by Vorjack
From the National Post comes the story of a religious court battle in the civilized portion of North America:
Christian parents who objected to their children being taught about other religions in a mandatory new Quebec school course have suffered a serious setback with a ruling this week that the teachings do not infringe their religious freedoms.
I’m going to tread carefully here, since I know next to nothing about law and politics in my northern neighbor. It seems that the province of Quebec is now requiring school children to take a course on comparative religion and ethics. It covers “a broad range of world religions, with particular emphasis on Quebec’s religious heritage — Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism and aboriginal spirituality.” When 1,700 parents requested exemptions, the government refused. Naturally, it all winds up in court.
What’s interesting to me are the arguments of the opposition. Parents argued that the comparative religion course was “undermining their efforts to instill Christian faith in their children.” According to the spokesman of the opposition coalition,
“The course shouldn’t be compulsory, because it changes completely how parents keep their moral authority over the education of their children…. We’re not talking about mathematics or French or English here. We’re talking about something that involves the essence of the culture of people.”
This is odd to me. Granted, one woman complains about her 7-year-old being in a comparative religion course, which does seem a bit young. But when I was attending a Catholic high school, we were required to take a comparative religions course. It was believed that the comparison to other religions would help us better understand the religion we grew up in.
Others don’t seem to see it that way. I suspect that many parents believe that these secular courses will place all religions on an even field and rob Christianity of the exalted position they wish it to have as the one true religion. Frankly, I think this underestimates their own children, who will naturally base their own perceptions and identities on their parents. It may also be laziness, as many parents don’t seem to want the task of teaching their children about the family religion.
Of course, this is taking place in Quebec, where many people are touchy about maintaining their culture. I invite any Canadians in the audience to set me straight. Do please write in English.
(via)
I would like to see a course like this taught in the USA. The biggest problem I see with it is that some of the teachers are going to make sure they put their own religion in a good light only. I would like to know more about what they are teaching in the classes. Are they just teaching the basic beliefs or are they showing the histories of the different religions? Do they only point out some of the things they see as good about each religion or do they show the bad that has come from them also?
Lived in Canada all my life. I took a 20th Century Religions course in high school (late 80′s) and no one complained. We even watched The Name of the Rose in class as part of the course. Having said that, this was back in a time when no one cared where you spent your Sunday mornings or Friday afternoons.
The idiocy that has possessed half your population does have its grip in our Western province of Alberta, where they have passed a law allowing parents to exclude their children from any course that references homosexuality or religion. Our Prime Minister (leader) is also recently more concerned about how his god judges him rather than history. Despite being considered an outsider by most of the country for its separatist rhetoric, Québec is one of our more saner provinces when it comes to actual functionality.
I weep for America (I leave out the term “United States” as it no longer applies); when a country takes once-in-a-generation leadership potential like Barack Obama and systematically runs it into the ground with outright lies and disinformation, much of it coming from the Republican party and its hacks, I wonder how long it’ll be before a red-blue, two-state solution is proposed.
Religion in the 20th Century. Yes, that was it.
“I weep for America (I leave out the term “United States” as it no longer applies); when a country takes once-in-a-generation leadership potential like Barack Obama and systematically runs it into the ground with outright lies and disinformation, much of it coming from the Republican party and its hacks..”
My sentiments exactly. It is a heartbreak unique to itself, my beloved America. Sad to see this hateful, closed madness in Canada.
A good comparitive course on religion is a good thing, provided the teacher is fair of course. I think a critical thinking/philosophy class would be needed as well. I’m a hands on guy myself, but when we have more classes on pottery and welding than we do on critical thinking we may have a problem.
Speaking to the issue of Obama being destroyed by the Republicans I’m glad to find out that lies and misinformation are to found only in that group, it will make me a more aware person at the polls. Obama’s downturn could just as easily be blamed on the Democrats that he can’t seem to get on board.
As others have noted, the biggest difficulty I see is the fairness of the teacher. As someone who’s had some graduate courses such as this, I find the idea of being tasked to teach such a course very intimidating.
I don’t know how you are going to find teachers at the middle and high school levels who are 1) educated enough to teach the course well and 2) non-biased (and I count myself in both groups).
