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.
Quebec Superior Court Justice Jean-Guy Dubois dismissed a bid by parents in Drummondville, Que., who said the course on ethics and religious culture introduced across the province last year was undermining their efforts to instill Christian faith in their children.
“In light of all the evidence presented, the court does not see how the … course limits the plaintiff’s freedom of conscience and of religion for the children when it provides an overall presentation of various religions without obliging the children to adhere to them,” Judge Dubois wrote.
One of a bazillion reasons to homeschool.
A basic knowledge of the major world religions and their cultural contributions is necessary to being educated in the liberal arts and humanities. Christianity has nothing to fear, and much to gain, from such knowledge.
I’m with #2; I don’t see any harm in learning about other religions. One of our deacons taught a class at our parish on world religions for a few months, and it was fascinating. Christians shouldn’t let the truth of Jesus Christ devolve into know-nothingism.
#2 and #3, I have a different opinion about that. I believe that parents need to raise their children up on the truth and give them the firm foundation that Jesus speaks of in the Bible. Once they have become adults and have gotten a good, firm foundation in the truth, THEN and ONLY THEN, would it make sense for them to look at what other religions teach. Before that, in my opinion, would only cause much confusion and make the foundation the parents are trying to build in the children become very weak.
If I was still in Canada, and if I was being forced to accept this for my son, I would have pulled him out and homeschooled him in a minute. I did homeschool him for 4 years even here in the States. He’s only been back in public school for one year. We are already seeing things we’re not crazy about. We’re trying to teach our son what is wrong about some of the behaviors he’s witnessing at his high school. He’s now 15 years old. If I do begin so see him shifting and becoming confused about the truth, public school will again become history for him.
And in Canada, what would be the likely “Starting point”? I mean, what religion do you learn first, then some “Other” one? It’s not like the “National” one is usually seen by most Canadians, is it?
#5, I don’t get your point here. Maybe you missed mine. The “starting point” as you put it, would only be the truth based on the Bible. Nothing else matters. My point is that you need to help your children build a firm foundation on the TRUTH, based on the Bible. THEN, they can look at what others believe to get an understanding of where they are. BUT, the truth from the Bible needs to be firmly established in their minds well before they look at what others believe. Most of childhood is very impressionable for most people. My concern is that if the kids are introduced to other stuff that is not Biblical before they are fully grounded in the TRUTH, they will sway with the wind and will just wash away like sand (a foundation of sand is all they’ll have) as Jesus states in the Bible.
Nationality has nothing to do with it. There is only one TRUTH, ONE FAITH, and ONE BAPTISIM, according to Scripture. THAT is what all kids need to learn. Everything else is just hogwash (total lies) and there would really be no need to learn any of that at all. The only reason anyone would want to learn any of it would be to get an idea of where their opponent’s point of view was coming from. That would give the one with the truth an opportunity to then teach the truth and use the Scriptures to prove how the opponent’s teachings were not based on truth. In order for anyone to be able to do that, he or she needs to be fully grounded in the truth, right out of the Bible.
Having lived in Québec for thirteen years (1978-91), and speaking French with near-native fluency, I hope I can enlighten the discussion just a bit.
Throughout Canada until just a few years ago [i]all[/i] school boards were officially either Protestant or Catholic. In each school district you could direct your taxes to one board or the other, as you chose. Québec abandoned that approach a dozen years ago on account of the patent idiocy of Vietnamese buddhists in Montréal having been classified as “Protestants.” Québec school boards are now divided on the basis of language, as is the case in most other provinces with a significant minority linguistic group.
The real problems with what’s happening are that it begins in Grade I — presenting a clear opportunity to brainwash young children that all faiths are equal (and believe me, Québecs numerous militant secularists will approach it in that manner) — [i]and[/i] that it forces Québec’s numerous Catholic private schools to offer the same spiritual-relativism course to their students.
The ultimate irony is that the course curricula prescribe teaching “native” spirituality. The crushing majority of Québec native peoples are either Anglican or Catholic, and have been such for many generations.
This court decision is quite simply another act in the now-50-year-old drama of Québec’s rebellion against the Catholic church, begun as part of the [i]révolution tranquile[/i] following the death of the dictator Duplessis. The [i]corneils noirs[/i] — black crows, meaning priests — worked closely with the Duplessis régime to suppress and exploit ordinary québecois for decades.
They are still truly hated by most québecois older than 55, many of whom are still in a position to keep on kicking them.
One quibble with the headline —
As I read the article, the court did not say that students must learn about other religions. It said that the provincial government could require students to learn about other religions.
That may be a distinction without a difference to some of you, but it is in fact important.
I have no quibble that Christianity has nothing to fear in comparison to other religions – and that ‘know-nothingism’ is harmful. However, young children are extremely malleable and need a secure foundation before they can reasonably assess other religions without significant risk to their faiths. In addition, a news report on TV last night was discussing the difference in how established religions are spoken of in secular courses on religion vs. how minority ones are. An true example from a textbook here in the States was (the quotes are fully reflective of the point, though I may have the words a little off):
“Jesus claimed to be the son of God”
“Moses indicated he had received the tablets after meeting God on the mountain.”
“Muhammed received his revelations from Allah.”
RE: “A basic knowledge of the major world religions and their cultural contributions is necessary to being educated in the liberal arts and humanities.”
Oh absolutely. I was taught world religions pretty well as a young person — by my father. He had the books of the various religions in his library and showed me where they were, enjoining me to read them. And of course we had various courses that worked on that issue.
My dad then very kindly engaged me in various debates about their belief systems, pointing out to me where they erred, and where Christianity did not.
; > )
It was a marvelous education and I am able to converse fluently with various proponents of various religions. One of my favorite more recent conversations was with a very nice Buddhist in a coffee shop.
Of course . . . I suspect that the Judge in Quebec deciding that students must “learn about other religions” didn’t quite have my father’s ideas in mind and would not appreciate him as the teacher for these nice schoolchildren.
But then, neither would my dad appreciate the sort of teacher that will be teaching these nice Canadian students either.
And that is the issue.
Christian parents are right to mistrust “teachers” about other religions who don’t share the Christian faith, because they also have their own belief system and agenda.
The issue is not “learning about other religions” but from what stance those religions are taught. No one will be capable of teaching the subject objectively and with no stance at all — and so it is necessary to choose the stance that is most equivalent to one’s own.
Hence . . . homeschooling. ; > )