Bill 44

I feel that Bill 44 is a step backwards. Most of the information I have gathered so far on Bill 44 is from my professors here at the University (I really do need to investigate further.)I found this great article dated September 14, 2009 from the National Post by John Carpay and Karen Selick. It is titled God and Government. It started out with two great lines: "What could possibly go wrong with children gaining a general knowledge of the world's major religions and the differences among them?"

"Plenty, if the government requires that all children be taught that all religions, and all non-religious moral codes, have equal merit."

That got me thinking. I don't believe that just because teachers point out the differences between religions means that he/she is taking away the merit of one religion over another. It is a fact that the Catholic faith is different from Buddhism. (Although you would be amazed at the similarities between most of the major world religions....hmmm would that be a way around Bill 44..to teach the similarities of religions? But I digress)

The article then goes onto discuss that parents do not wish to have their children exposed to teachings that go against the religious teachings which contradicts what is taught within the students home. I do have to stop and pause here, to say that although I do not have any children, I get this idea. I hope that I would not be adverse to my children being exposed to ideals that do not fit my own, but when it comes to religion I think it is a whole other story. What about religions that go against some of the basic tenants that have been deemed human rights in Canada? I am still stuck on this question.

The article brings up another interesting point: some parents do not want their children forcibly exposed to religion at a young age. I am not sure how this would be detrimental? Another point is that the information that is presented is not "even-handed." That some religions are focused on more, for example within a Catholic school the Catholic faith would most likely be given more credence. This idea was backed up with the notion that most religions "include as one of its tenants, a superiority over rival systems (or else why adhere to it?) This is a rather sticky issue and I hope that teachers do not shy away from teaching religion in the future, as it is something that defines some of ones students and should not be looked at as controversial. Like rock and roll in the 50’s when it was banned, that secrecy created more issues than it was worth.