I’m from alberta and Bill 44 is crap, thats the law which requires teachers to send home a letter when controversial subjects will be discussed, allowing parents to withdraw their children for the class. The major is issue lies is will this apply to all discussions that may come up naturally, stifling creativity, expression and discipline. Will the teacher have to get premision to tell bobby its not nice to call richard a fag and this is why. At what age does this apply, all the way threw high school or only elementary etc.
The quebec issue is more to do with parental control over what is taught in the classroom. The curriculum for the comparative religion course was not open for public review before implementation, it also went from being a course that a school signed up for to mandatory, including in private and charter schools. Teachers have not been trained in course materials and some parents have issued complaints that there childs religion was made fun of by other students after the course. It singles there child out as different from everyone else being the only christian, or muslim, jew, wiccan etc in the class. Other parents wished for a history of religion in Quebec course taught instead. Cultural history of Quebec rather than comparing all widespread religions.
Il était ethnocentrique vous supposent que les Canadiens ne parleraient pas en anglais sur un site Web anglais. Veuillez être plus de compréhension de vos voisins au nord et à leur arrière-plan culturel
Hadn’t read this before I posted. You covered both issues quite thoroughly.
J’ai particulièrement apprécié votre analyse de la loi 44.
Il parlait de la loi au Québec.
Since the blog was written in English, he had very little chances of getting French comments.
I am a Québécois, and I have to say first ovall that I’m very happy to come from the place in North America where, in my opinion, religion is the least important. Ever since the 1960s and the “Revolution tranquille” (quiet revolution), the power of the church has waned to the point where now it has absolutely no influence (or barely) over public life and society. Of all my friends and acquaintances in Quebec, I don’t think I know anybody who goes to church or cares about religious matters.
But anyhow, I believe this course is a great step on the way to complete separation of church and state. And indeed, the most often heard argument of opponents to this course (who are quite few, actually, but vocal) is that it infringes on their freedom or religion. Complete bullcrap. As someone pointed out before, it should be up to the parents to instill religious values to their kids, not the public shools. And if schools do teach about various religions, again, in no way does that restrain parents in any way when it comes to raising Christian kids. It really seems like the “it violates our religious freedom” really means “it will force me to teach my kids about Christianity rather than count on the state”.
So this ruling is simply common sense.
What the story fails to point out is that this comparative religion class replaces a catholicism class! That’s right, I grew up in Quebec and I had the choice between taking the catholicism class like all the other kids, or be an outcast and take the ethics class. Anyway, the fact that they are replacing both the catholicism class and the ethics class with the comparative religion and ethics class is a step in the right direction (secularism). The Government of Quebec is no longer endorsing catholicism as the state religion. Take that, theocrats!
I think the real problem for most of these folks is that comparative religious exposure points out the common fraudulence of all religion since they are so similar in superstition and supernatural nonsense. That why I love using other religions (or all religions lumped together) than the religion of the person I’m debating with because they end up having to defend a religion other than there own at some point. Kind of makes the process fun.
My Catholic high school did not offer comparative religious classes, but my the Catholic university I attended did. One semester I took a course on Buddhism but the professor was so chill, we didn’t have to go to class–so I didn’t. I regret that now, but as a dumb 19 year old I was happy for the extra free time.
I live in Ontario which is English-speaking and historically Protestant but has a large immigrant population from Muslim countries. From my viewpoint, about 40 years ago, Quebec rebelled against the dominance of the Catholic Church and shortly after against anything English. Quebec Politicians often talk of separation and are generally more left than the rest of the country. They seem to be settling down now but one “side-effect” is that they are increasingly secular and this ruling is an example.
Alberta’s law on pulling kids out of classes on homosexuality and religion is more to do with an anti-gay bias – my opinion is that religion just got caught in the backlash. Alberta Politics is strongly Conservative and right-wing.
My Canadian based site touched on both these issues. See News>Canada.
What makes me laugh is that these parents are afraid that public schooling will actually impact on their kids’ beliefs. School already fails to teach many, many kids basic skills in reading, writing and arithmetic. But kids will be corrupted by a comparative religion class? I guess they must have the best teachers in the world covering this topic!!! Else they must use South Park as a pedagogical tool LOL
School is more effective at shaping attitudes and setting beliefs than it is in teaching facts and thought processes. But, most of that is due to peer influence, not teacher influence.
