The Instigator
natusia3009
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
hmikeshin
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should schools provide Religious Education?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
natusia3009
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/3/2017 Category: Education
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 643 times Debate No: 105495
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

natusia3009

Pro

Religious education is one of the most controversial issues in education that has been hovering over educational institutions since ages. It is probably one of the most debated topic that will always have a divided opinion.

A few days ago I decided to look through the statistics on this topic, which is disturbing and made me very upset, disappointed and confused, because mostly parents oppose that their children being taught religious disciplines in schools, some of them withdraw their children from religious education, if they have such an opportunity.

Don't think that I am a devout believer. I'm not. But even so, I can't understand what's wrong with religious education? Why do parents find something terrible in this and so categorically against it?

In my opinion, the main advantage of religious education is that it promotes children's spiritual, moral and cultural development. We should instill in younger generation moral values, tolerance, mutual understanding and respect for each other, they must realize that we are all people of the same Earth.

Moreover, by religious practices into the classroom, children would be given the opportunity to learn about the existence of different religions, as well as cultures, their differences. This would help children to broaden their horizons, be more educated and accepting of the beliefs of other people. Lessons touch upon topics that many families ignore, because parents are incompetent in this issue or for some other reason. In addition to this, religious education forms critical thinking in matters of morality, children learn to comprehend their actions not only from the position of their own benefit, but also from the point of view of moral norms.

All in all, the main goal of this education is simply to give children moral guidelines, ideas about what is good and what is bad, simple truth that children often can't understand, that's it...or not?
hmikeshin

Con

Hello!

First of all, it's not good to say an argument from your perspective. Really, nobody wants to hear somebody's opinion, especially in a debate. So this argument: "In my opinion, the main advantage of religious education is that it promotes children's spiritual, moral and cultural development" is not that strong.

Also, the claim, "A few days ago I decided to look through the statistics on this topic, which is disturbing and made me very upset, disappointed and confused, because most parents oppose that their children being taught religious disciplines in schools, some of them withdraw their children from religious education, if they have such an opportunity." is your experience/perspective, too. You shouldn't use that as your source. Nobody really wants to hear about your experience.

(If you do say that, that your perspective is indeed a source, that is wrong. Look at this scenario:
You met a black person and he/she was mean to you.
Due to this experience, you say that all black people are mean.
This is incorrect, and is called an "anecdotal evidence".)

Anyways, hey! Thank you for this debate, and I would totally do my best to support for why religious education should not be supported in schools.

Your argument and its structure were very interesting, and I liked the majority of it. However, they're some parts that I do want to say.

First, if religion was taught in school, more so as a class, wouldn't that cause discrimination and judgment? If people stood up for what they believe, especially in class, wouldn't that cause separation in people. For example, Christianity and Buddism are two totally different religion. Because of these two different viewpoints, a line might go through different groups. People may look at each other and judge one another because one may believe in a different religion.
(And also, the judging of one another may happen in school. Same to this scenario, let's look at a two group of people that kind of caused war: white and black people. The white people judged the black people because they had a different color. Same to the religion, some religion may judge on the other religion because they are not the same.)

But not only that, if religions were to be taught, disagreement of religion could be made. And these disagreements could soon turn into arguments. From the website, http://knightlyherald.com..., it says, "... because too many controversies would be present; therefore, more arguments would start. The word religion means, 'a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects' (dictionary.com). 'To be taught religion' means to learn about each religion and its beliefs and faiths in order to understand it or to believe what the specific religion teaches or believes. Nowadays in society, any kind of disagreement can and often does start an argument."

