[gracie24]

Get you Matthew!

[Captain.Remy]

Well actually RE doesn't exist in France as there is an old law who considers that the State and the school are no religious. So there is no RE lessons cause they aren't aloud to discuss or to include religion to the lessons.

I don't know what to think about it you know, you learn lot of things about cultures, religions and stuff then you can accept the others and their thoughts better but in a way, it's boring (I've been in one last december) and it makes lots of comparisons.

Then I don't know lol

[xXxCharlottexXx]

Well because my school is catholic we have to have it twice a week but at my school it's quite easy!

[Sunny_01]

I think that it is an important lesson in schools and opens the mind to others beliefs, cultures etc.. I like to think that it encourages compassion and kindness and at some level encourages acceptance of others.

I am not sure that it should be compulsory from YR9 onwards as young people already have so much to learn in preparation for their GCSE's. That said my daughter who is in YR10 enjoys RE. She does go to a catholic school and finds learning about other religions of great interest and she is happy to debate religion with others.

I suppose if you open your mind to anything then you are always going to be learning so why the hell not?

[Retroman]

I personally don't think it should be taught, as im non religious and quite frankly have no desire to learn or appreciate other cultures if I think they're false...
There's a major image that good people appreciate everything and everybody, and bad people only think about themselves, which I think influences people into trying to understand one another.

But at the same time, I have no interest in knowing lots of facts about a religion im not a part of. Just as I don't wish to know the insides and outsides of table tennis, as I have no interest in playing it.

However, it's probably better for us as a nation if it is taught, as some people will learn to accept other faiths and beliefs etc.

Sometimes learning more about others religion can offer more ammo to insult people with though.

Some people could also argue that if we were less aware on religion/not taught it, that we'd be less informed about the differences between religions and racism/prejudice would decrease, rather than increase.

[xDramatick]

I actually dislike RE.
The first three SECONDARY yearsdidn't teach me much at all, we briefly covered most of the religions in Yr7, Islam in Yr8, then Christianity [meaning we all got our own new testaments to.. play with =/] in Yr9.
Then it was optional, where I chose to drop it [sorry but PerformingArts, Languages, and Computing > Religion IMO], and there's generally a mixed reaction about it in our year. Most people only took it because it's 'easy' and there's no coursework.
I think it should only be taught in Primary, and made optional in secondary. I had a friend who couldn't attend Religion lessons AT ALL.

Then again I'm an athiest and couldn't care less sooo yeah :]

[Z]

It's a compulsory subject, but I really don't see why. Whenever we're learning about Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, or any other religion, I just feel affronted that I'm having somebody else's view imposed upon me. I don't think it's fair to do things the way they are done, at least in my school, whereby we have to say the prayer at assembly (though amen simply means you agree with it, I just skip that bit out.) and then in class, we have to learn up stuff about the religion to write about in a test, or learn fine details about the culture. I can see the point in educating about other cultures, but it's very oppressive the way it is taught, I don't appreciate it, and it's not going to change my mind about religion, the idea of God, or of miracles. Why is it still compulsory? Seriously pointless, mind numbing stuff. Currently, we're studying philosophy, Karl Marx and Marxism etc. It's all flying straight over my head, I don't understand it and our teacher is terrible. He's the head of department, shouts if you ask questions, etc. It's just all very off-putting.

[gracie24]

The Religion I'm studying hardly covers actually sitting down and studying other religions to be fair.

It's Philsophy and Ethics of Religion. Talking about the meaning of life, life after death, abortion, euthanasia, and topics such as those.

I think that people who don't take RE at the level that I do assume that we sit down and learn facts from other religions, which is rarely the case at all.

It opens your mind and makes you think.
It's not about trying to brainwash you into practising another religion which isn't your own.

Z - you can't use the attitude of your teacher or your ability of understanding the subject in defence of saying that RE shouldn't be taught.

[Retroman]

Originally posted by Z
It's a compulsory subject, but I really don't see why. Whenever we're learning about Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, or any other religion, I just feel affronted that I'm having somebody else's view imposed upon me.

That part made me think...
Everything else in regards to education is fact, or based on skills and fitness such as P.E and Cooking.

R.E as far as im aware is the only lesson that is purely based on learning other people's opinions/beliefs.

