Should Religions Be Taught in Schools?

[Nap the Magnificent]

I would also suggest OP change the title to "Should Religions be taught in Schools?" because that would be a better representation of the original post and question.

[Nap the Magnificent]

We should only learn about maths through history.

Religion can easily fit into a history class by teaching the history of various major religions.

So can maths! I'm glad we are on the same page.

[Geneviev]

You don't have to teach that it's true.

Teaching it is true would make it even worse then what you are suggesting. Creationism should not be taught in the science classroom because it is in no way science. Well, unless you want to teach students about how not to do science. I am pretty sure evangelicals would have issues with their creation story being used in such a manner though.

They already have issues with a lot of things. Teach what the belief is, and why it's wrong.

You don't have to teach that it's true.

So you're saying we should teach things....that are false?

And why they're false. The students will hear about it anyway.

[Genivaria]

I've never seen someone say that.

Although my church did attempt science, most people were just extremely confused. If you don't know anything about biology, you won't understand the complicated things that the church was trying to teach.

Well, I think it's just a matter of messaging. In Opus Dei, priests tend to be educated.

I'll say this about the Catholic Church, they don't deny evolution exists.

[Sundiata]

Well, I think it's just a matter of messaging. In Opus Dei, priests tend to be educated.

I'll say this about the Catholic Church, they don't deny evolution exists.

[Geneviev]

I would also suggest OP change the title to "Should Religions be taught in Schools?" because that would be a better representation of the original post and question.

Thanks, I did that.

[Neutraligon]

Teaching it is true would make it even worse then what you are suggesting. Creationism should not be taught in the science classroom because it is in no way science. Well, unless you want to teach students about how not to do science. I am pretty sure evangelicals would have issues with their creation story being used in such a manner though.

They already have issues with a lot of things. Teach what the belief is, and why it's wrong.

Which is not science and so does not belong in a science class. As to teaching it is wrong, that would be against the 1st amendment.

[Neutraligon]

Religion can easily fit into a history class by teaching the history of various major religions.

So can maths! I'm glad we are on the same page.

Nope maths cannot, various religions however can be.

[New Tussia]

Religion should be taught in schools from a neutral (or as close to neutral as possible) point of view. It is important that children learn what religion is and what it brings. Evangelize, no. There are plenty of places available to indoctrinate children outside public school.

Same here.
I believe that along with science, religious viewpoints should be taught. Especially in the US dealing with the First Amendment

[Genivaria]

I'll say this about the Catholic Church, they don't deny evolution exists.

Don't be too proud, that's a low bar.

[Sundiata]

Don't be too proud, that's a low bar.

Pride is a sin; I'm just grateful.

[Nap the Magnificent]

So can maths! I'm glad we are on the same page.

Nope maths cannot, various religions however can be.

aKshuAlLy it cannot because religions are not just a history of some people in robes chanting stuff much like maths isn't just a history of some guys in robes scribbling numbers down or governments are not just the history of some guys in robes shifting papers around.

[Mowte]

My view is that in public schools, students can organize religious unions, but they should not be allowed to have any sort of official gathering or petition, meaning they should really just be so that students of a certain religion can get to know each other or have a group to belong in. They should teach about religions in their Social Studies classes, but only impartially, so that the students understand other views, but they should not be promoting any of the religions, only explaining them.

I feel that parents must have the choice to send there kids to a religious school, but those religion schools must still have science classes and normal general studies if they are full day-schools.

[Rojava Free State]

Nope maths cannot, various religions however can be.

aKshuAlLy it cannot because religions are not just a history of some people in robes chanting stuff much like maths isn't just a history of some guys in robes scribbling numbers down or governments are not just the history of some guys in robes shifting papers around.

We already learn the history of religions in school here. We just learn it from an unbiased perspective.

[VoVoDoCo]

I’m all right with there being religious clubs and student organizations. Even if I wanted to, banning them would Prove itself to be nearly impossible and would only fuel a persecution complex. As long as it doesn’t cost any taxpayer dollars, Isn’t A class or elective, is done on everybody’s free time (like before or after school), and attendance is voluntary, I don’t see a reason to ban it.

It definitely should not be taught in the classrooms though.

[Rojava Free State]

I’m all right with there being religious clubs and student organizations. Even if I wanted to, banning them would Prove itself to be nearly impossible and would only fuel a persecution complex. As long as it doesn’t cost any taxpayer dollars, Isn’t A class or elective, is done on everybody’s free time (like before or after school), and attendance is voluntary, I don’t see a reason to ban it.

It definitely should not be taught in the classrooms though.

We should only have a Christian club if we also have an atheist club.

[Geneviev]

They already have issues with a lot of things. Teach what the belief is, and why it's wrong.

Which is not science and so does not belong in a science class. As to teaching it is wrong, that would be against the 1st amendment.

How is that against the 1st amendment? It's being acknowledged, but according to actual science.

I've never seen someone say that.

Although my church did attempt science, most people were just extremely confused. If you don't know anything about biology, you won't understand the complicated things that the church was trying to teach.

Well, I think it's just a matter of messaging. Opus Dei priests tend to be highly educated.

Catholics tend to be better at some things.

[VoVoDoCo]

I’m all right with there being religious clubs and student organizations. Even if I wanted to, banning them would Prove itself to be nearly impossible and would only fuel a persecution complex. As long as it doesn’t cost any taxpayer dollars, Isn’t A class or elective, is done on everybody’s free time (like before or after school), and attendance is voluntary, I don’t see a reason to ban it.

It definitely should not be taught in the classrooms though.

We should only have a Christian club if we also have an atheist club.

Hell yeah. I would sponsor it.

[Neutraligon]

Which is not science and so does not belong in a science class. As to teaching it is wrong, that would be against the 1st amendment.

How is that against the 1st amendment? It's being acknowledged, but according to actual science.

Because it is a public school teaching against a religion.

[Genivaria]

We should only have a Christian club if we also have an atheist club.

Hell yeah. I would sponsor it.

I've seen Secular Student Alliance clubs, they often encounter resistance from the administration.

[Albrenia]

I'm all for the history, basic understanding and the like of religions in general being taught in school in a general and non-specific sense. Historically religion is quite important to humanity, and it remains a shaping force in many societies today. Also probably would help if people understood other religions better.

As for classes about individual religions? Nah, not on the tax payer's dime. I guess if one wants to indoctrinate one's kids in a particular religious private school that's their choice.

[Atheris]

If you mean in the US, no. That directly goes against the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

[Kathol Rift]

It should be allowed, as long as it is completely optional and there is at least two options in each school that does it. Nobody should be required to be taught a religion they don’t want to be taught, but if they want to, then let them.

[Diarcesia]

Sure, if they don't mind other religions introducing themselves in the classroom.

[Kowani]

When they get substantial scientific backing, sure.