And children should not be taught the Earth is between 5,000 and 6,000 years old when education is at stake. I cannot imagine a child being taught to respect that belief.

Yes, all religions are made up by human beings, however, not all of them are patriarchal in nature. The Goddess based traditions appeared long before the mono-theist God based traditions appeared.

-----------------------

For me religion and spirituality are two different things and it seems some folks are using those terms interchangeably. Religion is a set of beliefs and practices about an entity greater than and outside of us, while spirituality is a individual practice and may or may not be based on a religion.

I do think religion and not spirituality should be taught. We can teach about the religion without imposing that religion on students. I do wish it was part of the curriculum of public schools, along with art and music and physical education.

The priorities of this country are still apparently more focused on killing people and making more money, rather than educating people.

Mono-theism has been the basis of patriarchal religious beleifs. Although, gender based equality can certainly be traced back to Greek mythology.


Wouldn't this be grand! There are certainly rituals within spiritual contexts- and when you take a good long look... religions of the world have borrowed them from spiritualism.... which is a whole different thing. And actually has levels of devoutness and integration into one's life.

I do believe that one can be both spiritual and religious. And also spiritual without any ties to an organized set of religious doctrine.

I think it is the institutional nature of religion as an organized entity that bothers me the most when applied to public education in the US. It just goes against key tenets of our system of government and leaves out the world in world religion! Makes no sense to me because of the world content of the people that make up the US. Also, the spiritual base of those that are native to this country was just blown apart. And Native American spirituality does have organization to it. This is simply how a culture is able to pass on its spiritual beliefs to its people. But, with major organized religions throughout history, other things like power and control via political systems polluted the spiritual nature within them. accumulation of wealth is always at the bottom of this structure when you study the role of organized religions. Thinking about things like prayer before battle.

I don't use spirituality and religion interchangeably, but, I do find faith to apply to my spiritual realm in relation to what I practice spiritually. But faith to me, has nothing to do with anything institutional in nature. Nothing.

Yes, world religions ought to be studied in schools, but not as faith. And any rituals (like prayer) just don't fit with our constitutional make-up of separation of church and state.

Sometimes it is simply amazing to me to see advocates like those in the so called Tea Party make a case as strict constitutionalist while at the same time declaring Christian values as THE values of the US!

In this whole discussion about holidays and public school calendars, religion and spirituality just shouldn’t be part of the equation at all. And in the US, Christian religions are the time honored back drop which, to me is not OK. then, again, spirituality is deeply personal to me and just isn't about sharing like values. It is about me and what I believe and how I apply my beliefs in my life to have balance internally. I don't know what works for other people and really feel like that is their concern, not mine.

This is slightly off topic, but would most of you who favor more religious holidays for public school students also favor additional federal holidays (mind you these are paid holidays) which are religious in orientation?

CRS Report for Congress

Patriarchy is not limited to religion ... much of the law, government, even the degradation of nature has been argued by many feminists to have roots in patriarchy (see, for instance, Caroline Merchant and Rosemary Radford Ruther).

Rather than perpetuate ignorance, I feel that teaching world religions, teaching about patriarchy, racism, gender oppression, heterosexism, and whiteness should be taught as an interdisciplinary subject.

Ack! The self correcting speller on smart phone is maddening. Please excuse my errors.

I don't think the crime rate in this country would be affected by the teaching of religion in schools. As a matter of fact, the crime rate has dropped with less observance of religion in schools (prayer, celebration of religious holidays). And, which religions would be taught? How would that be decided? And, how would they be taught? From which viewpoint?

In my experiences, subjects are taught by those who not only are members of a specific discipline, but who also have academic credentials. In progressive education, and in an interdisciplinary team approach, this CAN work quite well.

Waxnrope, how would it be decided which religions to teach? And, from what perspective would they be taught - As history? From a spiritual perspective? Patriarchy v. matriarchy? Oppression v. non-oppression? etc. Are you saying you would need a member from every religion taught to teach it?

I cannot do multiple quotes from my phone. Your patience is appreciated. I cannot seem to make lengthy replies without the cursor jumping all around. So, succinct, and please ask for clarity.

Before I begin I wish it to be known that my approach to this subject arises from the perspective of a postcolonial scholar and as a POC. I also believe that NOT ALL white people are bad, even though I and my people have been irreparably harmed for centuries by SOME white people. It took a long time for me to get this. I also believe, and have learned through my studies of the multiplicity, the interrelatedness of things. Having said this, I will try my best to respond.

I have taught such a course, developed primarily in conjunction with a First Nation woman. And one can hardly teach every religion known to humankind. One looks upon the the culture/s of place, of the student body, and of the interests of both students and professors. We looked at current issues and prevailing problems. After spending months, and we argued, we presented our proposal. A course suitable in Berkeley, CA, might not be suitable for another city. We spent neatly half a year developing the course with various scholars from different religious backgrounds. We also had Elders and other wise people from SOME lesser known religions give thought to, and participate in the curriculum. We were determined, and it wore us out. It was difficult because we had so few models to guide us. But, yes, it is possible.

The example given by HSIN ... is that ignorant racialization or a religious issue?

Sorry, I had to submit my post prematurally. This is driving me batty. I'm just going to stop for a while and listen.
Thank you for the inquiry.

Corey, perhaps I was not clear: NO white person taught about First Nation religion. And, there were mote than one rabbi because, just as with Christianity, there are more than a single belief system. Which, I might add, seems to be a notion on this thread. Universalizing is the master's tool.

The idea was to see if two doctoral students COULD find a way to do it ... and if, in the paucity of our teaching experiences we could, than it should be possible for those who have mote experience to do so. Actually, it is kind of interesting in that you have the same objections da the conservative folk who nearly killed our project.

For goodness sakes, we didn't have funds to pay the guest lecturers. We were students, too. A new idea, progressive thinking religious folk ... with openness and creativity, and the desire to make change, to maybe do a good thing, anything can happen

And the continued religious observances practiced in today's schools only perpetuates government supported religions.