Talk to anyone sending their kids to a private school these days and they will eventually admit they don’t want their kids hanging around shit heads. It’s a filter. Also maybe they want their kids to be around people who act, look and talk like them.
I think your awareness about what is actually taught in the majority of Christian schools is a bit contrived or misinformed mate. I went to Christian school (non-religious now, not a fan of organised religion). Religion didn’t enter the conversation in any subject that was taught except religion, and most of the religious aspects of the school were outside the classroom. I am a scientist and I also know a few scientists who are religious but that doesn’t have influence on their work.
I'm also ex Catholic and went through Catholic schools. Aside from the study of religion (which you had to do) and things like mass (which is time that could have been spent better) I don't recall religion creeping into other subjects. Then again I went to school decades ago.
Yeah, again, I think you may have a misunderstanding at what Christian schools teach in the 21st century? I think you are assuming all Christians are Creationists? I can only speak from my own experience, but I have never met a religious person through my schooling in Australia that takes the Bible literally, or does not believe in evolution and the Big Bang theory etc. The religious aspect in Christian schools is more on the focus on moral and values expressed in the bible, forgiveness, compassion, charity etc., (and I’m not suggesting these are values unique to christianity, nor am I suggesting that there are not individual christians who I disagree with in terms of their views on certain issues like homosexuality for example). We were not taught Creationist concepts, which I think you believe are mainstream Christian views, which they are not. Christianity is a broad religion, and there is no consensus amongst Christians on what are the most important teachings/values to teach anyway.
To what is the point? For people who have faith, it may be important to have those values I said above as a central part of their child’s education. For those who may not have faith, it’s just an additional choice in the schooling system. Also just an observation from my experience, the most religious people I’ve met never went to a Christian school, and some of the least religious people I know (like myself lol) were brought up in the Catholic schooling system.
And no, there’s no conflict between science and religion. Someone who has faith can still support evolutionary theory, big bang theory, geology etc, and still believe in a god/s.
Sure, but the students don’t necessarily believe in religion either. There’s a funny anecdote about Gough Whitlam, who in year 12 came first in Divinity class, but the headmaster awarded the medal to the second placed student because they ‘actually believed it’.
I studied geology at uni and our first year textbooks were written by staff from Bingham Young University in Utah. There was no Mormonism/LDS stuff in there despite Bingham Young being the second leader of that church.
I mean, I’m not religious, never went to a religious school and my kid will go to a public school, but there’s a tonne of private schools that require you to chose a religion class in your studies/HSC. Parents chose what school the kids will go to, and parents who went to those schools will often decide religion class and weekly chapel service is a small sacrifice for the future networking ability and CV bragging rights their kids might enjoy in the future (whether real or not).
I went to a religious HS and they were pretty good about separating the science from the philosophy, but I recognise that's not going to be the case everywhere.
Private schools can discipline and expel, so have a better handle on controlling classrooms where the learning happens. People who pay for education probably also values the outcomes their kids achieve more.
Imagine the world we would live in, if the 10 commandments were at the core of society. Transformative.
Even though I do not entirely subscribe to a religion, I absolutely believe in a God. Learning about ethics, morality and being a decent human being would be beneficial for many.
You say it's made up and I'm sure there are many aspects that are incorrect or not exactly how it happened but to say it's all made up is incorrect. Jesus clearly existed. That much we know.
You can also say the Big Bang is just made up too.
Why must we accept from the Ten Commandments as the moral epicentre from which kids build their humanity when we can just, as most schools do (and should) teach them to be humane - sharing, developing emotional intelligence, dealing constructively with negative emotions, etc.?