Even if you are religious, you won't agree with all religions as they all have differing views/backgrounds/methods/even gods etc.

It's a lesson in which people thrust an opinion on you, something that I really do see as pointless. Religion is something to be taught in church, or by family, or even the bible/quran etc. And should be restricted to those.

Opinions have no place in being taught inside a school. As religion is a choice, and doesn't benefit anyone's future in terms of jobs or compulsory information and brain power etc [unless you're wanting to be a vicar/R.E teacher etc.]

That being said, learning R.E did get me an A in my GCSE results =] but that's only because it's pathetically easy to understand and over predictable.

[Z]

You're right, I can't use that as an argument, it was just an aside to why I also dislike it as a subject. Sorry, I didn't make that clear.

However, I still feel that it's a very intrusive subject - you have to learn the beliefs of other cultures, discuss opinions of other people etc. The entire religious aspect of the course is therefore redundant, if you steadfastly don't believe in God. The philosophical part is also a very vague topic, you have to have the right frame of mind to be able to accept the ideologies and ideas discussed. I'm not an idiot, I'd say I'm very clever, but I'm not very good at understanding concepts to which I'm not used to. For example, the teachings of Karl Marx (I use this as an example because that's what we're doing in RE currently) is something I don't understand. Before, the only thing I could tell you about Karl Marx was that his ideas were the basis for Communism, that he was a German Jew and he spent a lot of time moving around Europe. That's it. But the way the course is presented, you have to have a very good understanding of philosophy already - there are only two people in my class who took Philosophy as a subject at Standard Grade, and they are the only two who ever contribute answers in class. It's a very pointless exercise really, to have 20 people sit there, not understanding, and two who do. So maybe you can understand my situation slightly better, it's not just me who doesn't comprehend any of it, almost all of the class just doesn't understand, and our teacher is just not the type of teacher who explains things, you either get it, or you don't.

[gracie24]

I don't think you need to have had any prior Philosophy lessons to understand the Philosophy side to the Religious Studies course.
I didn't and I understand them, usually not at first mind, but eventually.

RE is about facts and opinions.
I see no downside in learning about other people's opinions on "why we are here" and what you can gain from this is supporting your argument for why you believe in what you believe in. Even if you're an atheist you believe in something.

It gives you the change to make good arguments and get involved in debates, I see that as a positive aspect and something good to learn from.
You don't have to agree with everything that is said and I rarely do sometimes, you just have to take what is said on board.
If you don't agree, your answer isn't wrong.

but that's only because it's pathetically easy to understand and over predictable.

Please....why doesn't everyone get an A in it then?
Surely every subject is easy to understand and over predictable?
You have all the forumlas in Maths, why can't every problem be solved?
You read a book in English, surely you can answer every question on that book?

My opinion anyways, I would even be able to apply for Uni if I couldn't have taken RE at A Level as I wouldn't have had enough A Levels.

[Retroman]

Originally posted by gracie24
Please....why doesn't everyone get an A in it then?
Surely every subject is easy to understand and over predictable?
You have all the forumlas in Maths, why can't every problem be solved?
You read a book in English, surely you can answer every question on that book?

My opinion anyways, I would even be able to apply for Uni if I couldn't have taken RE at A Level as I wouldn't have had enough A Levels.

Because sadly, there are still stupid people in this world. Im sure if an assessment on the amount of A's acheived in specific subjects was done, a lot more people would be passing R.E compared to other subjects.

I remember the lower sets of classes bragging that it was the only subject they decided to sit because it was so easy, and that was coming from people who skipped the rest of their GCSE's purely because they couldn't be bothered.

Plus, to be fair, I never claimed it was over predictable and easy for the entire nation/planet in the first place, only myself. So that makes your rant void in an instant =]

But I suppose I would pass it off as easy for the average person of relatively decent intelligence.

As for the rest of the questions, ive no idea how they're relevant but i'll answer them anyway:

1. If every subject was easy to understand and over predictable, then millions of people out there wouldn't be working for such low paid and unsatisfying jobs.

2. If I had all the forumlas in maths, then every problem could be solved. Although I wouldn't personally compare maths forumlas with religion, as maths is based on strict facts and usually tends to be rather complicated...whereas religion is easy because it's just based on a range of random opinions that are all simple to understand.

