Should religous students be allowed to opt out of science classes?

[PBrunsel]

Letting them opt out but not graduate would be a reasonable option, except that it would be aquiescing to their abuse by religious parents.  No, they should be required to take the classes.

What about your defense of freedom opebo? Isn't it the right of a student not to take a class, isn't that their freedom? Isn't failing them for practicing their freedom to choose a class anti-freedom? Don't you respect freedom anymore?

I love to use the term "freedom" loosely.

[Emsworth]

I agree, but that's not the question.

Well, the question was phrased with the words "religious students," implying that religion might be a factor in permitting students to drop classes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm a cynic when it comes to education; I feel that most courses are entirely pointless. I think that the students (or the parents) should be given the opportunity to freely choose courses, at least at the high school level.

[Smash255]

I agree, but that's not the question.

Well, the question was phrased with the words "religious students," implying that religion might be a factor in permitting students to drop classes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm a cynic when it comes to education; I feel that most courses are entirely pointless. I think that the students (or the parents) should be given the opportunity to freely choose courses, at least at the high school level.

I think kids should have s say in their high school courses to a point, however that does not mean their should be at least some requirments in regards to Science, History, etc

[A18]

Science is a complete waste of time for most people. At least History is interesting, but you have to take it on a case-by-case basis.

[Smash255]

Science is a complete waste of time for most people. At least History is interesting, but you have to take it on a case-by-case basis.

I hated taken Science in High School, but that doesn't mean its not important to know the fundamentals (which includes evolution).  Their is a reason the U.S lacks behind many other countries in regards to our achievements in Science, part of it has to do with the restrictions put on science teaching so it doesn't conflict with religious beliefs

[John Dibble]

High school science is mainly to prepare you for college science, and you will probably have to take a college science class or two if you go to college. In that sense they are useful to a good deal of people.

In my high school, we had two types of diplomas - college prep and technical. Each required you take a different set of classes. Technical didn't require much science, but college prep required four classes in science. If you want a diploma, you need to meet the standards for it - period.

If someone doesn't agree with the content of the class based on religion, all they have to do when answering is say "According to the theory of FILL IN THE BLANK this is how it works" - it wouldn't violate anyone's beliefs because all that is really required is understanding of the theory itself, not actual belief in it.

[opebo]

Letting them opt out but not graduate would be a reasonable option, except that it would be aquiescing to their abuse by religious parents.  No, they should be required to take the classes.

What about your defense of freedom opebo? Isn't it the right of a student not to take a class, isn't that their freedom? Isn't failing them for practicing their freedom to choose a class anti-freedom? Don't you respect freedom anymore?

I'm sure you're well aware, Pbrunsel, that the issue of freedom when it comes to youths under their parents control is a difficult one.  We can say, yes, let them have their freedom to be in school or not, take specific classes or not, but then again we're also saying they are totally under the control of their parents.  This in effect gives parents the right to do absolutely as they will with their offspring, with no recognition of the independent rights of the youth.  

I don't have any clear answer as to what the balance should be between the rights of young people and the power we allow their parents.  But I would probably prefer some compromise between State intervention and parental power, rather than absolute parental control.

[opebo]

Science is a complete waste of time for most people. At least History is interesting, but you have to take it on a case-by-case basis.

Who are 'most people'?  It is true that in a class society, the lower orders need only the most rudimentary training to perform their servile functions for the elite.

[A18]

Most people are most people. I thought that'd be pretty easy to figure out.

[opebo]

Most people are most people. I thought that'd be pretty easy to figure out.

Well I wasn't sure if you meant most people as in those destined to perform simple functions in life, or most people as in those who were simple-minded, or what.  Certainly I think class identity is the most realistic way of determining what the options in life would be for the child.

[A18]

No, either way, it's quite useless.

[Alcon]

You don't do the work, and you should fail.

Just because you disagree with the material does not mean you can't study it. Education is a lot of filtering.

[A18]

I agree, but you shouldn't have to take the class. Actually, we should just abolish public schools, so we wouldn't have to have these debates.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Of course not.

