Primary school college course and atheism

darealtulip

There are two points with an integrated curriculum with religion;

1 A subject which is based on believe and not on evidence is taught as true

2 It is impossible to opt a child out of religious education that way.

This is very different from integrating other subjects. My son was taught to recite prayers because it was an integrated part of the day and not religious education. Therefore they saw fit to indoctrinate my son with their religion.

I only opted my son out of the religious class not out of the rest of the religious indoctrination.

robindch

KamiKazeKitten wrote: »

Would depend on individual school ethoses I imagine. Most are couched in fluffy terms like that, but it still means the same thing.

Yes, that's why I object to the term "ethos" quite strongly -- it's a blandm, harmless-sounding word used to justify and excuse the indoctrination of innocents.

KamiKazeKitten wrote: »

[...] if a child asked me "did this really happen Teacher?" or whatever I'd have to say yes.

Are you not allowed to say "Lots of people believe it happened"?

iguana

darealtulip wrote: »

There are two points with an integrated curriculum with religion;

1 A subject which is based on believe and not on evidence is taught as true

2 It is impossible to opt a child out of religious education that way.

This is very different from integrating other subjects. My son was taught to recite prayers because it was an integrated part of the day and not religious education. Therefore they saw fit to indoctrinate my son with their religion.

I only opted my son out of the religious class not out of the rest of the religious indoctrination.

If you want him out of every religious aspect of the day can you request that this is done? Make it clear you do not want him to be required to say prayers or to take part in any class which is religion* themed. As I said the JW kids in my class would not take part in any lesson with a religious theme, they certainly never prayed at any of the 4-6 class prayers we said every day.

*I actually think that's just true of Judeo/Christian religion. As far as I can remember they did any lessons which involved stories of Egyptian, Greco-Roman, Celtic gods, etc. The reason being that nobody actually believed those stories were anything other than stories, whereas the ones about Jesus/God/Saints, corresponded with what we were taught as fact in religion class.

darealtulip

iguana wrote: »

If you want him out of every religious aspect of the day can you request that this is done? Make it clear you do not want him to be required to say prayers or to take part in any class which is religion* themed. As I said the JW kids in my class would not take part in any lesson with a religious theme, they certainly never prayed at any of the 4-6 class prayers we said every day.

*I actually think that's just true of Judeo/Christian religion. As far as I can remember they did any lessons which involved stories of Egyptian, Greco-Roman, Celtic gods, etc. The reason being that nobody actually believed those stories were anything other than stories, whereas the ones about Jesus/God/Saints, corresponded with what we were taught as fact in religion class.

I took my son of that school. Yes, I could get him out if I supervised him myself every time, only they could not tell me the times.

Besides if it is integrated into every subject and throughout the day it becomes impossible to opt him out.

It would have been possible if the school actually wanted to facilitate us (there were/are more non religious people who send their kids to that school) but instead they decided to force their religion down the throat of our children.

Just put up with it was the general idea from the people in the village, don't rock the boat. You don't want to upset people or worse offend them.

It all depends greatly on how religious the teacher and principal are. Thanks to the fact that schools have no obligation by law to write down what their ethos entails they are free to do what ever they want and how ever they wanted. They are even protected by law to do so.

JonPierson

The first thing to note in some of the recent posts is the matter of the Catholic 'ethos'. An ethos is not, as some heretics like myself would believe, an electronic thos but is, in fact, "the distinctive character, spirit, and attitudes of a people, culture, era, etc." [Collins English Dictionary, 2004].

What no one appears to be asking is where does this 'ethos' come from? Indeed, where does the whole framework and methodology of educating kids in Roman Catholic schools come from?