3. Most likely, yes..I could answer every question in that book, providing I have a decent memory. Are you comparing the vast range of beliefs, religious history and happenings to that of just one book? Religion is much more indepth than just a book, yet still somehow it manages to be quite a simple thing to understand.

I don't really know what point you're arguing...
I merely stated that I found religion over predictable and easy, which was the reason behind my A.

Would it appeal more to your views if I said I acheived an E because it was difficult, hard to understand and incredibly complicated?

Also, I don't think learning religion equipped me with the skills to argue and debate religious views/matters. Religion just creates lots of annoying people who present arguments such as "GOD LOVES ME, HE'S REAL! I HAVE FAITH AND HE LOOKS DOWN UPON YOU BECAUSE YOU DO NOT! I HOPE GOD CAN FORGIVE YOU, BECAUSE I CAN'T! YOUR WORDS ARE BLASPHEMOUS!" or something to that effect.

Which sounds like the words of a simpleton every time I hear it, and isn't doing anyone any good. That isn't the sign of a worthwhile debate, but just someone forcing their opinion on you with constant rantings...which is exactly what an R.E lesson is.

Anyhow, before this gets too long, i'll end by saying that learning other people's opinions that you don't agree with doesn't benefit you in the slightest. Nobody lives by the motto that we have to understand every single sport on the planet, in order to respect people's hobbies? because none of us are interested in every single sport.

So why should anyone have to understand every single religion on the planet in order to respect their beliefs? when you simply don't agree with it, believe in it, or need to learn any of it.

You learn tennis if you're a fan, or wish to take up the sport.
The same should be with religion...you only learn it if you wish to practise it. People who insist on learning all religions in order to respect other people are "dogooders" who think that they have to understand everyone in order to be classed as a decent person.

[gracie24]

I'm actually offended by that and I'm finding it difficult to say what I want without over-reacting or personally offending you which I wouldn't want to do.

I'm evidently one of the stupid people in the world then because I didn't get an A in RE at GCSE.
I'll just let my parents know now how much money they've wasted on my education.

but that's only because it's pathetically easy to understand and over predictable.

The second time I've quoted this, you never say that this is based on you personally, am I automatically supposed to assume this? To me it seems like a generalisation. But then again, I'm stupid.

There is my point, why don't people just take RE then, if it's so easy? Take that along with a few BTec courses and you'll be well on your way to Uni and able to get a degree, etc, and then we wouldn't have this huge problem of unemployment.
RE might have been easy to you, but your one person, out of thousands who have taken an RE exam.

I never compared maths forumlas with religion, but as you will see I said before "surely every subject is easy to understand and over predictable" - maths is clearly one as there are facts, it's all facts. There's either a right or wrong answer with it.

You've taken everything out of context to make me seem like someone who doesn't take religion seriously and is comparing it to ONE BOOK or MATHS FORMULAS.
I clearly didn't do that!!
I was on about subjects in general and using those subjects as examples.

My point that I was arguing is that I don't feel that RE is an easy subject and is pisses me off when people think it is!

Maybe your classes in your school didn't equip you with the skills to argue and debate religious views and such, but mine has.
My teachers methods are obviously different to the ones of your teachers, that isn't my fault?
I was merely making a statement that RE lessons do give you the opportunity to argue and so can develop those skills.

Once again, my RE lessons do not contain someone forcing their opinion on me in the slighest, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, their own beliefs and we all accept one anothers even though we may not believe in it.
Why do you come on a forum then?
All it is is people forcing their opinions on you with constant rantings, just like you have ranted above and just like I am doing now.
My RE lessons, do not consist of it in the manner that you are stating.

Nobody has to understand every single religion at all. I would easily go through life happy not knowing anything about the Islamic faith (for example), but I found it interesting in the way they think, the way they act and I feel I gained more knowledge by learning about other people's cultures. It doesn't mean I'm automatically forced to convert my beliefs and religion because I've learned something!
You're rather ignorant if you don't want to learn about other people's cultures at all, even if it's just a small amount.
Like I've said before, my RE lessons don't even consists of talking about other religions, its the ethics and philosophy behind religion.