(Also, from that particular website, it also gives several reasons of why religion should not be taught at school and many pieces of evidence supporting it. For example, they say that religion should not be taught at school because "many school officials and teachers do not know enough about other religions besides their own" and also that " teaching various children about many different religions is simply hard to do well". It's really interesting and you should check it out)

Continuing on, in the article of "Getting Religion Right in Public Schools", the author, Charles C. Haynes, says "A cursory glance at the daily headlines reminds us that religious differences are at the heart of many of the world's most violent conflicts. And, in the United States, rapidly expanding religious diversity presents daunting new challenges for building one nation out of many faiths and cultures in the 21st century"

(Finally, please give me your source for this claim: "This would help children to broaden their horizons, be more educated and accepting of the beliefs of other people. Lessons touch upon topics that many families ignore, because parents are incompetent in this issue or for some other reason. In addition to this, religious education forms critical thinking in matters of morality, children learn to comprehend their actions not only from the position of their own benefit, but also from the point of view of moral norms.")

But the real question I want to give you is, what if all the religions are not true? What if Christianity is not true, and Buddism is not true? Does this mean that all this education was a waste of time? For me, I give the answer of yes. If all of these religions weren't really true and that there is no God, yes, I believe that this education was a waste of time. What do you think?

Best wishes,
Jason
Debate Round No. 1
natusia3009

Pro

Hello, Jason. First of all, thank you for supporting this debate.

To start with, that's my first debate ever. I can assume that I had some errors in the structure and so on, to which you very kindly hinted.

Maybe my arguments are not so strong. Maybe. But voting will judge us.

Undoubtedly, before starting the debate, I read a lot of information on this topic, looked through a lot of resources, after which I had some kind of my own opinion, which I presented here. It doesn't mean, that all that I wrote is my own experience or perspective. I didn't take it from my head, this is the opinion which developed after reading a lot of articles. The thing is that I don't see the point of publishing here links to articles, because articles contain the opinion of ordinary people, the same as me or you, which can take place but can't be considered fully objective.

The claim " A few days ago I decided to... which is disturbing..." this is just an introduction, which I did in order to explain why I'm here and why I started this debate. It's not my experience, I just explain, why I'm going to be a Pro in the debate. Because I see the statistics and it made me confused. Why didn't I provide a link to the statistics? Because again I don't see the point in this. The figures in the different articles are slightly different, but still it didn't interfere me with understanding how many parents want to protect their children from religious education.

Despite all this, I still don"t understand why I can"t express my opinion? My opinion is less authoritative for you than the opinion of some people who wrote something on the Internet? Meanwhile, you don"t know either them or me.

Let's move on to discrimination and judgment. Of course it can be, it can be even without religious classes. That's why I pointed out in the previous round, that by religious practices into the classroom, children would be given the opportunity to learn about the existence of different religions and their differences. To have religious classes doesn't mean to be taught only your particular religion, goals are much broader. The goal of religious education is also to explain youngsters what is tolerance, why should we respect each other and opinions of other people, to explain, that we shouldn't judge people by colour of their skin or their appearance or their literacy skills etc. The goal is to make clear, that we are all different, but first of all we are all people.

I don't really understand what you mean by this http://knightlyherald.com...... And I'm not sure, that you understand it, because you just took an extract from the article. Well, I agree, that nowadays in society, any kind of disagreement can and often does start an argument. So, what is next? This applies not only to religion, it concerns every aspect of life!!!

With regard to teachers and the quality of religious classes, I'm totally agree with you. I I read the same information on many websites. And I think that this is a real problem and it will take some time before schools are able to provide a high-quality religious education.

Time and again, I don"t do copy/paste from one particular website. I read a lot of articles, actually some of them are in Russian, and present the information that I've read in my own words. What embarrassed you in this particular paragraph? Don't you agree that many families ignore a lot of things for different reasons and sometimes can't give their children an exhaustive answer to a specific question? Families are very different, and not all parents are engaged in the moral education of their children, and I don"t mean only the so-called "unsuccessful families", but, on the contrary, "very successful", where the house is a full cup, where children have everything ... except parental warmth and attention. Moreover, if children hear about moral norms only in the family, they don't have the conviction that these norms are universally valid, that they should be guided by everything. The school complements family education, confirming and strengthening the good that children hear from their parents.