Well, look no further than The Vatican State. The rules for Roman Catholic schools are freely available for all to see at http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_gravissimum-educationis_en.html

The whole document is worth a read for those with a strong stomach, foe example, this tidbit is about what the Roman Catholic church requires in schools:

A Christian education does not merely strive for the maturing of a human person as just now described, but has as its principal purpose this goal: that the baptized, while they are gradually introduced the knowledge of the mystery of salvation, become ever more aware of the gift of Faith they have received, and that they learn in addition how to worship God the Father in spirit and truth (cf. John 4:23) especially in liturgical action, and be conformed in their personal lives according to the new man created in justice and holiness of truth (Eph. 4:22-24)...

I just love that word 'conform', don't you?

The Roman Catholic church is an institution that occupies a space that is about as far away from democratic as it is possible to get. It is a dictatorship led by an individual that the church's believers have been indoctrinated to believe is infallible. It was one of these 'infallible' leaders, one Giovanni Montini, who published the Declaration on Christian Education quoted, above.

Article 42 of our Constitution (http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Publications/Publications_Archive/Publications_2006/Publications_for_2002/Bunreacht_na_hÉireann_-_Constitution_of_Ireland.html) could have been lifted straight out of this foreign state's document. The Constitution, at least those parts even remotely connected to religion, remember, was written by the soon-to-be Archbishop of Dublin, John McQuaid and the Jesuits and the Irish President, Eamon De Valera, sent the draft of the Constitution to a foreign State, The Vatican, for 'approval'. (See The Jesuits and the drafting of the Irish constitution of 1937, Seán Fauhgnan, Irish Historical Studies, Vol. 26, No. 101 (May 1988), pp. 79-102)

The reality is that, however liberal a Roman Catholic school may appear to be, the orders from the foreign State that interfered with our Constitution, to include its requirements for education, are what the Roman Catholic church requires to be applied in Roman Catholic schools – 93% of all National Schools in the State.

Insect Overlord

It was the day I realised all of this (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77361745&postcount=236) that I first started to have doubts about Catholicism. I think I was 10 years old when I spotted the patterns...

JonPierson

Insect Overlord wrote: »

It was the day I realised all of this (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77361745&postcount=236) that I first started to have doubts about Catholicism. I think I was 10 years old when I spotted the patterns...

DO NOT DOUBT CATHOLICISM! It is the way, the truth and the light... unless you happen to have a brain lodged somewhere in your skull.

May I commend to you the reasons why you may have had the bizarre notion that there is an old bloke sitting in the skies waiting for you to join him in what is, so far, an undetected afterlife placement? It is a book (not 'the good book', which is good because it says it's good) that explains 'why we believe in god(s)', by J. Anderson, JR., MD - with Clare Aukofer?

The ISBN is 9780984493210 and it is available on Amazon.

I try really hard not to post comments that are my own opinion. I prefer to quote (non-internet) sources which people are able to access themselves if they wish so to do.

I try so hard not to 'preach' atheism but, rather, point people in the direction of peer reviewed, scientifically researched publications that can be indepentantly verified.

Only a nutter would make claims that are only verifiable by reference to a one thousand to two thousand year-old text that has no independently verifiably basis whatsoever.

In step with most, if not all, atheists that I know, I am more than happy to change my beliefs in the face of evidence. For example, I have long accepted that the speed of light is 299,792,458 metres per second and that is as fast as anything in the universe can travel. However, recently, the Large Hadron Collider appears to have shown that neutrinos are capable of travelling 0.00000006 seconds faster, around the 732km circumference of collider, than other particles.

This a scientific breakthrough of immeasurable proportions and yet, not mentioned in the Bible, the Qur'an or any other religious text.

You'd think that an infallible, omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent creator would have at least given us a tip off that it is possible for particles to travel faster than the presumed speed of light. Mind you, this God person didn't even manage to tell us that our earth is (roughly) a sphere orbiting our sun which is, in turn, part of a galaxy that is, in turn, part of an ever expanding universe.

Ignorant twat. It's like getting a builder in to do an extension and being left with half-a-dozen bricks laid out in a pretty pattern that resembles an extension and, if you pray/wish/dream really hard, it will, miraculously become the extension that you paid for.