I don't wish to practise religion, I don't ever want to go into a church, I don't ever want to be a vicar, I'm never going to go to Church on a Sunday, I'm never going to get married in a Church, but I find learning about philosophers views on religion interesting, about animal rights, euthanasia, abortion, life after death, determinism, utilitarianism, the psychology of religion...etc.

I hope that made sense - me being a stupid person I've probably messed it all up!

[geoking66]

My school has a world religions history class and an English course known as "Ethical Dilemma" in which students read literature with a focus on moral and ethical behaviour and the decisions that we must make in real life. Note, those two are optional classes. However, most of my classes end up talking about morality.

[Ruth]

Well, yes I do think it should be taught. Most people who don't think it should be seem to say that it's because they're not interested in it, or it's based on people's beliefs, not fact.

Well hellooooooo? I hated maths and science at school, and wasn't interested in them at all. I still had to do them as subjects though. If I could have only done subjects I was interested in, I would have been doing English, Drama and very little else.

Also, it is based on fact. It is teaching you the facts of what people believe in (I mean for a very easy example - The Koran is the Muslim holy book - fact). You may choose not to believe in the same things, but what's wrong with at least learning about them?

If you are an aetheist, say, you may say that you have no interest in RE - but how can you truly say that you don't believe in something, unless you know at least a bit about it?

As for comparing it to say, tennis, and saying that you would only take tennis lessons if you were interested in learning it, so you should only take RE lessons if you are interested in learning it - well again, I had no interest in maths or science. But I had to take the lessons.

I personally believe it should be compulsory up to GCSE level, and then should be available as an option for GCSE.

[bananarama]

Only facts should be taught in Schools not myths and ancient cultures that are not so much taught in communities more brainwashed into children instead. RE should be banned until the age of 16.

[jamesh]

I go to a catholic school and obviously we do R.E and actually Ii find it really interesting. I am a catholic, but in R.E they aren't shoving it down our throats trying to make us like all holy and believe evrything that the religion says. It's more about learning about the religion and beliefs of our religion and other religions. It helps us understand other peoples beliefs. I have to take R.E GCSE its compulsory at our school. But still, they aren't forcing us believe the whole shabang if you get what I mean.

[bananarama]

Originally posted by jamesh
I go to a catholic school and obviously we do R.E and actually Ii find it really interesting. I am a catholic, but in R.E they aren't shoving it down our throats trying to make us like all holy and believe evrything that the religion says. It's more about learning about the religion and beliefs of our religion and other religions. It helps us understand other peoples beliefs. I have to take R.E GCSE its compulsory at our school. But still, they aren't forcing us believe the whole shabang if you get what I mean.

Thats the problem with RE. Why in a free society so called should religion be "Compulsory". Religion is a series of beliefs not proven facts. Fairy stories should never be compulsory unless the institutions teaching them have a sinister intention to brain wash. You cannot opt out of the teaching if it is compulsory. This should be regarded as a major breach of human rights and an attempt to mould peoples minds into believing fantasies are true............

[Sam]

This is a tough one.

I'm split. I agree that the Bible is all based on myth, but beleive it should be taught because it shows how people live, which is what I find interesting. Even if religion was proved wrong i still think it should be taught as the history of religion, as for thousands of years people have lived with religion, and I think its important for people to understand how other people from other cultures live and the great and not so great things people have done because or religion.

However I do beleive its wrong as Religion contradicts Science, so to be taught one thing in one subject and another thing in another is wrong, but generally i think it should be taught as its important.

[XxShortyxX]

I did RE at school. I hated it! Why did I have to learn about it? How is RE going to help me get a job! That's the problem at school's, they teach you aload of rubbish like RE, Frence, PE god knows what else, when they should be teaching imorpant things, like Maths English, stuff that is going to help you get a job. I mean no wonder half of people who leave school can't read or write that well.

[bananarama]

Originally posted by Sam
This is a tough one.

I'm split. I agree that the Bible is all based on myth, but beleive it should be taught because it shows how people live, which is what I find interesting. Even if religion was proved wrong i still think it should be taught as the history of religion, as for thousands of years people have lived with religion, and I think its important for people to understand how other people from other cultures live and the great and not so great things people have done because or religion.