And the last thing but not the least. Oh, to be honest, I'm waiting for this question"and this is a completely different topic, which can be discussed many times and we will never come to a consensus. But still, for me, I give the answer of no. I don't think that it is a waste of time, because you will never know, what will be useful for you in your further life, especially when you are still a child. The same we can say about physics, chemistry etc. because it can never come in handy to you, but in life you need to know at least the basics of everything.

Can't wait for our next round :)
hmikeshin

Con

Hello!

I would like to say that you never answered my biggest question. What if religion wasn't true. What would happen then?

The point of this questions lead me to this:

- If religion wasn't true, teaching religion is a waste of time because they are teaching bunch of lies.

But the BIGGER point is, it wouldn't be called RELIGIOUS Education. Instead, it would be called something like a HISTORY Education. It's basically a history of what people used to believe in. According to Dictionary.com, history means, "the study of past events, particularly in human affairs." And if religion wasn't true and humans used to believe in these religions, then it falls in the definition of history because it is the study of the PAST events, particularly in the human's events.

In World History, it does talk about past religion. However, is it called RELIGIOUS education? No. Becuase nowadays, people realized that the past religions were wrong, so they put it in the history section. The chapter may be called "Religion", but it falls into the category of history.

Also, I would like to say that you were looking at the wrong website. It is "http://knightlyherald.com...;

Another thing is, why wouldn't the majority of the parents talk religion to their child? The most likely reason is that they may be atheists or they believe in some other religion. The parents may think that their child might believe in another religion because they hear some other religion being taught.

Yes, perhaps, their parents may not care for their child and not talk about religion. But, even if there may be some benefits for religious education, it doesn't add up to how much religious education may cause in a bad way.

Also, I would like to say that if, indeed, God was real, then religious education should start right away. However, that is not the case. We're still not sure if God does or doesn't exist.

Next, you did say " Well, I agree, that nowadays in society, any kind of disagreement can and often does start an argument. So, what is next?" Think about it. Disagreements on racisms indeed happen. It did cause arguments and disagreements. And then what happened? The answer is simple: war, discrimination, chaos, etc. I'm not saying that religion may be severe as racism, but look what racism cause. Both racism and religion are not different at all. Both were had disagreements, which cause arguments. Also, you did say " This applies not only to religion, it concerns every aspect of life" which support my reasoning and claim that religion and racism aren't really that different.

Also, you did say "Despite all this, I still don't understand why I can't express my opinion?"

Let me explain you why.

Let look at a scenario:

This one black person was mean to you.
Due to this, you conclude that all black people were mean.
But is this right?
No.

You're opinion and perspective of all black people were not correct.

Due to this scenario, this explains why opinions are not that supportive.

Also, I would like to make that all the website I used are what people determined as facts using data and all sorts.

You also said "The goal of religious education is also to explain youngsters what is tolerance, why should we respect each other and opinions of other people," This is not strong. It is because what if somebody were to murder somebody. Should we respect them and their opinions, and maybe call it "Why People Kill" education? Seeing this, that statement is completely poor.

Also, I would like to point out that "but in life you need to know at least the basics of everything." is wrong. Does this mean that I need to know the basic of Algebra 2, Pre-calculus, Trigonometry, Acting, Quantum Mechanics, String theory, etc? The answer is no.

Another thing is, people may need to know that there may be different religion in this world. However, that doesn't mean the students should have a specific education talking about a certain religion and going into detail.

Lastly, check out this website: https://theconversation.com....

From this website, it does say: "Students are also segregated according to religious belief contributing to stereotyping and suspicion of minorities and risking promoting religious exclusion." From this citation, it also does support my claim that segregation may occur due to religious beliefs.

But above all, please support your evidence. All you say is how you read these certain books and that these made a conclusion for you that schools should provide religious education. But what are these certain books? I need sources, which is the most important thing to provide in a debate.

You also said "Because I see the statistics and it made me confused. Why didn't I provide a link to the statistics? Because again I don't see the point in this." If you didn't provide a link, how I am I suppose to believe that there was a specific statistic that made you confused. Remember, sources are very important.

These statements now prove my claim of why schools should not provide Religious Education.