Hotblack Desiato

In the scientific world, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; the neutrino result is now in question and will be re-run in May.

Compare / contrast with your salvation provider of choice...

recedite

JonPierson wrote: »

This a scientific breakthrough of immeasurable proportions and yet, not mentioned in the Bible, the Qur'an or any other religious text.

Yes, but the LARGE Hadron Collider is in Switzerland, whereas everything mentioned in the bible occurs within a 10 mile radius of the guy who wrote it.
Note also that there are loads of dragons mentioned in the text, but no kangaroos or penguins.

JonPierson

ninja900 wrote: »

In the scientific world, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; the neutrino result is now in question and will be re-run in May.

Compare / contrast with your salvation provider of choice...

I love it when stuff like this comes out of science. I shows that even those who make unexpected discoveries bend over backwards to prove themselves wrong and they spent three years trying to prove themselves wrong before announcing the find to the scientific community... so others would be able to prove them wrong.

Now, all are working together trying to prove it wrong.

As you correctly observe, ninja900, those who make incredible (in the literal sense of the word) claims are under the obligation to provide the wider community with all their empirical evidence so that evidence can be scrutinised and independently verified, not just 'believed'.

JonPierson

recedite wrote: »

Yes, but the LARGE Hadron Collider is in Switzerland, whereas everything mentioned in the bible occurs within a 10 mile radius of the guy who wrote it.
Note also that there are loads of dragons mentioned in the text, but no kangaroos or penguins.

But there are owls. I wonder how the owl PR people managed to get God to mention them so often in the list of things we're not allowed to eat.

The iron chariot people probably have the best commercial tie-in with God, though:

Judges 1:19 And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

You can just imagine the ad campaign:

Judas's chariots – We can't be beaten... even by God!

Galvasean

God's only weakness... iron.

JonPierson

Galvasean wrote: »

God's only weakness... iron.

Could have been worse, could have been green Kryptonite.

recedite

Maybe "chariots of iron" is just a metaphor for some concept.
Like technology, or education, or something.

Galvasean

Proof that Iron Man could beat God in a fight.

Michael Nugent

Atheist Ireland today met with Hibernia College to discuss the course notes that made untrue statements about atheism and atheists. The meeting was very productive. The relevant course notes have been removed. I am preparing an initial one-hour introductory lesson for Hibernia College on atheism and nonreligious ethics. After that, Atheist Ireland will discuss with Hibernia College how we can make a more comprehensive contribution towards developing a more pluralist religion and ethics curriculum. Hibernia College will reassure students about its existing commitment to encourage them to give feedback about any concerns they have about the course.

Here is a more complete report of the meeting:

Atheist Ireland chairperson Michael Nugent and Education Policy Officer Jane Donnelly met today with Dr. Nicholas Breakwell, Hibernia College’s VP for Academic Affairs and Knowledge Management and Dr. Siobhan Cahillane-McGovern, Hibernia College’s Course Director for its Higher Diploma in Arts in Primary Education.

The meeting was very productive. Atheist Ireland is very happy with Hibernia College’s commitment to developing a pluralist curriculum and we will be working with Hibernia College to assist them in this outcome.

Hibernia College has explained to us the context in which the religious education element of its course has evolved. We are happy that Hibernia College did not intentionally include the sections that we found to be inaccurate about atheism and atheists.

Hibernia College has removed the sections of the course notes that we have raised concerns about.

Michael Nugent will initially prepare a one-hour introductory lesson for Hibernia College on atheism and nonreligious ethics, in conjunction with the College’s technological and presentation team.

After that, we will discuss with Hibernia College how we can make a more comprehensive contribution towards developing a more pluralist religion and ethics curriculum, that is consistent with the human right of all students to freedom of conscience regardless of their religious or nonreligious beliefs.

