Berlin vote on religion in education

[Tony Williams]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8016990.stm

"Voters in Berlin are preparing to go to the polls to decide whether children should have a choice between classes in secular ethics or religion."

[Pebble]

Just shows how pivotal it is to religious communities to have the freedom to brainwash kids. Hope sense prevails.

[polomint38]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8016990.stm

"Voters in Berlin are preparing to go to the polls to decide whether children should have a choice between classes in secular ethics or religion."

Will it be the children making the choice or their parents?

[Pebble]

Will it be the children making the choice or their parents?

Neither: the bullies that will be empowered by such legislation will be working hard to convince communities that voting for such measures will be in the long term interests of the whole community. I suspect that most who vote for a return to the bad old days will do so without any real understanding of the implications.

[polomint38]

Neither: the bullies that will be empowered by such legislation will be working hard to convince communities that voting for such measures will be in the long term interests of the whole community. I suspect that most who vote for a return to the bad old days will do so without any real understanding of the implications.

I meant on a day to day basis, if this goes through.

Parental pressure and peer pressure will be more important than the individuals person views, as with most things when still a child (and through the rest of life for many, if not most people).

I did religion in school (sort of required in Catholic school).

[Imox]

Parents have the supreme right and duty to raise a family/children. They decide. Not the government. And for that reason they should have the right to decide which philosophy is taught.

In my state Thuringia parents had this free choice always since 1991. If we want to be democratic countries, we must tolerate the freedom of opinion. And as much as I know, there are discussions about the Bible not forbidden in these religion lessons.

[Pebble]

Parents have the supreme right and duty to raise a family/children. They decide. Not the government. And for that reason they should have the right to decide which philosophy is taught.

In my state Thuringia parents had this free choice always since 1991. If we want to be democratic countries, we must tolerate the freedom of opinion. And as much as I know, there are discussions about the Bible not forbidden in these religion lessons.

The question is not that of the parents rights, rather the schools/government responsibility. It is not being suggested that the children are forced to become secular, but rather that the particular beliefs that the parents wish their child to follow is a matter for them and their community to provide.

From a societal perspective, it is vital that children whatever their beliefs get on together, thus general training in all major religions or education in ethics becomes the priority.

The reason religious groups are so upset, is that they have observed that without state/school subsidised opportunities for early brainwashing they are losing adherents. Once this is re-established, they can use peer pressure to force parents into complying with their stance - since there will be 'no excuse' for not ensuring that their children are brainwashed too.

[chaggle]

it is vital that children whatever their beliefs get on together

Right. How stupid does that make Tony Blair's 'Faith School' idiocy sound?

[Tony Williams]

Right. How stupid does that make Tony Blair's 'Faith School' idiocy sound?
Very. One of the worst aspects of his time in power, IMO (after Iraq...).

I do not object to parents arranging religious education for their children (although I'd prefer them to leave it them to decide as they grow up), but there is no way that this should be state-subsidised, or be presented in school as if it were as factual as other subjects.

[Imox]

Kids can choose anyway whether they want make Music or Arts, Latin or French, Physics or Biology and so on. So, they should be able to choose any philosophy too. They won't die if they learn something about the Bible. And if they want to study history of art, a little bit religion might be right helpful. You may even study Religion at the university even if you're not religious.
And at last, nobody is forced to attend Religion.

[Pebble]

And at last, nobody is forced to attend Religion.

Yea, right!
Perhaps not directly in your neck of the woods, in the last 60 years. Peer pressure is a wonderful thing, no compunction required. However, try living in a Taliban controlled area, or being dependent on missionaries for food etc etc.

[Tony Williams]

Kids can choose anyway whether they want make Music or Arts, Latin or French, Physics or Biology and so on. So, they should be able to choose any philosophy too. They won't die if they learn something about the Bible. And if they want to study history of art, a little bit religion might be right helpful.
I have no objection to students learning about religion - in fact, I think it's useful - as long as the course covers religion in general (not focusing on any specific faith), contrasted with secular philosophies, and does not at any point imply that religious beliefs have a factual basis.

The problem is that when religion is taught at school, it tends to be taught by religious people who start from the basis that their faith is valid.


You may even study Religion at the university even if you're not religious.
Yes, I did biblical studies as a subsidiary one year (nothing else on offer appealed to me much, and there was a very pretty girl on the course ::)). I found it very interesting, because the lecturer took an entirely secular approach and just analysed the Bible as an historical document. I had no idea what his personal beliefs were - which is as it should be.

[farmersboy]

Kids can choose anyway whether they want make Music or Arts, Latin or French, Physics or Biology and so on. So, they should be able to choose any philosophy too. They won't die if they learn something about the Bible. And if they want to study history of art, a little bit religion might be right helpful. You may even study Religion at the university even if you're not religious.
And at last, nobody is forced to attend Religion.