Best wishes,
Jason
Debate Round No. 2
natusia3009

Pro

Nobody can answer you this question. And nothing would happen. People who used to believe in religion and God will continue to believe, who didn't believe, will continue not to believe. Children are taught the basics of it, and then, when they become adults, they are able in any case to decide for themselves whether they need it or not.

Everything has a history. All subjects and things that we study have some historic background. Must we then all things call a history education? And what's wrong with religious education in the context of history? Even in history some events can be presented completely from different sides, I mean that each side will represent and interpret them in terms of their benefits. Maybe we don't need to learn history then? Who do I believe? Because everyone has their own truth.

No, I was looking exactly the website that you mentioned. Just copied the wrong link, can't understand why.

About atheists. Actually I'm glad that you touched on this topic. Because it perplexes me. Not because people don't believe in God, surely they can do that or not. But this is such a thing that you can do quietly. What is really irritated me, is the fact, that people so proud of it, that they shouting about it on every corner, at every convenient opportunity. I'm an atheist! I have an impression that it just became fashionable to say "I'm an atheist", as well as to say " I'm a childfree". There are many such people around me, and often it seems to me that they are ready to kill you, with foam at the mouth proving that there is no God, if you say, for example, that you believe in God. The thing is that they can't prove it, as well as I can't prove the opposite.

Can you imagine our world without disagreements and arguments? No. It's impossible. When I say " This applies not only to religion, it concerns every aspect of life", I unfortunately didn"t dig so deeply and don't even think about racism or some things like that. I thought about simpler things, for example, children read the same book, but everyone has his own vision, even such a minor can cause controversy and indignation. Maybe we shouldn't read books, maybe we shouldn't talk at all with each other, so that there will be no disputes?

Who conclude? You conclude? Maybe someone else conclude? But not everybody conclude. Only a fool will judge the whole nation or a group of people by one person who has done something bad to him. I see, that the problem of racism is painful. That's why we should explain our children, that there's nothing wrong with them, that we shouldn't judge people by colour of their skin etc, we are all equal, and this is directly about religious education. Because nowadays children see and hear a lot of bad things on TV, from their peers, and can't always understand what is good and what is bad.

Murder, seriously? Don't go to extremes.
This is not strong, that's wrong... Are you sure that you have the right to judge what is right and what is wrong? We are here to consider the problem from different angles. And I have the right to my own vision of this problem.

Maybe you don't need to know String theory, but it's always a big pleasure to communicate with an educated, erudite and highly intelligent person. In order to be able to support any conversation, you need to be informed in many fields.

Why do you think, that students are segregated according to religious belief? The goal of religious education is not to segregate, but on the contrary to unite. To make it clear to the children that despite the fact that we all can belong to different religions, we are all equal.

That's all that I wanted to point out.
Good luck in your last round and thank you so much for this debate! It was very exciting and informative! :)
hmikeshin

Con

Hello,

I would like to say that this claim, "People who used to believe in religion and God will continue to believe, who didn't believe, will continue not to believe" is actually incorrect. Not ALL people will still stay supporting a specific religion. From this website, https://news.nationalgeographic.com..., it talks about how atheists are increasing in number. From this growing amount of atheists, we could probably infer that many people may have changed their religion.

Yes, indeed, everything has a history. However, you have misunderstood my point, again.

For example, let's look at the subject of math. Math is agreed by everyone and is not in the history unit. Yes, you may have to calculate dates and so on, but the history of math is not specifically taught. Why? It is because math continues to grow and increase, as humans develop more skills. Math continues to agree with everyone and continues to bring itself throughout the PRESENT day.

Now let's look at religion. If religion weren't to be true, then religion ends. It becomes part of our past histories of humans. So technically, it wouldn't be called Religious Education. It would be part of a HISTORY education. And also, in world history, they do provide religious information, including Greek mythology and Egyptian mythology. But do the school consider this religious education? No. It is because it is part of history and is also in the history curriculum.