Of course the new law is “undermining the parents efforts to instill Christian faith in their children.” And that’s perfect. It’s one of the most efficient way to break the vicious circle of ‘hereditary religion’.
I’m Québecois, and I wholeheartedly approve this law.
Just to let you know, this subject (which is taught beginning in grade one) includes ethics, religion, and secularism. The Alberta law, to be more specific, says that schools/teachers who do not inform parents in advance when sexuality (not homosexuality specifically) or religion (the gov’t *claims* this doesn’t pertain to classes in which evolution is being taught) will be covered in class can be brought up for a human rights violation. I’m just waiting for a court challenge to that one.
Pingback: Daily Digest for September 8th « Bridget K McKinney
Daniel, your description of the ruling in Quebec and your analysis of it is excellent. No need to set you straight. I appreciate the comment about Canada being the “civilized portion of North America.” I am not so sure we are, but we do get things right now and then despite our pathetic prime minister and his religious cronies. I think this ruling was poetic justice and I am glad others have taken notice.
I enjoy your blog a lot. I check it every day. Thanks for writing.
(from Canada) I agree with the ruling but I’m not so sure it’s undermining anything. It’s education, pure and simple. It’s up to the individual to decide what to do with that information, and shouldn’t people of faith have “faith” that, regardless of a more in-depth knowledge of other religions, their children will choose “the right” religion in the end? But instead, they’re scared and touting “religious freedoms” at every frickin’ turn with the loosest possible definition.
How does it change a parent’s authority? Simple, it doesn’t! Why NOT have this discussion with your kids when they come home from a course like this? You can still teach them what you believe and you can continue to choose to ignore the fact that other religions exist, but with or without these courses, your kid won’t stay in the dark for long.
I went through a Catholic English elementary school in Quebec starting from 1976–Only two years after Prime Minister Trudeau deployed troops in the province following the FLQ crisis. As an anlgo living there, I found Quebecois to be fairly accepting on a broad scale–More tolerant than I find Albertans now, to be honest. Though I was also a child, and adult experience might be different.
In sixth grade, prior to Confirmation (the sacrament in which one confirms one’s faith in the Catholic Church, essentially), we received a short “comparative religion” course. Naturally it tended to show other religions as odd rituals practiced by superstitious and uncivilized people, and generally showed the weirder bits of ritual. I think it was honest in its intent, just biased in its worldview.
Some of the images remain with me, and form a tiny portion of my eventual decision that all religions were pretty much equally silly. For which I can only say “Thanks” to the Catholic Church.
So perhaps this course will help speed the day when religion fades into irrelevance.
Intriguingly, I found the church’s influence quite strong even in the nineties. To get her passport my sister had to write for her birth registration not to the hospital, nor the ministry responsible, but to the parish church. Since then the requirements have changed somewhat.
Hey! We here in Texas resent Canada being called the civilized part of North America.
@bigjohn756 : And we can understand why.
I find it rather stunning that parents actually protest when their children are offered education.
More stunningly I have recently found out that in the US it seems to be rather common that a comparative religions class is not taught at all in school.
In my opinion a class that presents and examines different religions of the world is an important component in the set of general knowledge that everyone should be taught. It’s on the order of importance with being taught the names of continents, countries, and capitals in geography class. This world religions class should be taught already in middle school (junior high), so that those who do not advance to high school would be exposed to this information too.
This class should simply present the different religions, and tell where in the world they are dominant, how and where ad why they originated, what are their sacred texts and what do they teach, what is considered holy, what rites they have, etc. Basic factual general information.
A religion informs a person’s worldview and shapes his beliefs about what is true in the universe. What a person believes is true informs his actions and gives him a frame of reference on how to react in different situations. Therefore, in order to understand “what makes people tick” you need to be able to understand and evaluate how for example a person’s religion and culture affects him. Religion plays such a big role in today’s geopolitics that if you are ignorant of all religions beside your own, you have a giant hole in your understanding of how the world works on the social and societal level.
In addition, refraining from teaching children about other religions, concentrating only on your own religion and keeping “the wrongbelievers” as a separate bunch of people (whose teachings should not even be mentioned in class), you promote bigotry and a “us vs. them” -mentality which is not very healthy.
Yup.