Introduction
There have been a lot of controversies based on the teachings of religious education in schools during the peak spread season of religious education. This has been evidenced among Christians in the 21st century, whether teaching religious education in schools worldwide is right or wrong. This has created many arguments between theists and atheists based on their different viewpoints about religion. In addition, the topic has been debated on whether it is ethically good or bad for education in schools and other learning institutions.
The argument of religious individuals and some theists is that teaching religion in school is ethically correct. Therefore, it should be introduced into every education system by developing a religion-oriented curriculum. In the theist community, there is a belief that learning religion builds the gift of faith and trust among every individual, which is a good virtue. Besides, religious teachings help students understand themselves and promote spiritual, moral, social, and cultural development. Religious education has been given three different approaches (Rest et al., 149). This includes the confession approach, which entails teaching commitment, the phenomenological approach, which entails teaching about responsibilities, and finally, leading from the commitment approach.
An atheist is an individual who does not believe in God or gods of any kind doctrine. Atheists’ religious education should not be taught in schools, and atheism should be incorporated into the school education system. Atheists argue that the time allocated to teaching religion should be used for other learning programs. They do not believe in any spiritual kind of being or some doctrine; therefore, time should not be attached to godly situations or principles. The atheists have questioned God’s existence in various ways; for instance, why should God let Christians suffer when he has the ability and control over everything? This, therefore, brings the question of discussion.
Is It Right or Wrong to Teach Religious Education in Schools?
To morally bring the best ideology about religion and school, there is a need to discuss the ethical part of the question and give a philosophical address to the issue. There are a variety of moral theories that should therefore be addressed, such as teleological and deontological theories. The teleological theory also referred to as the consequentialist approach, is mainly aimed at the end goal or purpose of performing a given duty or activity. The idea originates from the Greek word telos, which means end goal or purpose. This theory is anchored in fundamental assumptions that human deeds are determined to be right or wrong depending on their end goals or outcomes and not the action. The moral worthiness of activity is mainly determined by its result and the virtue of its consequences. This theory is best described by utilitarianism and ethical egoism.
Jeremy Bentham and John S Mill proposed utilitarianism, and they both suggested that the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined solely by its consequences. The utilitarian theory is summarized in significant ways where the first principle means that the step is right or wrong by its products. Therefore, morally right actions produce desirable products, while immoral actions have undesirable consequences. The second principle is based on evaluating the moral worth of an effort. Bentham argued that humans are guided by the amount of happiness produced by our actions. The theist suggests that taking religious education creates greater happiness than not taking it, while the atheist argues controversially.
Human opinions and decisions are always inclined to their interest in ethical egoism. Therefore an action is considered suitable when its outcome is beneficial to oneself. According to the theist society, learning religious education is helpful to them and their interest. However, atheist has criticized ethical egoism as impractical because there would be a rivalry for cases requiring collective responsibility, yet every individual seeks their interest.
According to the theist, the primary outcome of learning religious education in schools is to teach faith in the students and other good virtues like patience, trust, honesty, generosity, kindness, and commitment. Therefore, a suggestion is that learning religious education in schools bears some good traits. On the other side, atheists oppose it by suggesting that it is not valuable to believe in the divine form and that it is a waste of time that should be used in other things and related courses.
The deontological theory originates from the Greek word deon, which means obligation, duty, or principal. This theory suggests that an action’s rightness or wrongness depends on the sense of responsibility. Deontological steps are right or wrong in themselves, not under their consequences. The theories that take this form are Emanuel Kant’s theory, Human rights-based theory, and divine command theory. Kant stated that moral duties are absolute, implying that they accept no exception and must be followed. However, Kant’s theory or suggestion had a significant weakness: he ignored the consequences of an action in determining its rightness or wrongness, thus, a lot of uncertainties. Divine command theory is based on commandments, and the theory holds that the right or wrong command is based on God’s will and law. The views are premised on the idea that God exists, is omniscient, and, therefore, is an infallible source of morality.
Theist community, therefore, is the command of the Lord for humans to be religious, and there is a need to study more about religion to know more about God and the commandments. The theist community brings this by looking at bibles and Quran for the Christians and the Muslims, respectively (Margolis, 39). Besides, there is an excellent belief among Christians and Muslims that God will reward the righteous and punish the wicked-on judgment day (Gardner, 20). The atheist, on the other, questions much about all this; for example, how do we know what God commands and forbids? Is something right because God commands it, or Does he control it because it is right in the first place?
Being challenging to abide by Kant’s decision or approach, philosophers developed the situationist approach. They argued that neither consequences nor motives can help us decide on the action since it is not moral thus may be right now and turns out to be wrong shortly. The philosophers suggested that what is right or wrong, good or bad, depends on the situations we find ourselves in at the moment of its occurrence. This was better known as relativism or situationists. This view is traced to the ancient philosopher Protagoras, who declared that humans are the measure of all that is good and bad. Besides, he also suggested that there are no absolute morals, not even God.
Theists suggest that humans need to learn more about religion to know right and wrong and seek God’s favor during difficult situations, thus posing the topic of discussion. On the other hand, atheists also suggest that there is no existence of God. It is there for clearly evident that the theist community recommends and supports the teaching of religious education in schools. The theist suggests a series of advantages and benefits of teaching religious education in schools and other learning institutions, as discussed below:
- It helps build strong faith and belief among religious members and develops other spiritual practices worldwide.
- It creates the gift of tolerance between believers with different ideologies.
- It also helps build good relations in a community by linking people with the same ideologies together.