It is still compulsory in the UK, regardless of how it's dressed up or titled - whether it's called RE, Social Studies or Philosophy there's no escaping it, it's not a lesson you're allowed to drop. A bit like the drama lessons my 13 yr old son has to endure at the moment, an utter waste of time.

[polomint38]

It is still compulsory in the UK, regardless of how it's dressed up or titled - whether it's called RE, Social Studies or Philosophy there's no escaping it, it's not a lesson you're allowed to drop. A bit like the drama lessons my 13 yr old son has to endure at the moment, an utter waste of time.

I like drama >:-)
Don't insult it, as a punishment go stand in the corner and pretend you are a tree for 30 minutes. :cheesy:

[farmersboy]

I like drama >:-)
Don't insult it, as a punishment go stand in the corner and pretend you are a tree for 30 minutes. :cheesy:

Fine...call me Treebeard.

Speaking from my own experiences at school, there were many hours taken up with wasteful and frivolous lessons - RE, Social Studies, Music, Drama...

I hated school.

[Imox]

Yea, right!
Perhaps not directly in your neck of the woods, in the last 60 years.
Indeed, in East Germany there was no religion at schools. But we had a lot of Marxism-Leninism instead.

[Tony Williams]

Indeed, in East Germany there was no religion at schools. But we had a lot of Marxism-Leninism instead.
I thought that was a religion - a belief system lacking any evidence of validity? ;)

[IandR]

Usually absent from reports about referenda in other countries, such as the "pitting religion against ethics" (Der Spiegel) show in Berlin, has been comment on the "absent elephant" (the opposite of elephant in the room). What is missing? In UK and its countries there is near total absence of the right to trigger a referendum.

The BBC report which you cite states that the Berlin "pro-Reli" ballot resulted from a petition but omitted (deliberately I think) to mention that the electorate has the legal right to demand and get a referendum. This is the case in all of the German Lands, including the city-states of Hamburg and Berlin.

To improve our democracy, balance the "elective dictatorship" and increase participation in public affairs we should urgently consider introducing "Initiative and Referendum" in the UK. More about how to do this may be found at the web site of I&R ~ GB iniref dot org

[Trinoc]

If we gave ourselves the ability to call a referendum on any subject in the UK, we would constantly be getting called out to vote on subjects drummed up by the Sun or the Daily Mail, and real politics would grind to a standstill. After a while, just like in America, only people with strident views on the subject (usually in favour of the proposition) would normally bother to vote, so we would end up with stuff like anti-abortion, anti-gay-marriage, anti-immigration, NIMBY, pro-hunting, pro-guns, and all the usual suspects. Decisions should be made by people who can be held responsible for the consequences ... that's what we elect people for (in theory, at least).

[lost thought]

Being able to call for a referendum could have sved a lot of grief,
Poll Tax riots,
Smoking Ban Angst,
Entering the Euro debacle.

to name a few things that Politicians have claimed we elected them to do.

[Tony Williams]

Being able to call for a referendum could have sved a lot of grief,
Poll Tax riots,
Smoking Ban Angst,
Entering the Euro debacle.

to name a few things that Politicians have claimed we elected them to do.
Not to mention Iraq...

The freedom to hold referenda ought to work - the Swiss do it all the time, controlling central as well as local government policy, and that's one of the best-run countries in the world with very strong public participation. Sadly, it would require a change in cultural mindset for the British public to be so sensible. It could raise the public interest in politics, though.

[Mulder]

If we gave ourselves the ability to call a referendum on any subject in the UK, we would constantly be getting called out to vote on subjects drummed up by the Sun or the Daily Mail, and real politics would grind to a standstill.

Yeh, because the Westminster lot are doing such a good job! I'm fed up of the way that, at elections, we get rid of one lot of losers only to find ourselves saddled with another lot.

The answer to the problem of extremists calling the shots in referenda might be to require a high number of signatures to trigger one, so it isn't just a vocal minority.

[Trinoc]

Yeh, because the Westminster lot are doing such a good job! I'm fed up of the way that, at elections, we get rid of one lot of losers only to find ourselves saddled with another lot.

The answer to the problem of extremists calling the shots in referenda might be to require a high number of signatures to trigger one, so it isn't just a vocal minority.
If you think professional politicians do a lousy job (and I do), just think what a mess the amateurs would make!

Looking at some of the antics of local councils would be a good place to start.

[Mulder]

Switzerland has lots of referenda and it isn't a total mess.

[Trinoc]

Switzerland has lots of referenda and it isn't a total mess.
True. They seem to have got the hang of it. Being a country with lots of beautiful places to hang out, and filthy rich from the proceeds of international crime - sorry, I meant to say commerce - probably helps. I expect Liechtenstein, Jersey etc., might do just as well.