Privatize Religious Education

   

By Ronald Michael Quijano, LPT

     Education - as defined in different well-known dictionaries - is a systematic way of instructing a particular subject or field in which they should integrate with other learning experiences to apply it in reality to make progress and contribution to society. The definition may differ to some aspect, but the essence of its meaning and application are under the same roof. Education is the action or process of teaching someone especially in a school, college, or university; it somehow refers to what we know as formal education but the very essence of its definition stays within the context of being academic. Education is teaching the knowledge, skill, and understanding that you get from attending school, college, or university; which pertains that a student should be taught that they have the right to decide what to think, how to think, and why should they think. Religious education tends to give them absolute understanding about the nature of their beliefs as if they were an expert on interpreting such religious scriptures that even they can’t have absolute understanding and interpretation. They always raise an argument in interpreting verses whether symbolically or literally. The student then has no choice to raise their question and inquiry on their understanding of religious beliefs.

    The context of this article is to explain why religious education should remain in the private sector of an individual’s life. I do not claim that all religious teachings affect the education of a person, but the dogmatic principle of some aspect perturbs me in an extended manner. The teachings of religion about the workings of the universe - especially Christianity - are farfetched to the real workings of the cosmos. Religion bestows spiel in the most hortative way as if it’s true and the only truth. What’s the sense of teaching Big Bang theory in Science when you are convincing them to believe in the Genesis version of the bible? What’s the point of teaching philosophy if religious education accentuates the act of inquiry about the divine as a blasphemous act? What’s the point of teaching Chemistry and Physics if the workings of Jesus are exempted to demand questions? How can society progress if we stop inquiry and tolerate ignorance? I bet those Christian fundamentalists who will read this will be offended, but why should they feel the former? Why is religion exempted from questions and criticism? Richard Dawkins - an evolutionary biologist, and a well-known voice for Atheism - said to one of his speeches that religion should not be offended by this criticism. So what if they’re offended or their feelings are hurt? Should it stop someone from expressing their thoughts and opinions? in what context should society feel offended? Is there a time for us to feel offended? Yes. We should be offended when children are denied a proper education. We should be offended when children are told they will spend eternity in hell. We should be offended when medical science is compromised by some well-financed ignoramuses. We should be offended when voodoo of some kind is given equal weight to science.

    Now, why should the government give a right to church for constructing such an educational institution? Will giving such permission leads to mutatis mutandis? I wonder if the faith-based educational institution will ever hire a non-believer. The manipulation of minds and understanding are done clandestinely by some sort of demiurge leaders. It is very agonistic that most of us aren’t aware of these things, that we tend to close our eyes and view education as some sort of requirement and formality. The society does not care about ideas being thought. The society is not provoked by things that are offensive to human rights. The very roots of religious beliefs and superstitions can be traced back to human ignorance, the lack of understanding about the real world. They tried to explain the things they do not understand in some sort of story. But as prolific scientific thinkers emerged, we now have some explanations on those things we do not understand in the past, admitting that we were wrong, and entertained inquiries for more discoveries. As Neil DeGrasse Tyson - a well-known astrophysicist and science popularizer - stated “The more science belongs to all of us, the less likely it is to be misused. These values undermined the appeals of fanaticism and ignorance. Because it matters what's true. Imagination is nothing compared with nature's awesome reality.”