(Also, the majority of your 4th paragraph made no contribution whatsoever to your claim. )

And also, you did say "The thing is that they can't prove it, as well as I can't prove the opposite." I've got to say, you've misunderstood that point, too. I've had said, IF God was not real, then religious education may be a waste of time because they are all false. I have never said anything about proving if God is real or not. I was giving a POSSIBILITY or a SCENARIO.

Another thing is about the disagreements and the arguments. I would like to say that the argument may reach over the line, or be very severe. this time, I'll give you an example without racism.

After the election, and Donald Trump had won the election, do you remember what happened? The "Anti-Trumps" held a REBELLIONS and PROTESTS, soon causing many injuries and deaths. This website shows how the rebellion and the protests looked liked with more information concerning this issue:
http://www.cnn.com...
https://www.nytimes.com...

Now, thinking about that, think what would happen if religious education was given. ARGUMENTS and DISAGREEMENTS would happen, maybe causing violence at the end. It is true that "Anti Trumps" and Religion may be different. However, they may have similar causes for conflicts: Unsettling arguments and disagreements.

Also, you said "Murder, seriously? Don't go to extremes."
But, I've got to say, murder is one of an EXAMPLE based on your claims you made, saying "The goal of religious education is also to explain youngsters what is tolerance, why should we respect each other and opinions of other people," (I soon made this point "This is not strong. It is because what if somebody were to murder somebody. Should we respect them and their opinions, and maybe call it 'Why People Kill' education? Seeing this, that statement is completely poor.") I was showing you how that particular claim was absurd. It soon shows that you contradict your statement of "The goal of religious education is also to explain youngsters what is tolerance, why should we respect each other and opinions of other people," as you have said "Murder, seriously? Don't go to extremes."

You also did mention "Are you sure that you have the right to judge what is right and what is wrong?" and the answer to that question is "Yes". For example, if you have cheated on a test, I could judge that person's actions as wrong. (This scenario contradicts your statement.)

Next, you said, "Maybe you don't need to know String theory, but it's always a big pleasure to communicate with an educated, erudite and highly intelligent person." You mentioned the word "pleasure" which changes the whole field around. Just in round 2, you did say how people are to know the basic stuff of everything. (You said: " but in life you need to know at least the basics of everything.") Now you're saying that knowing basic stuff just bring pleasure in Round 3. This doesn't make sense to me at all. They don't seem to match up, which soon shows that you have contradicted your own statement, again.

Also, I never thought or believed that students would be segregated according to religious belief. I was stating a fact and a possibility that may arise from religious education.
The website, as always is, https://theconversation.com...

Lastly, this brings me to say that you should support your evidence. From all rounds, you pretty much didn't support any evidence with a supporting source. Please do, because they make your claims look stronger.

This shows me that all the claims and arguemtns continues to be solid.

Finally, I would like to say, thank you, Pro, for providing such a great opportunity for me.
I have learned so much, and it was super fun debating this particular topic.
Also, its really cool as you can read Russian documents, as you have stated in round 2.
Thank you, and I wish you luck as the voting round begins.

Best wishes,
Jason
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by dsjpk5 6 months ago
dsjpk5
Hilarious!
Posted by whiteflame 6 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: dsjpk5// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision:

[*Reason non-removal*] The voter is not required to post an RFD on this debate. Moreover, the debate is over 1 months past the end of the voting period, and therefore well past the statute of limitations for moderation.
************************************************************************
Posted by dsjpk5 6 months ago
dsjpk5
I love it whenever someone reports a vote where no rfd is required. Hilarious!
Posted by whiteflame 7 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: dsjpk5// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision:

[*Reason non-removal*] No RFD is required on this debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by ninjad912 7 months ago
ninjad912
wow one biased vote
Posted by missmedic 7 months ago
missmedic
Religious morality is often contradictory, confusing, unclear, authority based and wrong. Religious morality can't make moral progress or change. We live in a continuously changing world with new kinds of moral problem being generated all the time and much harmful ignorance still to overcome. It's only through abandoning certain widespread religious ideas that progress towards a truly just and consistent morality is possible.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 7 months ago
dsjpk5
natusia3009hmikeshinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30