However I do beleive its wrong as Religion contradicts Science, so to be taught one thing in one subject and another thing in another is wrong, but generally i think it should be taught as its important.

There is nothing wrong in the belief in a god (Being religious) unfortunately religious beliefs are used to control societies and define controlled cultures. Control of people is in the long run dangerous as the world events show. Religion is dangerous in the sense it is confusing to people to teach confusing beliefs. We should all worship facts and not perpetuate tall tales from the past that causes passions that lead to death and destruction.... That's why religion should be kept away from the minds of children as childrens minds are programmable.

[bananarama]

Originally posted by XxShortyxX
I did RE at school. I hated it! Why did I have to learn about it? How is RE going to help me get a job! That's the problem at school's, they teach you aload of rubbish like RE, Frence, PE god knows what else, when they should be teaching imorpant things, like Maths English, stuff that is going to help you get a job. I mean no wonder half of people who leave school can't read or write that well.

Exactly. Exactly...I could not agree more. I think only usable skills should be taught on a compulsion basis. Valuable teaching time is wasted on historical religious mumbo jumbo.

Religious stories are from the past. Live in the past and you kill the future.....

[Retroman]

Originally posted by gracie24
I'll just let my parents know now how much money they've wasted on my education.

If you think your parents have wasted money by funding your education and you not acheiving top results, that's your issue not mine. If you acheived good/average results and think your parents money was wisely spent, then well done.

Originally posted by gracie24
The second time I've quoted this, you never say that this is based on you personally, am I automatically supposed to assume this? To me it seems like a generalisation. But then again, I'm stupid.

I already said it was based on me personally in my last post, when I talked about your rant being void. So you don't need to assume im talking about me, if ive clearly stated that I am.

Originally posted by gracie24
There is my point, why don't people just take RE then, if it's so easy? Take that along with a few BTec courses and you'll be well on your way to Uni and able to get a degree, etc, and then we wouldn't have this huge problem of unemployment.
RE might have been easy to you, but your one person, out of thousands who have taken an RE exam.

If people are looking for an easy way into uni or acheiving more subjects then that's exactly what id recommend them to do...take R.E.

Then again, R.E is a less and less popular subject these days and many people don't wish to learn it, even if it does mean an easy pass.

Originally posted by gracie24
I never compared maths forumlas with religion, but as you will see I said before "surely every subject is easy to understand and over predictable" - maths is clearly one as there are facts, it's all facts. There's either a right or wrong answer with it.

Facts makes things more difficult, as you have to remember things EXACTLY or else it'll be classed as wrong. Whereas religion is based on opinion, so you have plenty of room to be a little more vague, or choose what you talk about. Another reason it's so easy. Plus it's a lot easier to remember a theory that thousands of people believe in, than forumlas, numbers, methods and equations.

Also, maths is done in levels...
You start off with easy sums at primary school, more advanced techniques at secondary school, even more in depth at college and ridiculously advanced material at university that usually requires very intelligent people to even comprehend.

R.E is all on one level. I could discuss the in's and out's of R.E at any moment in time, and it'll always just be discussions on people's opinions and beliefs. Nothing more, nothing less.

Originally posted by gracie24
My point that I was arguing is that I don't feel that RE is an easy subject and is p****s me off when people think it is!

This sums everything up completely.
You're annoyed because you've spent plenty of time being into a subject that you found quite difficult. Whereas I spent no time at all on a subject I don't even enjoy, and found it ridiculously easy.

That's what this is all about, you not being able to accept that I found the same subject you found so difficult, to be simple.

Have you any idea how ignorant you sound when you say you're "pissed" off at me for finding a subject easy? Haven't I a right to find a subject easy? just because you found it so hard? don't be so childish.

Originally posted by gracie24
Maybe your classes in your school didn't equip you with the skills to argue and debate religious views and such, but mine has.
My teachers methods are obviously different to the ones of your teachers, that isn't my fault?
I was merely making a statement that RE lessons do give you the opportunity to argue and so can develop those skills.

