thereafter looking at non Catholics as weirdoes.

This anti-Catholic bias, is it from the Irish Times’ Catholic Fintan O’Toole or the Catholic John Waters or maybe the Catholic Breda O’Brien or even the Catholic science writer William Reville?

Catholics and all religions run schools for one reason and one reason only to spread the “faith”, i.e. indoctrinate more children. It’s not for any higher purpose.

I had the same experience in the later 80′s- 90′s, anyone with a question or doubt had the fear of God driven into them with a stick, and made feel sinful and remorseful for even thinking against the good lord.

To the age of 18 I knew of only knowing Protestants, Jehovah’s ( both neighbors) and Jews were only mentioned in the bible, at home I was criticised and made feel bad for hurting my mother when I didn’t want to go to mass or eat that bread. The only description of this was indoctrination through guilt, needless to saw I fought it and just never mention it at home now. I first heard and learnt about Islam from working in a restaurant with guys from Bangladesh. (Who drank and partied as they believed their god couldn’t see them in Ireland… good times)
I’m fairly confident that if children where only introduced to organised religions and all the dogma in late teens religions days would be numbered.

Derek, you reminded me of the Mother’s Influence there. I stopped going to Mass (aka mass brainwashing) about 15 and still had to pretend to go until leaving home. Partly because my old man would have gone apeshit and partly because my mother would have driven me mad with her belief that I was doomed. She didn’t find out I stopped going to mass until I was living in London and when she visited I didn’t even know where the local Catholic Church was :)

They were so religious that none of my parents or my wife’s parents went to our registry office wedding in London. Mind you that was about 1979. My father in law, the local sacristan, tried to apologise to me in his late 80′s but I told him I didn’t do confession and he would just have to live with his decision.

As one of Ireland’s leading religious journalists said to me, “no one hates like a Christian”. They’re all barking mad.

Nice one William, unable to forgive a man in his 80s for not turning up at your wedding! Very mature.

Brainwashing isn’t always successful. With modern scientific knowledge it’s becoming more difficult to convince even young teenage children the tooth fairy exists. A free press and even the Internet is giving people ammunition to fight back against their abusers.

@Tertullian:

No, it doesn’t. It took a long time and a lot of pain to rid myself of the poison of the religious garbage I was stuffed with. And I know plenty of other who would say the same.

You’re quite the aggressor, I notice!

Schools might have been set up by religious orders, but they were and continue to be funded by taxpayers. In essence, the catholic church had a free run at education and healthcare in the early years of the state, and managed to gain control of both sectors in order to ensure that a catholic ethos prevailed.
I am concerned at the here and now tough, the reality that all the costs (apart from parental top-ups) of education falls on the taxpayers, and that should mean that taxpayers have equal access to education. The reality is different though; non-Catholics are discriminated against.

Maria, what about the child’s choice? The very fact that the vast majority of Muslims have Muslim parents and Catholics, Catholic parents etc should tell you that most indoctrinated children have no choice but to believe what their abusers forced them to believe.

And, if you had children, William, would you expose them to all the arguments in favour of God existing or would to dismiss anything spiritual as childish nonsense?

I have three children, all grown up. Which God Maria should I have exposed them to? Yours? Maybe Scientology’s Tethans, perhaps the Gods of Olympus?

There aren’t any arguments left in favour of any gods existing. They’ve all been discredited. I’d be fascinated if you could tell me one that isn’t.

Maria teaching that germs exist is not indoctrination. Teaching that humans can be born by asexual means is indoctrination. Teaching genetics or immunology is not indoctrination teaching that an invisible being answers prayers is. Teaching evolution is not indoctrination teaching that a human can rise from the dead is. You might like Catholicism and the escapism it brings you but it is not evidence based. Not only that but modern scientific evidence makes it laughable. Hence it is not education.

Cyril, there is an even stronger point that can be made. Genetics for example is taught under the rules of the Scientific Method so it’s taught as a theory and the evidence is supplied. Religion isn’t taught in this manner it’s told to children as a bald fact. I was told god made the world, not there is a theory that god made the world. I wasn’t told there is a contrary theory that it coalesced from matter created in a older star. Furthermore fear is used to ram religion down children’s throats. I was told that I would burn in hell for ever if I didn’t practice my religion and not sin. Furthermore religion is taught in a standard brainwashing manner, repetition. My wife only mentioned recently that for years their father made them say the brainwashing rosary every single night, all 10 of his children :) PS I can still say the Hail Mary…it’s etched in my brain.

William, you are mistaken. The principles of logic, which form the foundations upon which the whole edifice of modern science are built, are a philosophical construct. Science has stemmed out of the work of the greatest thinkers, the great philosophers, Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras…….algebra and mathematics were evolved by Persian philosophers, alchemy gave birth to chemistry, etc etc. It is arrogant to assume that modern science is anything other than the offspring of thought.
At any rate, most of the most exciting scientific discoveries have not been lab based- they have been discovered by great thinkers while following wild flights of fancy and have frequently been described as akin to mystical experiences.
One of the most important things that philosophy can offer the modern world is the skill of debating. Reasoned, well formed argument according to principles of logic would make a refreshing and enlightening change to the arrogant mud-slinging that most people seem to get by this on these comment pages!

I know what happens when schools get ideas on spirituality and religion. I don’t like it.

So what happens Joost??? enlighten us please.

What’s a “spiritual need”? I don’t seem to have any. I suspect you have to be successfully brainwashed into believing in a spiritual need before you need one.

Where in the Bible does it say anything about say copyright? Smoking in the work place? Homosexual partnerships? I could go on.

First: STOP SHOUTING!, and secondly, the Bible is most certainly not the first work of literature (can I say that?) to mention morality, or attempt to set a moral guideline or code … it is not unique in this respect (in approach or content). Any student of Ancient Greek philosophy (an influence on the New Testament, “the body is evil, but the soul is pure”), or anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of social norms and their evolution will tell you this. In fact, one can find many examples in the ´holy book´, which completely go against the grain of acceptable behaviour towards our fellow human beings. In short, just stop!

Ha ha ha! ALL IN CAPITAL LETTERS! Hilarious!

And, as far as I know, there are no laws (at least, not in Ireland, yet) against coveting, taking the Lord’s name in vain, worshipping other Gods, etc.

Time for your medicine, I think…

David, I don’t think he was shouting. Just new to computers.