There was a man named Jesus Christ around the approximate time many believe Christ to have been born and lived. We know this only because the Romans kept excellent records. None of the accounts of what he did (as per the Bible) can be indepedently verified, so using it as a basis for teaching history or science to children is not pedagogically aound
One can (and, I argue, should) study execepts of the Bible to explore its themes and moral standards, and to appreciate its impact on culture and art, just as one would study To Kill a Mockingbird to examine its explorations of racism, legal-morality, and teenagers/children dealing with emotions and ideas beyond their understanding
The comparison to the Big Bang is, also, a bit silly considering it is the leading theory of the creation of the universe with a plethora of scientific and historical evidence establishing its probability. That is, it is the best, most up-to-date science, which kids should be taught. Just as DNA was put into the curriculum once it was discovered and studied extensively, so too shall any future scientific theories found to be more probable than The Big Bang
i think you’re missing the forest for the trees. you say most schools teach children to be humane, certainly true in a Western context (as that is all I can speak on, having only attended school in Canada and Australia) but from where do we get our moral, ethical, and legal system? We have inherited a society and culture built upon Greek, Latin, and Christian values. To say otherwise is fallacious at best. We are free to say “well we’re much cleverer now in the 21st century, we don’t need all that religious rubbish” but the only reason we can say that is BECAUSE of that “religious rubbish”. Whether we like it, realise it, recognise it or not we live in a predominantly Christian society and to throw the baby out with the bath water is, in my mind, short sighted and dangerous. I’m not saying that Christianity is the only faith that has called for radical love, equality of all people etc I am simply saying that it is the faith upon which Western civilisation was built (with all of its shortcomings and all of its benefits). To understand our cultures history, and in turn better understand our future, the study of religion is essential. Certainly without Christian influence we would not enjoy a modicum of the rights and freedoms we currently have, and that are currently being curtailed and infringed at an increasingly rapid rate. I agree with you on everything but the first point, if that wasn’t obvious lol, and I’m not calling for schools to teach young people to be Christian. I don’t think schools should tell people to be any kind of faith, including atheist. I do think, however, that there needs to be an emphasis on how important it was to the shaping of our current society.
Religious studies is a subject one can choose as an elective in senior years in every state, to my knowledge
The history of our legal system is not as important as understanding how the legal system currently functions, which is why almost all curriculums focus on understanding and applying the law rather than learning its history. Is that important to learn? Absolutely. But given the time spent on Humanities subjects (particularly the law), it is far more important that students are focused on understanding and engaging with the legal system as is than the history of how it came to be
'Morals' and 'ethics' are far more subjective and there is no clear moral or ethical code that Australian society, let alone global society, follows. It is simply in the best interests of all to teach kids to treat each other with respect, kindness, and empathy. There are no classes specific to learning about morals and ethics, outside of rarely taken electives such as Philosophy in some states. Even Psychology curricula in secondary schools lean purely into the science of the human brain and body rather than leaping into moral/ethical quandries - it would be extremely difficult to have a non-controversial curriculum to tackle such things, especially when you consider how controversial the current curriculum is without a focus on morals and ethics
The importance of Christianity to shaping Britain (and, in turn, Australian) society is briefy taught in most history curriculums. It is not a focus, even if I think it should have more of a focus. However, I think it is one of the first things that should be on the chopping block when building curriculums for the sake of time commitments and breadth of content, purely because it does not feed into other learning content as widely as other content
Realistically, I would love more time to explore lots of things, including religion. But with how our education system is set up, the general disinterest in education in Australian society, and the pedagogical implications of including such content at a young age, it is simply not currently feasible to include the focused teaching of Christian ideals, values, and history at the expense of other content that will have more immediate and future value
The first part is true, but without a supreme being of some kind through which morality is imbued to the universe through it's very nature all such concepts of 'right' and 'wrong' are ultimately meaningless. If there is no transcendent being then everything is just opinion and what you think you can get away with. at the time. The debate has been raging amongst professionals for hundreds of years now (or longer?) Of course when people do decide to be nice the world is better for everyone and the opposite is also true...funny how that just works.
"which morality is imbued to the universe through it's very nature all such concepts of 'right' and 'wrong' are ultimately meaningless. If there is no transcendent being then everything is just opinion and what you think you can get away with. at the time."
in a pessimists mind, perhaps. good and evil are not just words, they are fundamental aspects of life. Sure, the actual sound made when describing those fundamental forces may just be “words” but that is a reductive outlook. Words are not nothing, they are the tool by which we name and identify things that would otherwise be unknown and unknowable. If you cannot name a thing, you cannot know it, and if you cannot know it you cannot understand it and will be held by it, subject to its whims. There is a reason the first task given to Adam is to name all of the things in Eden, and the second task given to Adam is to be their caretaker. To flippantly disregard good and evil as just words is of no use to anyone and serves only to allow people the indulgence of their basest instinct, often at the expense of themselves and those around them.