My point is, due to what I find to be over predictable, I can easily argue religion by myself. I didn't require school to educate me on the subject. Which would explain why I paid no attention what so ever in R.E, did no revision, and still got the highest mark. That isn't my way of bragging, as in my eyes R.E is the last subject anyone should be bragging about, it's just my way of saying yet again...how easy I found it.

Originally posted by gracie24
Once again, my RE lessons do not contain someone forcing their opinion on me in the slighest, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, their own beliefs and we all accept one anothers even though we may not believe in it.
Why do you come on a forum then?
All it is is people forcing their opinions on you with constant rantings, just like you have ranted above and just like I am doing now.
My RE lessons, do not consist of it in the manner that you are stating.

I class someone educating me about Allah, as a forcing of opinion. That is somebodies belief, being taught to me, despite the fact I have absolutely nothing to do with it and disagree with it completely. Whereas somebody teaching me my times table is factual information that will come in useful for my further education and career, and in everyday life.

Whereas I don't walk the streets debating religion every ten minutes, so R.E isn't very beneficial at all. It won't play much part in anyone's future, besides if they persue an R.E based career or further R.E education. Maths benefits everybody on the planet in some form or another.

Also, I think you're missing the subject at hand. We're discussing opinions being forced on people within school. I choose to come on the forum to have general conversations mostly, but if I do get in the situation where I have a debate on my hands I will do so.

And i'll argue my point with them, just as I would argue against religion being taught if I was sat in an R.E class.

Also, opinions on the forum aren't forced. Whereas the in's and out's of a religion being read out to me, and me being told I have to remember it in order to acheive a pass..is practically forcing me to listen, or fail. Luckily I didn't listen nor fail, but the above is the difference between a forum and an R.E lesson.

Originally posted by gracie24
Nobody has to understand every single religion at all. I would easily go through life happy not knowing anything about the Islamic faith (for example), but I found it interesting in the way they think, the way they act and I feel I gained more knowledge by learning about other people's cultures. It doesn't mean I'm automatically forced to convert my beliefs and religion because I've learned something!
You're rather ignorant if you don't want to learn about other people's cultures at all, even if it's just a small amount.
Like I've said before, my RE lessons don't even consists of talking about other religions, its the ethics and philosophy behind religion.

Why do you place religion above everything else? Im ignorant because I don't wish to know everything about other people's religion/views/opinions? So as I said, im ignorant if I don't wish to learn every sport/subject as well?

Like I said, you seem to live by some strange definition that a good person is someone who learns about all beliefs. Where is the written rule that says im ignorant unless I take the time to learn about ALL religion? Religion plays no part in my life, so why id waste my time learning about it im really not sure. Just as backgammon plays no part in my life, and I have no interest in it...yet I don't see you telling me to respect people's hobbies and interests by learning backgammon =]

Originally posted by gracie24
I don't wish to practise religion, I don't ever want to go into a church, I don't ever want to be a vicar, I'm never going to go to Church on a Sunday, I'm never going to get married in a Church, but I find learning about philosophers views on religion interesting, about animal rights, euthanasia, abortion, life after death, determinism, utilitarianism, the psychology of religion...etc.

Im very glad you find it all so interesting, what that has to do with anything im not sure. But im pleased you're enjoying yourself so much.

[gracie24]

Why are you so patronising towards me?
You've really upset me and you were supposed to be one of the people on here who I would have classed as a "friend".

[Retroman]

Im only arguing my point because you got the wrong idea about me saying R.E is easy...
I was originally saying it was easy for me, and that even though I don't think it should be taught in school it was nice to get an easy A on my GCSE results, that's all.

But you took it the wrong way and thought I meant it's easy for everyone, then decided to start a debate/argument mainly about it not being easy or over predictable for you and other people.

Im hoping this is just a misunderstanding, that lead to you saying something slightly negative, me replying with something more negative, you replying with something even more negative and me relpying with something more negative than that...

I didn't intend to upset you, but im sure if I randomly misunderstood something in a post you made and had a go at you for it, you'd have ended up retaliating/defending yourself too.

Id much rather you hadn't found a problem with my post and not started an argument in the first place, trust me. But it'd be silly to let a misunderstanding and two people just fending their corners ruin any "friendships"

And im not going to act any differently with you, or start talking to you weirdly/harshly all the time...thats providing you're still talking to me >_<