I don't think !!! Unless they are interested . As it is they have it at home ..

I think it would be a good idea. People have to understand differences in order to to expect form other cultural groups. We, in Brazil, know so little of religions and for this lack of knowledge many people think that one particular religion is directly related to terrorism or war. Which is shear ignorance. Such a course would promote cultural awareness among nations.

Vilemar Magalhães

The problem with these courses on religions is that they are like course on world dancing where no dancing is taking place but only described and without music. Would it be really teaching dancing? Not at all. I would rather recommend a course were actual religious practices are actually practice: meditation .practices, yoga practices, buddhist spiritual practices, attending native ceremonies, attending all kind of real religious ceremonies, etc. A minimum of preparatory talking and a maximum of actual practice. This is the kind of course that could be valuable but it would not be confined to classrooms.

Dear Dr. Louis,

I understand your point. But the most important aspect of sociology and theology is to study those religious manifestations without interfering on them. It is not easy and exception may be found here and there because it is very difficult for a teacher who professes another faith or no faith at all not to interfer on his analysis. But when that is accomplish, everyone benefits and when it is not 100% as thought of, it is still very positive.

Vilemar Magalhães

I think a course on tolerance that touches on our common humanity should be required.

What do you mean by world religions sir?

Interesting question!!!

Thanks for sharing this question.

In my opnion, it will be a difficult task because of so many religions, which one is to be choosen? Another thing is individual differences, person belonging to same religion does't have same faith, so this might cause a conflict. I think it is very difficult to change the mindset of having (not having) faith of a person.

Alternatively, I think the moral lessons given in any religion can be included, tilted scientifically by teachers so as to benefit all.

Best wishes

How about world cultures? How world about races? How about world ethnicities? Well there goes your curriculum!

good idea ,but

It will be a great initiative to imbibe in our young ones the need to understand, respect, and appreciate all religions while forging a united weapon for the common challenges of all persons irrespective of their colour of religion.

Dear Sir I believe that the existence of a religion lesson is necessary ... Religious sciences are like any science taught in the same way as it instills the principles of mathematics, chemistry, physics and other sciences. Young people must know the basic concepts of religion so that the young man is a good citizen ... Why do we consider the lesson of religion compulsory? the rest of the lessons are compulsory ?

The lesson of religion taught by specialized people complemented the role of parents in teaching the basic concepts of all religions....this my personal opinion ...regards..

Hello,

Although religious education (RE) has long had an anomalous status in education curricula, its inclusion in the school program may offer several benefits. First, it can help students to develop a knowledge and understanding of religious beliefs and practices. Second, it can contribute to students' spiritual development.Finally, it can provide students with a useful source by which they can explore and respond to religious issues. Therefore, it is appropriate to familiarize pupils not only with the knowledge and understanding of Christianity but also with other principal religions practiced in the country. The main goals are (a) to develop an understanding of the influence of beliefs, values and traditions on individuals, communities, and ethnic cultures, (b) to enable pupils to to make reasoned and informed judgements about religious and moral values that can be different from those of their own religion, and (c) to help them develop an awareness of the fundamental issues of life raised by human experiences and how religious teachings relate to them in the light of their own experience and with reference to the teachings and practices of their own religions. With the unprecedented growth of international conflicts , which sometimes involve religious issues, the inclusion of a course about the world's principal religions in secondary schools is a good investment on peaceful co-existence and mutual understanding between various religious sects.

Best regards,

R. Biria

Each person thinks differently. As for religion, there is a lot of controversy.

FOLLOWING YOU

I think given the growing diversity in our classrooms today and religious wars around the world, a course in world religions may help to bridge understandings among religious groups and prepare students for living in a global village.