Hibernia College will continue to offer, as a private business institution, whatever courses and qualifications its students require in order to be able to work as primary teachers in Ireland.

The Higher Diploma in Arts in Primary Education has a religious curriculum module that covers what the State requires for a teacher to to teach religion in any primary school, and a module that covers what the Roman Catholic church requires for a teacher to teach in Roman Catholic schools. Hibernia College will review these existing two modules to ensure that the curriculum module contains everything as required by the primary school curriculum.

In the medium term, Hibernia College will examine offering two separate qualifications, with the State curriculum requirements for teaching religion in any primary school remaining part of its overall Higher Diploma in Arts in Primary Education, and the Roman Catholic Church requirements for teaching in Roman Catholic schools being offered as a separate qualification.

Hibernia College will reassure students about its existing commitment to encourage them to give feedback about any concerns they have about the course.

robindch

Michael Nugent wrote: »

The relevant course notes have been removed. I am preparing an initial one-hour introductory lesson for Hibernia College on atheism and nonreligious ethics. After that, Atheist Ireland will discuss with Hibernia College how we can make a more comprehensive contribution towards developing a more pluralist religion and ethics curriculum.

number10a for reporting, and Michael for following up so convincingly -- my heartiest congratulations.

Beers on me.

krankykitty

Well done to AI, and to the OP for raising the issue.

darealtulip

A big thank you to number 10A, Michael Nugent, Jane Donnelly and all the people writing emails to Hibernia College.

I am very happy with how Hibernia engaged with Atheist Ireland and all the concerned people and offered a solution.

Well done to all!!

Galvasean

It's great that Hibernia College were so polite and helpful when dealing with AI.
I guess diplomacy does work.
Still...

Galvasean wrote: »

Diplomacy has failed.

Militant atheists assemble!!!

Sarky

Cheer up, Galvie. I'm sure there'll be another chance to call a Black Crusade and snuff out the weakling kingdoms of men in a tide of pestilence, blood and suffering...

recedite

Good job Michael and the other contributers. We can be confident from the recent Rite and Reason series in the Irish Times that this "one-hour introductory lesson for Hibernia College on atheism and nonreligious ethics" will be well thought out and well articulated.

Dades

Atheist Ireland. Making some atheists feel somewhat lazy about certain issues since 2006.

Well done, folks. And go us, too, on Boards. And the OP!

gawker

Congrats to AI and fair play to Hibernia College for swallowing their pride and making changes. It could be good for business for them, I'm sure being the only truly non-religious teachers ed providers in Ireland will bring them some students.

JonPierson

gawker wrote: »

Congrats to AI and fair play to Hibernia College for swallowing their pride and making changes. It could be good for business for them, I'm sure being the only truly non-religious teachers ed providers in Ireland will bring them some students.

My understanding is that the senior college management was not aware of the precise nature of the content of the specific course in which the objectionable material was being used.

It seems important to me that we recognise that the religious have had recognised mind-control and hypnotic techniques used against from four or five-years-old, and that they simply cannot 'believe' that anything that a senior clergyman says could not be the truth.

(These sophisticated techniques even work against receptive adults, especially when they are in a mentally weekend state, for example, following bereavement or at times of physical or mental illness, just look at the American mega-churches and faith healers. I will not expand further on this matter because it is up to the reader to research, not for me to preach.)

It is no surprise that those involved in delivering the course saw nothing wrong with it until its irrationality was brought to the attention of the college.

I'm not sure that I agree that the college 'swallowed its pride', I think it was more a case of the college having pointed out to it that it was involved in propagating untrue and defamatory material (which also, in my opinion, encompassed incitement to hatred) and dealing with that matter in an extremely professional manner.

With respect to the 'good business' comment, the sad truth is that, as long as the Irish State continues to ride roughshod over the human rights of its citizens and disown its responsibility to provide equal education to all, teacher training colleges will be required to teach student teachers how to indoctrinate children and what to indoctrinate them with, when it comes to religion.