- It creates good virtues among humans, thus enabling harmonic interaction within society.
- It acts as the pivotal point through which education may be given to developing various virtues like patience, trust, and goodwill, thus creating a close interaction of humans with God.
- It enables one to venture into career studies instantly; the theologists hence also provide an overview of how to earn a living.
- By studying religion, an individual can know the best stress and depression management methods and control anxiety levels.
- Studying religious education helps an individual learn how to control drug abuse, addiction sexual anxiety, which might lead to crime.
- Studying religion also helps in increasing the number of successful marriages and building an appreciative family.
- It helps us know and appreciate our culture and respect other cultural beliefs.
Based on the arguments proposed by the theist, the atheist also suggested a variety of opposition to support their stand on why religious education should not be taught in schools. They offered a lot of shortcomings in studying religious education. Religion as an expansionist tool: overtime religion has been used to fight other kingdoms based on their different ideologies about religion. Therefore, atheists oppose religious education for fear that there might be rivalry among other faiths one day (Ozgul, 104). This may bring forth devastating conditions and lead to the loss of lives. It can therefore be portrayed as a bad influence in some communities.
Religion is a tool for mental adolescence, and the atheist describes religion as a tool for mental youth as most individuals indulge themselves in religion not only to note that there is more to know about religion. It becomes difficult convincing an individual who has become a victim of religion. Besides, studying religion creates interpersonal war as most people are stranded on what should be done right and what will happen in case of failure to abide by religious activities (Agee, 439). Due to fear of facing the reparations of sin, some humans have involved themselves in devastating activities like committing suicide. The atheists view this as a negative impact of studying religion in schools as part of the curriculum and should be avoided.
Religious hypocrisy is the act of blindfolding others that one is spiritual and divine in that all that people think about him or she is being holy. This happens to both Christians and Muslims and any other individual. This has, for quite a while, posted a false picture of the theist because some have got evil deeds in their private personality, which is not portrayed in public. Religion also builds and keeps ignorance in people as they are born in a conditioned state where they are forced to believe religious dogma without questioning, fearing that it is sinful to examine some of the religious beliefs (Jackson, 39). Humans, therefore, remain stunted by the information planted on them, thus preventing the art of exploration.
Atheists believe that religion aids in developing an exploitation situation; religion also creates an exploitation situation by creating economic exploitation and making differences among people. Karl Max, a renowned German philosopher, said religion works like opium. It creates a power struggle between the minority and majority, which sometimes escalates into the shocking occurrence of events in the world (Jackson, 31). Furthermore, religion is perceived as a business idea by some individuals who start up churches with the main aim of getting tithes from other theists. This has left a more significant percentage of theists without a way to survive, thus rendering them poor.
In addition, this notion of religion being the opiate of the mass, different subscribers in different religions tend to rely much on religion to explain their phenomenon situations. They cling to religion to give them answers to the everyday life situation in all spheres of social life. This idea is contrary to the atheistic notion and understanding of life situations, and they rely on facts and shreds of evidence to explain a phenomenon. They count on the justification of every single challenge (Hill et al., 49). The Marxist idea is correct; in some circumstances, religion leads its members astray following its various doctrines and teachings, which play a significant role in their daily activities. Moreover, since they believe in some deities and supernatural powers behind every phenomenon, they do not accept any explanation or scientific thoughts to remedy their challenging situation.
Conclusion
The argument between theists and atheists is at its peak. Every society member should be well acquainted with some spiritual guide to nurturing good and desirable traits. Regarding divine command theory, as discussed above. It is ethically correct and logical to have some religious education to enable one to develop some virtues and help us understand the existence of the supreme being. Besides, its also evidenced by the presence of the supreme being (God); therefore, it is the will of God to decide on what is right and wrong.
The theories outlined above, including Teleological theory, Deontological theory, and the situationist approach, clearly support the need to incorporate religious education into the education system. For instance, according to religion, it’s generally ethical to do the right at all times despite the situation one is in; it is right to connect yourself to some belief considering the advantages of religion. Furthermore, many theists benefit from being touched by some faith; for instance, in religion, having a sense of belonging, human behavior builds teamwork and brings wisdom about God’s existence. Besides religious education, it explains ancient human history and the relationship between nature and humans. Therefore, having discussed my point of view, I would advise and encourage the spread of religious education in schools.
Works Cited
Agee, Jane. “Developing qualitative research questions: A reflective process.” International journal of qualitative studies in education 22.4 (2019): 431-447.
Gardner, Howard. “The five minds for the future.” Schools 5.1/2 (2018): 17-24.
Hill, Peter C., and Ralph W. Hood, eds. Measures of religiosity. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press, 2019
Jackson, Robert. “Inclusive study of religions and world views in schools: Signposts from the Council of Europe.” Religious Education for Plural Societies. Routledge, 2018. 248-263.
Margolis, Michele F. “How politics affects religion: Partisanship, socialization, and religiosity in America.” The Journal of Politics 80.1 (2018): 30-43
Nucci, Larry P. Education in the moral domain. Cambridge University Press, 2021.
Ă–zgĂĽl, Ceren. “Freedom of religion, the ECtHR and grassroots mobilization on religious education in Turkey.” Politics and Religion 12.S1 (2019): S103-S133.
Rest, James R., Stephen J. Thoma, and Muriel J. Bebeau. Postconventional moral thinking: A neo-Kohlbergian approach. Psychology Press, 2019. Christians, Clifford G. “In qualitative research.” Sage Handb. Qualitat. Res 139 (2005): 139-164.