In fact, not so at all. It was the more religious people in the American South who insisted on carrying on practicing slavery, and was even prepared to fight a destructive war for this privelege which is fully sanctioned by their Old Testament, and their interpretation of religion.

The Bible’s Old Testament, in fact, sanctions many actions which we secualrists in a modern society find disgusting and abhorrent. God’s people are ordered to have their own children stoned to death for disobedience; Jews are told to kill every member of an opposing nation except for the young virgins and female virgin children so that they could “use” them.

I do not want these kinds of ethics transferred to my children, and I raise an
eyebrow at you that you seem happy with this happening to yours.

Jesus indeed taught very good ethics and spiritual rules that are still relevant and applicable in today’s day and age.
So I’d be quite happy if the school curriculum restricted itself to New Testament teaching, but they’re definitely not, and I at home have to try and explain why the sequence of creation in Genesis, fo example, is so mixed up.

How come God made space and the earth three days before he made the sun and the stars? Yet day and night was present before the sun was even created? How so? What caused the light during days before the sun and stars existed? How could grass have grown without sunlight existing? Grass was created on the third day already.

Sun, moon, and stars only on the fourth day. Please explain.

Also, where did the water that is supposed to sit above the firmament go? We have water in our atmosphere, but not outside our atmosphere. So what happened to that water since God had created it? What do you think a child thinks of a teacher who teaches him/her these obviously nonsensical things?

Jesus came along and brought a new teaching for you, a new interpretation; one that is more relevant for the times we live in. Why don’t you take it and embrace it, and focus on it rather than what went before. If you do, you will see that forcing your will onto others contravenes his rule of tolerance and respect: “Love your neighbor as yourself”.

I have always endeavoured to try and teach my children to have an open, questioning mind, and to think for themselves. This is being undermined by the fact that Christian religion (a religion that punishes dissenters) is being forced down their throats at school.

The intelligent child will eventually pick up that this is a religion full of inconsistencies and nonsensical statements, but if he tries to question it, will be told to simply to rely on faith alone and never to question.

I’ve been searching for ways on the internet to lobby to try and get rid of religiosity at public schools (there are no ‘special’ schools for non-religious children, so how is enforcing it fair?), and then came upon the sad controversy surrounding Prof Claassen.

It is truly frightening how he has been hounded into seclusion by belligerent fundamentalists, and just goes to show how “un-Christlike” these so-called Christians really are. Christ preached tolerance; these people don’t even know what the word means.

Just like Maria I am from the Northern suburbs in Cape Town, and cannot find a primary school that is religion-neutral. The religious clique is more outspoken, which is why they seem to be in the majority; fact is that they have simply bullied the rationalists into submission with their belligerence.

Furthermore, it’s absolute nonsense to say that an absence of religiosity enforces atheism.

Atheism actively declares that religion is nonsense, whereas abstinence from proselytisation simply conveys the message that each person is entitled to his/her own opinion, and rightly so.

I have no problem with religion being taught as a part of culture studies and if learners are being taught about the religion that is dominant in their community. But the message should be clear that this is -faith- for those who choose to believe, and not FACT. For years I, as a child, was forced to hide the fact that I could not buy into a lot of the goods I was being sold over the counters of religion, because the religious cadres are quickly out to punish dissenters.

Subjects like ethics and life skills should be taught separately from religion.

My children should be free to decide for themselves, and not feel co-erced if they decide that faith is not for them.

It should be their decision; not mine, or the school’s, or the religious leaders’.

Each human being should at least be granted the right and freedom to have congruity with their deepest beliefs and their inner self. I don’t begrudge the believers this; – please, try and have the same basic human respect for me.

There is simply no reason why even ONE learner should have to be overtly or covertly subjected to the religious views of the majority at any particular school. It is precisely at this stage of their lives where learners should be presented with a worldview that is stripped of all cultural and religious ‘meaning’

I say: There is “no reason” why learners should be be overtly or covertly subjected to the religious views of the secular minority either. If you keep religion out schools, you covertly promote: “Religion is not important, religion should not be spoken about, do not think about religion.”

It’s like language and culture. We don’t say: “There are 95% Sothos in this school, and too few Zulus to teach in Zulu, so we should teach without using language.” We don’t say: “A few of our kids come from a culture which regard asking questions to older people impolite, so we will forbid our children from asking questions to teachers.”

It is totally ridiculous to believe an education could be value-neutral or religiously neutral. Children would always, in any school, be influenced towards some viewpoint on the matter. People who propose secular schools won’t get neutrality: He will get secular views covertly (and overtly) promoted. Any way of handling this will leave some children’s religious views marginalized.
I think the closest thing to a solution would be to marginalize as few kids as possible. I think that can best be done by letting parents discuss with teachers what religious policy is good for that school, while allowing minorities who think differently to not attend religious practices, or choose another school.

Maria said:

…….. religious practice has no place in a public school.

The other argument that I should then put my child in a different school is also problematic. Please tell me about a decent school in Cape Town’s northern suburbs that is not overtly Christian.

IMO, that is a bit like saying: “Ovens have no place in an environmentally caring society” and then saying “I want to buy at the shops that currently do have ovens, their bread is fresher. (But I’ll keep insisting that they ban ovens.)”

I would argue that the prohibition against unfair discrimination on the various grounds does not imply equality of all value systems, or moral equivalence of all lifestyle choices. While a mother who has a child out of wedlock should not be unfairly discriminated against (particularly for the sake of the child), we should not lose our sense that marriage is the best environment (with all of its problems) environment overall for the raising of children.

While there might be a mandate to make redress for the victims of past unfair discrimination, I do not believe that the Constitution has any imperative to create equality generally, or in an overly activist manner (at least in the more subjective areas of belief and lifestyle)..