It is clear, even from this entirely statistically unrepresentative thread, that there are very many student teachers who are either non-believers or who feel uncomfortable being forced to teach children, as young as four-years-old, 'beliefs' rather than facts.

What we have seen here is that Atheist Ireland is well placed to act, and act quickly, to suppress cases of anti-atheist bigotry. Atheist Ireland's ultimate goal is to secure the provision of education by the State, rather than the State sub-contracting that responsibility, in the case of 97% of National Schools, to religious organisations.

Atheist Ireland's objective is to see the State providing places for every child in the State in State owned and run secular schools where all children are treated the same. Private religious activities, such as religious instruction and faith formation, have no place in schools. If parents feel it necessary to expose their children to irrational, superstitious and supernatural teachings, there is, sadly, nothing that can be done about it – but that is a matter for them and their churches, not the State.

Of course, so long as an approved national curriculum is delivered, parents, and their fabulously wealthy religions, can set up their own schools to have their children brainwashed in but not a single cent of taxpayers' money should be used to pay for anything at all related to such schools.

Education reform is only one of many campaigns that Atheist Ireland is involved with. If you would like to support Atheist Ireland's work, why not join? Take a look at atheist.ie to read about the issues that Atheist Ireland is addressing to achieve a secular Ireland in which no religious or non-religious ideology plays any part in the running of the country.

expectationlost

Michael Nugent wrote: »

Hibernia College has explained to us the context in which the religious education element of its course has evolved. We are happy that Hibernia College did not intentionally include the sections that we found to be inaccurate about atheism and atheists.

so how did it happen?

has anyone else got a proper explanation off them?

darealtulip

If I look at my own college see that lecturers have almost a free hand in what they teach. That is probably not different from what happened here.

But I was not at the meeting and I am just guessing. Maybe Michael Nugent could explain better?

swampgas

expectationlost wrote: »

so how did it happen?

has anyone else got a proper explanation off them?

I understand that a full explanation of what happened hasn't emerged.

However, I don't think there is much to be gained by pursuing this line of questioning. The management are cooperating and seem genuinely interested in making things right. Demanding further explanations at this point would (IMHO) be counter-productive, as it's an attempt to force the college to "name and shame" those responsible, and that's something that any Irish institution is very slow to do.

darealtulip

swampgas wrote: »

I understand that a full explanation of what happened hasn't emerged.

However, I don't think there is much to be gained by pursuing this line of questioning. The management are cooperating and seem genuinely interested in making things right. Demanding further explanations at this point would (IMHO) be counter-productive, as it's an attempt to force the college to "name and shame" those responsible, and that's something that any Irish institution is very slow to do.

It could also prevent it happening again, but I think that the College already looked at how this could have slipped through all nets in place.

I think the reaction of the college shows that there was no intention to do this and when pointed out they changed it and acted appropriately.

I think they acted in a professional manner.

expectationlost

ah yes trusting institutions thats the lesson we learn from all this. ? the only way to progress is to shine a light on things, not to an agent of suppression of information.

professional er no they didn't they hired Vincent Twomey to write their religion course, which was riddled with bigotted slander, how long was this the case? how long were they acting in a totally unprofessional manner and can we believe an overnight change?

who is going to take charge of the course now.

they need to put out a public statement on the matter.

here are the authors of the course http://cpd.hiberniacollege.net/CourseInformation/Spring2011Programme/ReligionsoftheWorld/tabid/69/Default.aspx including Twomey

This course aims to help its participants to gain an appreciation of, and respect for, religions other than their own without falling into relativism. It is hoped that, having studied this course, participants will appreciate how little they know of other religions and, as a result, be careful of making ill-informed comments and instead be capable of entering into respectful dialogue with people of different religions.

This course on Religions of the World will lead to an understanding of the true Christian attitude to other religions, and it is hoped will provide participants with some understanding of the points of contact between these religions and Christianity.

number10a

I can see what you're saying, expectationlost.

