My assertion that this issue will grow is not without support, here is an article from earlier this year.

"Faith school boom 'creates division'

    *
    * Email
    * Printer friendly version
    * Normal font
    * Large font

Michael Bachelard
February 25, 2008


    * At the crossroads

THE rapid growth of faith-based schools under the previous federal government has threatened the social cohesion of the nation, according to Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard's most senior education adviser.

The frank comments of Professor Barry McGaw, appointed this month to be the new head of the National Curriculum Board, contrast with the Howard government's celebration of the proliferation of small independent schools, encouraged by generous public funding.

"These people often form a narrowly focused school that is aimed at cementing the faith it's based on … If we continue as we are, I think we'll just become more and more isolated sub-groups in our community," Professor McGaw told The Age.

His comments are likely to worry the independent sector because the Government is reviewing the funding model, which Professor McGaw said had created the "worst of all worlds".

Professor McGaw's remarks reflect a profound shift in education in the past two decades, with more than 200,000 children — almost 40% of non-government school students — now attending a religious school outside the main Catholic, Anglican and Uniting systems.

The change has meant that, for instance, increasing numbers of children are taught creationism as part of their science classes.

And despite mainstream health experts arguing for a "harm minimisation" approach to sex education, many emphasise abstinence until marriage, asking students to sign "pledges" to remain virgins.

But the schools, many of which have rapidly increasing enrolments, say they offer a choice in education.

The principal of Chairo Christian School in Drouin, Rob Bray, said that both evolution and creationism were taught in his school's science class.

"We don't hide the fact that there is a theory of evolution, and that's how we'd present it, as a theory," Mr Bray said.

"We teach it, explain what it is, and at the same time we present clearly and fairly, and we believe convincingly, the fact that our position as a school is that God created the heaven and earth … There wouldn't be any point of being a faith-based school if we didn't think that God was the creator."

Under Victorian law, it is not compulsory for private schools to teach evolution, though it is recommended in the curriculum. In NSW evolution is a compulsory part of the syllabus.

Professor Rob Brooks, the head of the Evolution and Ecology Research Centre at the University of NSW, said the number of biology students holding "irreconcilably strong creationist viewpoints" had grown in recent years. "There's been a big move, big gains made by the creationist movement in the last five or six years," he said.

The two largest Christian school lobby groups, Christian Schools Australia and Christian Parent Controlled Schools, assert that God is the creator. Between them they represent 240 schools Australia-wide, including 38 in Victoria.

In the sex education curriculum, some Christian schools have adopted an abstinence-based program called "No Apologies", which highlights the dangers of sexual activity and encourages students to sign a US-style pledge to remain virgins until marriage. Chairo Christian College uses the program, which has been taught to 5000 people in the past 3½ years.

Faith-based schools say they also vet staff to make sure they are leading a "Christian lifestyle," and some say they would sack a teacher who admitted to being homosexual.

Critics such as psychologist and educationist Louise Samway say faith-based schools are balkanising the community.

"If we don't have agreed values that everyone can understand and respect … it leads to a whole lot of disparate sub-groups that are suspicious of each other," she said.

The two largest Christian school lobby groups, Christian Schools Australia and Christian Parent Controlled Schools, assert that God is the creator. Between them they represent 240 schools Australia-wide, including 38 in Victoria.

In the sex education curriculum, some Christian schools have adopted an abstinence-based program called "No Apologies", which highlights the dangers of sexual activity and encourages students to sign a US-style pledge to remain virgins until marriage. Chairo Christian College uses the program, which has been taught to 5000 people in the past 3½ years.

Faith-based schools say they also vet staff to make sure they are leading a "Christian lifestyle," and some say they would sack a teacher who admitted to being homosexual.

Critics such as psychologist and educationist Louise Samway say faith-based schools are balkanising the community.

"If we don't have agreed values that everyone can understand and respect … it leads to a whole lot of disparate sub-groups that are suspicious of each other," she said.




So we do see more than just what FD calls "Fundamentalist Atheists", recognising that what he calls "Religious Freedom", is actually really promoting Religious apartheid.

All I'm saying is that they should set a minimum standard before allocating Taxpayer's funds - for maths, science, english - and for religious studies.

But we don't have freedom of maths. We do not have freedom of science. We do not have freedom of english. We do have freedom of religion. That means no government interference or control over how people practice. Threatening to treat people unfairly because of hw they practice their religion undermines their rights.

All these subjects are important.

Religion is not important to the state. The church and the state are separated. The government cannot have an interest in religion.

The extra 'one true religion' training that they give is fine, as long as they maintain the core subjects.

Now you seem to be contradicting yourself. Is religion a core subject?

Do you disagree that general religious studies is important?

Yes. Some people may have an interest and get some value out of it. They can study it at university. There are far more important things to teach younger students. I would prefer they learnt some economics or basic philosophy instead. Your suggestion is like the people who want students to learn environmental studies instead of science. You learn the basics first (in school), so that you can understand the applied stuff, whatever your life throws up.

So we do see more than just what FD calls "Fundamentalist Atheists", recognising that what he calls "Religious Freedom", is actually really promoting Religious apartheid.

No Mozz. Apartheid is when the law forces people apart. Freedom is when they choose to be apart. There is a fundamental difference.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2194,n,n


That link is to a UK, BBC, show called "THE BIG DEBATE", which discusses this subject, worth a look if you have the bandwidth.

Scientific theories are not facts. They are generally considered to be wrong. They are taught as fact, but that's just part of the indoctrination.

freediver wrote on Jun 17^th, 2008 at 11:23am:


Now your mischaracterising the word 'Theory'. I had to study Chemistry Theory and Electrical theory, as well as practicals.  Electrical technicians use electrical theory every day to repair and service equipment. They use Relativity theory to compute satellite orbits.

It doesn't meant that it's non factual.

It doesn't meant that it's non factual.

But it isn't factual. Scientists deliberatley avoid using the term fact, because their theories and laws are wrong. This is why I think philosophy is such an important subject.

No, they only want teachers and clergy to tell them what their beliefs are.

That's what freedom of religion and separation of church and state are all about. No mandates. No taking children away from their parents.

What is wrong with just allowing them to decide what their beliefs are?

That is what my position is. That is not your position. Freedom is not achieved by the government taking away parents' rights. The government is not a better child raiser. Freedom of religion includes freedom to pass your religion onto your kids. The government has no right to get between parents and their children. It has no right to decide that the beliefs of a parent are dangerous to their children and that the children must be protected from their parents' ideas. It has no right to pass judgement on religion, because the church and the state are separated. The government's hands are off the children and their religion and their freedom to practice their religion.

Taking away a child's right to practice their religion is not the same as allowing a child to decide for themself. It is the opposite. Freedom to choose does not mean freedom to choose only after undergoing a government approved introduction to all the available choices.