Irish school children to be taught atheism...

[Ammi]

In a historic move that will cheer Richard Dawkins, lessons about atheism are to be taught in Ireland's primary schools for the first time.

The lessons on atheism, agnosticism and humanism for thousands of primary-school pupils in Ireland will be drawn up by Atheist Ireland and multi-denominational school provider Educate Together, in an education system that the Catholic church hierarchy has traditionally dominated.

Up to 16,000 primary schoolchildren who attend the fast-growing multi-denominational Irish school sector will receive tuition about atheism as part of their basic introduction course to ethics and belief systems, including other religions.

From September 2014 children could be reading texts such as Dawkins' The Magic of Reality, his book aimed at children, according to Atheist Ireland.

But Michael Nugent, Atheist Ireland's co-founder, stressed that all primary-school pupils, including the 93% of the population who attend schools run by the Catholic church, can access their atheism course on the internet and by downloading an app on smartphones. He said these would be advertised and offered to all parents with children at primary schools in the state.

"There will be a module of 10 classes of between 30 to 40 minutes from the ages of four upwards. It is necessary because the Irish education system has for too long been totally biased in favour of religious indoctrination. And if parents whose kids are in schools under church control want to opt their kids out of learning religion (as is their right these days) then they can use our course as an alternative for their children to study," he said.

Nugent added: "Religion isn't even taught properly as an objective subject with various religions and their origins examined and explained. The teaching is to create faith formation first, not objective education. We see our course as a chance for young Irish children to get an alternative view on how the world works."

Jane Donnelly, a member of Atheist Ireland and a parent of two children in an Irish secondary school, welcomed the creation of an atheism alternative for Irish pupils.

"I opted my two girls out of religious education classes and they were told to go to the library and find a philosophy book to read during RE instead. The range of philosophy books was very limited so I sent them into school each day with a copy of Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion for them to read."




http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/26/atheism-to-be-taught-irish-schoolchildren

[Kyle]

Welcome to the 21st Century R.O.I

[Z]

Good. I think it's a shame that people are forced to be religious from a young age, it riddles them with guilt over things that they wouldn't have blinked an eye at if they weren't religious. I'm forever grateful to my parents that they didn't baptise me, send me to a church or have anything religious in the house - I'm my own person without being shaped or controlled by what a religious institution has told me to be. I know Muslims and Catholics and Protestants who are all plagued with guilt about what their religious upbringing has taught them when it comes to just being a teenager/young adult and doing things that all other teenagers and young adults do.

[Nedusa]

Don't need to teach them atheism just stop filling their heads with religious fairy tales and let them decide if and when they want to develop a religious faith.

It should be a personal choice and made at an age when the child has a proper understanding of all the arguments for and against.

[Toy Soldier]

Don't need to teach them atheism just stop filling their heads with religious fairy tales and let them decide if and when they want to develop a religious faith.

It should be a personal choice and made at an age when the child has a proper understanding of all the arguments for and against.

I agree, children simply shouldn't be introduced to religion at all until they're old enough to understand some of the concepts for themselves - and that there are alternatives.

The vast majority of "religious" people have never given it any unbiased philosophical thought at all, they follow blindly because it was drummed into them from birth. It's a con. Even if there was any truth in organised religion, belief isn't real unless it's been developed individually... It's simple indoctrination.

Personally I'm not entirely un-spiritual (I think it's all but certain that there's more to existence than we can perceive or understand) but I think ORGANISED religion - every organised religion - is a sham. I've never seen anything that distinguishes a large "organised religion" like Christianity or Islam from a "cult" like scientology or even a tiny group of individuals claiming to have found Jesus in a farm in Alabama. The only difference is that they have hundreds of millions of followers* and that's... sort of terrifying.


*(statistics say billions of followers but that's census data, most of these people are non-religious)


Early introduction to a religion only achieves one of two things, usually. Blind, empty faith or a complete rejection of ANY spirituality in favour of pure WYSIWYG atheism. It just stifles, either way.

[smudgie]

I agree, children simply shouldn't be introduced to religion at all until they're old enough to understand some of the concepts for themselves - and that there are alternatives.

The vast majority of "religious" people have never given it any unbiased philosophical thought at all, they follow blindly because it was drummed into them from birth. It's a con. Even if there was any truth in organised religion, belief isn't real unless it's been developed individually... It's simple indoctrination.

Personally I'm not entirely un-spiritual (I think it's all but certain that there's more to existence than we can perceive or understand) but I think ORGANISED religion - every organised religion - is a sham. I've never seen anything that distinguishes a large "organised religion" like Christianity or Islam from a "cult" like scientology or even a tiny group of individuals claiming to have found Jesus in a farm in Alabama. The only difference is that they have hundreds of millions of followers* and that's... sort of terrifying.


*(statistics say billions of followers but that's census data, most of these people are non-religious)


Early introduction to a religion only achieves one of two things, usually. Blind, empty faith or a complete rejection of ANY spirituality in favour of pure WYSIWYG atheism. It just stifles, either way.

Totally agree.

As parents we taught "good" rather than God.
When our son was 8 he wanted to go to Sunday school, this being because his best friend went. We arranged for him to go with his fiends family, he lasted about 6 weeks.
They did do nativity etc at primary school, we also bought them a colourful pictured bible that resembled a story book (which in my mind is just what the bible is) .
They have both grown up with open minds, not really believing but not really sure.