The college made an absolutely massive mistake here, but they provide excellent training in all other areas of the teacher training process, so I have no doubt that they will follow through on what they have said and learn from their mistakes. That was mainly what shocked me into starting this thread. Hibernia College seemed so progressive to me up until that point, that I could not believe what I was reading.

As I have said, the college is a private enterprise, so they will not want bad publicity this time next year if another student reveals something similar, or reveals that nothing was done. I expect they will follow through on what they said.

We do need to give them the benefit of the doubt when they say that the higher authorities in the college knew nothing about this. It seems perfectly plausible. I imagine it highly unlikely that the President of UCC and his closest colleagues would vet everything their lecturers are preaching, and likewise in any other institute of higher education in this country. But they would react if something objectionable was brought to their attention.

This Fr Twomey, I assume, was hired on his merits as someone who has studied theology extensively, and unfortunately seems to have been given free rein to say what he likes. Others on here have suggested that the college may not have been taking the religion module seriously and were just offering it so another box could be ticked for us student teachers, and this could well be true. The theory fits. They (unfortunately) did not take it seriously enough to consider who they were hiring and just wanted to get it out of the way. Either that, or they put a lot of thought into who they were hiring as they were intentionally trying to indoctrinate us. But that theory doesn't fit at all with my other experiences with the college. They even have an optional module for us relating to Educate Together (see attachement of the module summary). This module is unfortunately not examined, or really brought to our attention, but nonetheless, it is there.

This issue has been brought to their attention and they say that it will be fixed by withdrawing said lecture notes immediately for any new students, and I imagine that they will be very careful of what is included in our written exam in May. As the only "non-religious" teacher training college in Ireland, they have no precedent to look to and are bound to make mistakes, in this case quite a big one.

Michael Nugent

In fairness, they can’t just introduce a new curriculum module overnight. That would be irresponsible as well as impractical. What we have agreed at our meeting with them is this:

• They have already removed the inaccurate and defamatory comments about atheism and atheists that we had raised concerns about.
• I am preparing, in conjunction with their presentation team, an introductory and objective one-hour lesson about atheism and nonreligious ethics.
• After that, we will discuss with them how we can help them to develop a more pluralist religion and ethics curriculum, and to ensure that the State curriculum module of their religion teaching covers the State requirements in an objective way.
• In the medium term, they will examine separating the Roman Catholic Church module of their religion teaching out of the main qualification and into a separate qualification.

I think that’s reasonable progress for a first meeting, and in my opinion and Jane’s, they were acting with integrity in their dealings with us. Let’s take it a step at a time and monitor how it develops in practice.

expectationlost

number10a wrote: »

The college made an absolutely massive mistake here, but they provide excellent training in all other areas of the teacher training process,

I have my doubts. how good can an online course be? when you can't challenge your lecturers?

We do need to give them the benefit of the doubt when they say that the higher authorities in the college knew nothing about this. It seems perfectly plausible. I imagine it highly unlikely that the President of UCC and his closest colleagues would vet everything their lecturers are preaching, and likewise in any other institute of higher education in this country. But they would react if something objectionable was brought to their attention. Others on here have suggested that the college may not have been taking the religion module seriously and were just offering it so another box could be ticked for us student teachers, and this could well be true. The theory fits.

i don't give them the benefit of the doubt, look http://cpd.hiberniacollege.net/CourseInformation/Spring2011Programme/ReligionsoftheWorld/tabid/69/Default.aspx they had 5 people supposedly writing this course and your suggesting they weren't talking it seriously?


[/QUOTE]
i don't have give them the benefit of the doubt, look http://cpd.hiberniacollege.net/CourseInformation/Spring2011Programme/ReligionsoftheWorld/tabid/69/Default.aspx they had 5 people supposedly writing this course and your suggesting they weren't talking it seriously?