[Alcon]

I agree, but you shouldn't have to take the class. Actually, we should just abolish public schools, so we wouldn't have to have these debates.

Well, if you shouldn't have to take the class, you obviously don't agree with what I said. And public schools aren't going to be abolished anytime soon.

[Citizen James]

Well, for starters, most science is not in conflict with most religious beliefs.   I can think of very few (None really) faiths which still adhere to the geocentric model of the universe, and perhaps a few individuals who subscribe to an egocentric model of it.

Even parts of science with which a sizable minority of the population objects to (such as evolution), are not banned by all denominations - just a few of the fundementalist creeds.  Amongst more mainstream congregations a more deist thought tends to prevail (i.e God created evolution).   I can think of nothing in Newtonian physics, standard chemistry, or basic physiology which would have much controversy over it at all.

Now, the opposition to education is a different matter entierly.   Advocates of authoritarianism tend to prefer ignorace, as an uneducated populous is easier to manipulate and control; whereas the well educated have a tendency to think for themselves, no matter how much certain elements may try to indoctrinate certain ideas.

[A18]

I agree, but you shouldn't have to take the class. Actually, we should just abolish public schools, so we wouldn't have to have these debates.

Well, if you shouldn't have to take the class, you obviously don't agree with what I said. And public schools aren't going to be abolished anytime soon.

"You don't do the work, and you should fail.

"Just because you disagree with the material does not mean you can't study it. Education is a lot of filtering."

I agree with all of that, and it has nothing to do with whether or not you should have to take the class.

"School choice" will eventually bring about the decline of public schools, or at least, I would certainly hope so. But I'm an eternal optimist.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

I can't decide.  On one hand I think it's their right to opt out if they want, and when we end up with a generation that just doesn't get the world, the horrors of religion will be revealed. 

On the other, I think it's ones right to not go through life that blind

[TeePee4Prez]

No because some parents are religious nutcases.

[migrendel]

If the child makes the choice, and it does not become a prerogative of a parent who feels they have the right to make such an important choice about knowledge for their child, I believe such an exception should be granted. We live in a pluralistic society, and while we should never alter the science curriculum that all children have a right to learn, we must respect the scruples of others. Sometimes we must allow people to make choices with which we disagree personally, so the freedom to follow the dictates of one's conscience, to the extent that it does not prevent other children from learning about cross-species evolution, is paramount.

[A18]

It should obviously ultimately be up to the parents.

[Alcon]

It should obviously ultimately be up to the parents.

So, theoretically, I could invent my own religion that objects to every core class and should still be able to graduate?

[J.R. Brown]

No, it doesn't. It gives you an understanding of the world we live in, but not a basic understanding, which people have by age 5. As for understanding, I could say the same about economics, U.S. history, or anything else.

The question was should they be allowed to opt out, not should they be forced, so you won't lose religious future scientists.

This is the reason why we are behind the rest of the world in science and mathmatics. Obviously, science and mathematics are important. Who builds our defense system? Who creates our highways and bridges? Engineers using science and mathematics. Not to mention Doctors and Biologists who work constantly to find cures for some of the most deadly diseases. These kids don't know their potential. Most people don't know their true potential until age 17 or 18. Maybe later. We need to provide a way for kids to expand their minds and explore areas that they have never heard of.

Evolution is really the only thing that religious people have a problem with. I don't think hearing a scientific theory will turn them away from God.

[A18]

It should obviously ultimately be up to the parents.

So, theoretically, I could invent my own religion that objects to every core class and should still be able to graduate?

I oppose "graduation." So give people credit for the classes they took.

And J.R. Brown, not everyone will quit taking math and science.

[Alcon]

It should obviously ultimately be up to the parents.

So, theoretically, I could invent my own religion that objects to every core class and should still be able to graduate?

I oppose "graduation." So give people credit for the classes they took.

And J.R. Brown, not everyone will quit taking math and science.

You oppose graduation? That is an interesting concept. Why?