[Nedusa]

I agree, children simply shouldn't be introduced to religion at all until they're old enough to understand some of the concepts for themselves - and that there are alternatives.

The vast majority of "religious" people have never given it any unbiased philosophical thought at all, they follow blindly because it was drummed into them from birth. It's a con. Even if there was any truth in organised religion, belief isn't real unless it's been developed individually... It's simple indoctrination.

Personally I'm not entirely un-spiritual (I think it's all but certain that there's more to existence than we can perceive or understand) but I think ORGANISED religion - every organised religion - is a sham. I've never seen anything that distinguishes a large "organised religion" like Christianity or Islam from a "cult" like scientology or even a tiny group of individuals claiming to have found Jesus in a farm in Alabama. The only difference is that they have hundreds of millions of followers* and that's... sort of terrifying.


*(statistics say billions of followers but that's census data, most of these people are non-religious)


Early introduction to a religion only achieves one of two things, usually. Blind, empty faith or a complete rejection of ANY spirituality in favour of pure WYSIWYG atheism. It just stifles, either way.

I agree, good post. I think the indoctrination process by parents is done to suit the desires and wishes of the parents. They want "their children" to follow and believe what they believe. It is brainwashing young minds to obey their parents wishes and believe what their parents believe no matter how ridiculous or deluded those beliefs are.

So you get one generation brainwashing the next and so into perpetuity. This is how the organised major religions survive by getting the older generations to condition the younger ones.

I have no problem with religion or religious beliefs but I think they are a very personal thing and should remain so, not something that should ever be exploited for money or subservience or worse.

[Toy Soldier]

I have no problem with religion or religious beliefs but I think they are a very personal thing and should remain so, not something that should ever be exploited for money or subservience or worse.

That's how I feel about it really. I've had very interesting diacussions with people who have "found" religion later in life and have really engaged their minds in the pursuit of it. But I also find that many who have been "life long religious" are very fragile in their beliefs. They become agitated easily and don't want to discuss it, because they've never really given it too much thought and it "makea them uncomfortable. Their "belief" is rooted in never questioning.

So as for introducing atheist literature... It's a buy of a quick fix in my eyes. Good to have a counterbalance where religion is being taught to impressionable people. But, I would rather that children ONLY be taught in terms of facts and scientific theories. Opinions and beliefs (including atheism) should be discovered individually without "teaching", whether that's in a school or in the home, to be genuine.

[arista]

Dawkins is Most wise

[Toy Soldier]

Dawkins is Most wise

He was, once upon a time. Recently he's been more concerned with being deliberately inflammatory and controversial in order to gain publicity, than in actually trying to enlighten people. It's a shame.

[Vicky.]

No need to teach them athiesm really. Just stop making out that Christianity and such are utter fact. Cover it in RE, like other religions are taught. No need for compulsory prayers and stuff in assembly.

[Redway]

Excellent news. They'd be better off being taught something with stone-hard, scientific proof than archaic, intolerant fairy tales.

[Jesus.]

He was, once upon a time. Recently he's been more concerned with being deliberately inflammatory and controversial in order to gain publicity, than in actually trying to enlighten people. It's a shame.

This is absolute bollocks, and is basically the media / religiously pushed caricature of who he is and what he does. Just because he doesn't dress up his opinions with flowers, it doesn't mean his intention is to inflame.

In amongst his recent work are books aimed at children and people with less scientific knowledge, such as the greatest show on earth, or the magic of reality.

He's an absolute genius in his field, and will go down in history as one. When people comment on his area of expertise, he should have no compunction to treat his opponents with respect.

[Josy]

Won't this be a really short lesson...

'There is no God'

Class dismissed :shrug:

[Niamh.]

:laugh2:

[Toy Soldier]

Won't this be a really short lesson...

'There is no God'

Class dismissed :shrug:

I do wonder what they can "teach" beyond that - as atheism isn't really anything that can be summed like a religion. You can't say that atheists believe in "the big bang", or in evolution, or in... Anything... The only requirement is NOT believing in god. One atheist might believe in evolution, another might believe we were placed on earth as some sort of alien science experiment that went horribly, horribly wrong. Neither are any less "atheist".

[Kazanne]

I don't think anything like that should be taught,let them make their own minds up when they are old enough,I believe in God,but will never force my kids too,they can make their own minds up,if they ask me I will tell them MY beliefs but they are just that MY beliefs,they can chose what they want to believe.

[Jessica.]

My niece goes to one of those schools, but tbh she is four years old and I'm pretty sure she knows some people believe in god and some people don't, there can't be more to it than that, especially for four year olds.

[Tregard]

Balance is key to these things, so it's good to see them showing the differences in theism and atheism, hopefully this will lead to less prejudice and hostility in later life.

I also wouldn't think there's much to it (bar the "history of atheism", which wouldn't be the most interest or relevant of things) but they could also talk about agnosticism, Humanism, just generally try and remove the stigma from the term, maybe show famous atheists.

And heck, if Dawkins can write numerous books on it, surely they can make a few lessons out of it? :P