They even have an optional module for us relating to Educate Together (see attachement of the module summary). This module is unfortunately not examined, or really brought to our attention, but nonetheless, it is there.

thats supposed to impress?

every educational body involved this needs to make a statement on it whether anybody likes it or not. HETAC, DES etc

Michael Nugent

expectationlost wrote: »

i don't give them the benefit of the doubt, look http://cpd.hiberniacollege.net/CourseInformation/Spring2011Programme/ReligionsoftheWorld/tabid/69/Default.aspx they had 5 people supposedly writing this course and your suggesting they weren't talking it seriously?

That’s actually a different course, EL.

The course we are dealing with is the Higher Diploma in Arts in Primary Education, for people who want to become teachers. The College’s Grade Moderator or Lead Tutor for this course in the subject of Religion is Father Vincent Twomey. Obviously we are not happy with this, and we are trying to change it in the way I have outlined above.

The course you have linked to is a short Continuous Professional Development course about Religions of the World, for people who are already working as teachers. It has, as you say, five people from different religious backgrounds writing it. It may include some useful material that could help to improve the religion module of the H Dip course.

number10a

expectationlost wrote: »

thats supposed to impress?

It's not supposed to impress. It's not impressive. I think you'll note that I said it's unfortunate that it is not given a more prominent position. I'm just showing you that the college isn't set on indoctrinating us. Fr Twomey might well be, Hibernia College I think not.

Amtmann

expectationlost wrote: »

I have my doubts. how good can an online course be? when you can't challenge your lecturers?

Have all the doubts you want. But e-learning courses can be very sophisticated these days in terms of their pedagogical structures. There is plenty of opportunity for interactions with lecturers in such courses - through discussion forums and skype conferences for instance.

You might as well ask "How good can an online discussion be? when you can't challenge other participants?"

Michael Nugent

I will be discussing the Hibernia College course notes about atheism on http://newstalk.ie at about 12.30 lunchtime today with Fr Vincent Twomey, who wrote the notes, and Noel Ward, Deputy General Secretary of the INTO.

Nutgrover

Teaching religion in publicly-funded schools should be deemed illegal under European human rights law (freedom of conscience). Teachers and teachers-to-be should demand banning religious education from curriculum and removing all religious symbols (crosses, figures of saints etc.) together with religious patrons of schools. Until this is not done, absurds like this are bound to continue. As an example, try to hang a cross in a classroom or preach any religion in a public school in France - you'll be immediately fired. That's exactly what should be implemented in Ireland A.D. 2012. Religion has nothing to do with education and knowledge, so it can only be harmully confusing to children. A teacher who should be their role model turns out to be a liar and hypocrite.

Gbear

Michael Nugent wrote: »

I will be discussing the Hibernia College course notes about atheism on http://newstalk.ie at about 12.30 lunchtime today with Fr Vincent Twomey, who wrote the notes, and Noel Ward, Deputy General Secretary of the INTO.

Good stuff. Fr Twomey put across very clearly and succinctly. Hopefully that way it'll be easier for people to spot what a load of tripe it was.

I was kind of surprised that he stuck to his guns. Hopefully the church sticks to this line in the future and continues to alienate reasonable people.

I would foible slightly with the point Michael made about Stalin being a Seminarian. It's not even relevant. Whether he was actually religious or not both Mao and Stalin viewed religion as a dangerous competitor for irrationally holding sway over people. That's why they stamped it out.

I feel a tangent coming on..:pac:

Anyway.. pats on the back all round. This forum gets stuff done.

Mark Hamill

Michael Nugent wrote: »

I will be discussing the Hibernia College course notes about atheism on http://newstalk.ie at about 12.30 lunchtime today with Fr Vincent Twomey, who wrote the notes, and Noel Ward, Deputy General Secretary of the INTO.

Despite sitting at my laptop with Newstalk open, I still managed to miss the first 15 minutes of this .
Was Twomey really trying to claim that this* was taken out of context and is, in fact, pluralist?