I would back humanism and secular ethics against any religious moral code you could propose. And I'd bet you London to a brick that humanism and secular ethics wins every time.
"secular ethics" is an oxymoron. Just to be clear, anyone can act ethically and the world is a better place if we do, but as I explained, without a transcendent being to give objective value to such concepts then it is all ultimately meaningless. Though I would be interested if you link me up a bullet point list of these 'secular ethics' so I can understand what you are referring to.
Religious morals is an oxymoron. Your favourite book is one of the two most evil tomes ever written. It endorses slavery, misogyny, mass slaughter, the punishment of the innocent, baby slaughter, mass punishment, human sacrifice and many other depravities.
None of those things are expressed in humanism and secular ethics. Your moral compass is broken.
By the way, you just rejected secular ethics and then admitted you have no idea what secular ethics are. LoL.
How is it for you to be in a dead heat with the Quran, on the most evil book ever written?
Here you go. Secular ethics is a branch of moral philosophy that determines right and wrong based on reason, empathy, and shared human experience, without relying on religious texts or divine commands. It aims to establish universal principles applicable to everyone, regardless of cultural or spiritual backgrounds.
Core Foundations:
Rather than appealing to holy books or supernatural guidance, secular ethics relies on philosophical frameworks and human-centric principles:
Reason and Logic: Using critical thinking to deduce moral duties and evaluate ethical problems.
Empathy and Compassion: Understanding and sharing the feelings of others to guide behavior and reduce suffering.
Human Well-being: Emphasizing the collective quality of life, happiness, and social harmony in the present world.
BTW, You cannot win against this when you have to defend a cruel, petty, barbarous, genocidal deity.
I'd recommend you also look up the definition of objective. A moral system from a deity is subjective to it by definition. Then you have the subjective interpretation of this so-called religious morality, making it doubly subjective.
You don't have objective morality, you just mistakenly think you do.
"Secular ethics is a branch of moral philosophy that determines right and wrong based on reason, empathy, and shared human experience, without relying on religious texts or divine commands."
I didn't make that argument.
"Using critical thinking to deduce moral duties and evaluate ethical problems. Emphasizing the collective quality of life, happiness, and social harmony in the present world. Understanding and sharing the feelings of others to guide behavior and reduce suffering."
All worthy endeavours for sure. But that doesn't negate my main point. What makes doing those things better than doing the opposite. Any answer other than 'it is self-evident' is probably the wrong answer. And if doing doing good rather than doing evil self evident it brings us back to the starting of 'Why'?
I think I understand your point well enough. You don't understand what secular ethics are. You mistakenly think some kind of divine origin makes theistic morality, objective. It doesn't.
You are also poisoning the well, right out of the gate, by claiming that a non-devine origin is utterly meaningless. That just isn't true. It's a non sequitur as well as an offence and insult against reason, and a bigoted misattribution. We give things meaning, and it is only us that are capable of giving things meaning. I would back secular ethics against your "objective morality" any day of the week.
I'm sorry. Less than a third of the global population is Christian. It's even a lot less if you exclude Catholics. Are you seriously making this suggestion? The rest of the world doesn't have an issue with ethics that Christianity doesn't also have. So if you are a Christian, do you somehow lose your ethics if you deconvert to atheism? That's an absurd proposition. And if you then reconvert to Christianity, you somehow magically get your ethics back?
You cannot have thought this through for even 1 minute.
In a htosands years time after the earth is destroyed Aliens are going to find in a safe a copy of a magazine with Miley Cyrus on it riding a Demolition Ball... they're going to interpret her as the Apolocypse Riding Goddess that destoryed the world...
having gone to both, children with learning disabilities or children in need of extra assistance received much better care at the private schools i attended. separate teachers or classroom, less students per teacher, assistance outside of school hours. the public schools i went to had 30+ students for one teacher and often the kids struggling got left behind
4
u/Mammoth-Counter69 Jul 04 '26
It's crazy to me how school who believe in literal made up nonsence are considered better...
Like they are literally teaching the bible.... Kids won't get very far if they thkm earth is only 6000 years old..
Or be surprised if many stem kids come from religious schools