Best regards,

Debra

I believe that at least some jurisdictions in England have experimented with doing something like this. That being said, two key questions that come to mind. First, "What is the intent behind the course?" I think it is important to acknowledge that education, including state funded education, always has a meta-goal that serves the interests of the provider. The second question is, "What would be the content/format?" It is unfortunate, but the easiest thing is to hire one person to teach it all. This format hardly fosters principled dialogue, understanding, etc. It is much harder to create a curriculum and educational process where students have an opportunity to hear people "speak in their own voice."

All in all, I am not sure this is a workable idea.

I think so, yes. In high school, we did have a course called "comparative cultures and religions," and it was quite interesting. I agree with Louis Brassard, that such courses don't actually make the student practice the religion, but only learn what it teaches in a dispassionate way. My feeling is, what's wrong with that? At the very least, the student can find what is similar to his/her own culture, and what is not. Is that not preferable to total ignorance of these facts?

Here, a trivial example. The Catholic Church teaches about this state called purgatory. It's for those who need, you know, training wheels, before the final reward. Well, how similar is that to reincarnation in Buddhist teaching? Realistically, the differences in the two are of our own invention. The usual fine details our various religions like to teach, but based on essentially no knowledge of this unknown.

I see nothing wrong with being taught these different cultures. And religion is a huge part of any culture, whether we like it or not.

Dear Albert,

I was born in a very traditional catholic society from the crib and gradually been introduced to the secular modern mentality and would have totally enjoyed a course in comparative religion. Actually I gave it to myself by reading and practicing meditation. But I would not recommend such a course to a teenager that was not religiously educated from a young age. It would make her even more religiously illeterate that she is already.

But, but, Cecilia and Louis, the alternative of not educating people is that they will frequently remain ignorant. Completely so. With the world getting smaller, figuratively speaking, I can't think how NOT teaching about different cultures can possibly be good. And as I suggested before, religions are an integral part of cultures.

Whether a person is a fervent believer or more or less a skeptic, I think that it's difficult to justify not educating, not broadening their perspective. (My personal thinking is that the more fervent a believer one is, the more important it is to show them that other points of view exist, and that there may even be similarities with one's own beliefs.)

Dear Albert,

What is worse than ignorance? Ignorance with a false impression of knowing. If someone is not religious than nothing is worse than abstract talk about the religious. It provide a totally false impression to know while it is not. It is like reading books about dance while never having dance. I read about 10 dances! If someone is religiously illiterate than that person first step HAS to seriously begin to embrace and practice at least ONE serious (not scientology or these king of tax scams) religion and experience it. Then and only then a person can learn about other religions. Doing that without the minimal experience is not breaking the veil of ignorance but painting it with a false impression to know something.

Students should be required to participate in a religious studies class because religion affects everyone—regardless of their own personal religious affiliation.

no

Mon cher Louis,

I'll belabor one small point here. It seems to me that education is most frequently advantageous when it imparts knowledge that we would otherwise miss, if we were to rely only on personal experiences. Astronomy and astrophysics are extremely valuable fields, even if no one so far has had to opportunity of visiting/experiencing other heavenly bodies than the moon (and Mars, with robots). Plus, learning about other cultures may just be the catalyst required, to convince a person that a visit would be interesting.

I think that in secondary school, introducing a course in comparative cultures and religions would fit easily, in a time slot otherwise dedicated to social studies and/or history, no?

In the UK religion is a GCSE and A level course looking at religion and religious belief in depth. The A level course is particularly good. Nevertheless, while these appear to produce admirable results they are not obligatory, nor should they be.

One development I am against is the growth of religious schools, religious tuition schools that demand exclusivity and I feel portend immense problems in the future.

Albert,

I am for freedom of choice in education. If a particular course on world religions is offered and is optional. They the decision to take it or not is on the mature students and nobody, including me, could say you should not have this option or could say no you should not take it. The decision to take it or not will be by the person with the knowledge of her needs. So the question of the course being optional is fundamental. But if it is optional and taken by only a minute minority of students then the course will only have a minimal impact on the general culture. Then the course content would have to be appealing so maybe 30% of students would choose it and then the impact would be significant.