Would you support funding classes to teach ABOUT religions?

Question

That's all religions not just Christianity. What about a class taking and objective and honest look the influence of religions including some of the less than nice things carried out in religions name?

An interesting article on religion illiteracy:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070430/cm_usatoday/howlittleweknowaboutreligion;_ylt=ArVtx_ELSSF2sCuKXPfiayP9wxIF

Answer 1

I think that religion should be taught in school.Not as an endorsement of any religion.Just as part of a history lesson.Religion does play a part in history and in the motives for many events both good and bad.So, as long as the lesson was about religion and not for religion, I wouldn't have a problem with it being a part of the curriculum.I would not support school prayer though.Once prayer is allowed it is only a matter of time before someone is forced to pray to a specific God and I still am a strong supporter of separation of church and state.

Answer 2

They have religious studies in college, and the students choose whether to take the class or not, and they're not state funded, they're paid for thru tuititions. Other than that, no, I don't think they should be in elementary, junior or high school. Gotta admit, I'd enjoy those classes, religious studies can be very interesting, but what you're suggesting isn't really religious studies, its classes geared toward showing all the wrongs of the world being blamed on religion, which is what I've noticed a lot of the bashers around here do on a regular basis. Somehow I have a feeling you guys could even blame the atrocities committed in China under communism on christianity.

Answer 3

Religion has moved so many people to do so many things, that really I don't think you can have a balanced study of things like history and culture without looking at it. I would support such a study, if it offered a balanced, objective view of all religions.
There is a difference between a school offering a course in the study of world religions, vs appearing to endorse a specific religion. I would be against anything that a public school might use in endorsing a specific religion, or trying to tell children that they have the "wrong" religion or anything like that, but as part of a study of world history for 11th or 12th graders preparing for college, why not?
In the school I went to, you decided with your parents and teachers what courses to take from 9 to 12 grade, if they still do it that way, I don't see any reason why it couldn't be offered as an elective....

Answer 4

Oh, most definitely. I wanted to take a religion class during my undergrad studies, but due to the nature of my courseload, I was unable to take non-major electives. I think this would be an excellent class so long as multiple religions were presented in an unbiased, objective fashion. Some people might oppose, but the reality is that religion is part of our society, regardless whether each individual agrees with the tenets of any one religion. So, if it was presented for educational purpose and focused on how religion has influenced and shaped our world (resulting in modern society), then I would definitely support funding.

Answer 5

I am an Atheist, but I don't have a problem with teaching about religion, but not a religion.
The problem I have is you must be a very knowledgeable theologian to teach the basis behind a very large number of religions. This would never happen with pubic funding, too many feathers would be ruffled.
It is taught at the college level, even in public colleges.

Answer 6

To teach children about religions is a worthy goal. There is no better thing to learn. They must be educated so they can decide for themselves! Religion is not only a path to spiritual peace, it is an important and dynamic social element! A plus no matter what you support. As long as the class equally represents all faiths, I see no problem at all with teaching it to those whose minds are most ready to learn it.

Answer 7

I think it is a great idea. They should make it mandatory for people to understand the HISTORY of the religions they practice. Might be the beginning of the end for many religions, if the practioners understood and knew that they were practicing religions that are nothing more than ripped of myths from other cultures.


Did you know that Noah was a Babylonian myth in which Noah was the King, and had to build a ship in order to escape being jailed for being unable to repay his debts? It was an allegory to teach that not even Kings are immuned to having to pay their debts.
It was stolen and turned into an allegory of punishment for failing to obey God...

Answer 8

While I would support coursework taking an honest and objective look at religious intolerance, I don't think it would work out that way. I think bias would interfere with that goal, sadly. The theory is a nice one. I just don't think it would work in practice. So, I'd have to say no.

Answer 9

Yes, so long as they are taught in a reasonable and logical manner. Religion, however outdated and illogical, still has an important place in cultures, and it is a good thing to get people thinking about philosophy.

Answer 10

Absolutly. It would expand our narrow educational system and bring the rest of the world into the classroom. So many Americans are graduating totally ignorant of anything outside their immediate ennviroment.