*"Atheism seems to be fashionable in Ireland at present. It is seen as rational, progressive and compassionate. But above all, it is "in", not to mention convenient. What bothers very few of its latter-day exponents is the fact that atheist humanism produced the worst horrors history has ever witnessed, namely Nazism, Fascism and Marxism, the latter alone responsible for some 100 million lives, according to The Black Book written by French ex-Marxists. Atheism is not a benign force in history"

It think Michael should have been a bit less nice with him. I missed the first 15 minutes, but the last part was full of the priest talking sh*t, such as above. He also went on the same line as the response from the college itself, that the material is supposed to get teachers thinking about religion and drive debate (despite the test explicitly requiring you to agree with it)

I laughed when he was talking about the pope trying to get agnostic representatives to come to the vatican and he said (paraphrasing here) "People get agnostics confused with atheists, they are searching for god" :rolleyes:

kylith

I thought it was a very good piece, though was surprised that the priest still claimed that the nazis were atheist even after it had been said that Hitler had aligned himself with Rome.

I think that Michael came over very well as patient and reasonable, and the more we can show the general public that we're reasonable people the less they'll feel threatened by atheism.

oceanclub

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that an elderly religious academic unused to public criticism should handle himself so badly, but it's quite a job to come off worse than Rush Limbaugh, who at least made an insincere apology over his recent bigoted remarks.
First, he tried to claim that Michael Nugent hadn't even read his remarks, then just obfuscated for 15 minutes, at one point shouting over Michael. A few quotes I tweeted:

"It is a fact (his emphasis - P.) that atheism has produced the worst atrocities in history... Nazisim..." -

"You're taking it out of context"

"I would claim what we are producing is objective."

"I stand over my course, I stand over what I said"

"We respect the beliefs of the parents of the children we are teaching"

His tactics - claiming his material hadn't be read, and the old "out of context" gambit, were typical old media tactics that don't work in the age of new media where people can pull up his exact quotes on a smartphone in seconds.

He sounded very unimpressed that his material is being changed. Will he be teaching the new material? How is that going to work?

P.

the culture of deference

Michael Nugent wrote: »

I will be discussing the Hibernia College course notes about atheism on http://newstalk.ie at about 12.30 lunchtime today with Fr Vincent Twomey, who wrote the notes, and Noel Ward, Deputy General Secretary of the INTO.

Disappointed really. I think you needed to be more agressive. You sat back and let them interupt you and handed the floor back to that stupid fool.

I Would like you to question the history of their church more, and their part in abuse, magdalene, nazi assistance WW2, you know let their followers see that they have no morals, and they just want power.

token56

Is there a podcast up yet of it? I can't seem to find anything on the newstalk site.

kylith

"We respect the beliefs of the parents of the children we are teaching"

That bit did make me laugh. I couldn't help but think of the threads we've had here from parents finding out that their children are participating in religous classes without their knowledge or permission. A lot of Catholic run schools don't seem to have any respect for the beliefs, or lack thereof, of their pupils' parents.

Michael Nugent

Audio file of the interview here

http://bit.ly/w3qVO6

expectationlost

number10a wrote: »

It's not supposed to impress. It's not impressive. I think you'll note that I said it's unfortunate that it is not given a more prominent position. I'm just showing you that the college isn't set on indoctrinating us. Fr Twomey might well be, Hibernia College I think not.

he's still the author of Hibernia College religion courses isn't he?

recedite

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Was Twomey really trying to claim that this* was taken out of context

Yeah, he said that several times. It was like a parody. Its the same answer they always give when confronted with the rubbish in the old testament :pac:

darealtulip

The last bit just went out. He dare say that catholic schools are inclusive and respect other religions and none????

Well not in my experience.

Michael, Did you get a word in after that?

oceanclub

The radio piece has been Youtubed as well:

http://youtu.be/fX7t8nB_2dg

P.