Yes Minister.

But what has Christianity to do with churches and greed?

If, as I am told, Christianity is Love and Giving, who do you love besides yourself and what have you given to anybody so far if not words

Is it just my imagination, or are we seeing a concerted effort to promulgate these phony-war articles about religion and religious education?

There's certainly a lot more sabre-rattling from the Nicholas Tuoheys, "an ordained Baptist minister" of this world, that's for certain.

What is it that suddenly has them marching, as to war?

The removal of Christianity-based religious education from schools is, surely, a trivial issue in the overall educational scene. There are after all many places, all run on a tax-exempt basis (i.e. funded by the taxpayer) where these folk can "educate" themselves to their heart's content.

They used to be called "Church", or "Sunday School" back in the day.

The way they carry on like a bunch of two-bob watches, you'd think that the government was banning their religion altogether.

This author provides a typical sample:

"Firstly, why shouldn’t children have the right to learn about Jesus"

Ummmm, no-one is stopping them.

"Secondly, we often hear about the need to understand and address the root causes of terrorism"

And we do this by "making disciples" in one specific religion? Isn't that more likely to exacerbate the problem?

"Thirdly, I think Australians are largely fearful of religion"

Non sequitur.

"Fourthly, are there not more pressing needs to protect our children from?"

Non sequitur.

"Fifthly, what about proselytising? Everyone does it. Football teams, soft drink companies, fast food joints, and newspapers."

And you would give these people face-time with your kids' in the classroom? Come on, be serious.

"Finally, we should keep alive the stories of the Bible and the beauty of the language in which they speak"

Ahhhh, so they are just "stories". That's good to know.

If only they were taught that way, instead of pretending they're real.

Well written article. I agree with his main contention.

Whilst he makes some good points in a fair, balance and even slightly light hearted fashion, my only criticism would be that he doesn't confront the main argument the secularists use against CRE.

Secularists often have an unrealistic and absurd idealogy about what the "separation of church and state" and what "secularism" should practically mean; they believe it is a tool that should be used to exclude all religions. In actual fact it is simply a tool to ensure that no single religion has power to exercise authority over the state, and it must play the role of ensuring that all faith groups have equal opportunity.

(And it must also be stressed that equal opportunity does not mean they will automatically utilise those opportunities equally).

Yet more propaganda based on a misinformation campaign by the Christian right.

"Firstly, why shouldn’t children have the right to learn about Jesus and, if they so want, become a follower or, ready for it, a Christian?"

No-one is preventing this. You might say the same thing about any other religion or philosophy, but you're not fighting for Islam, Buddhism, or humanism to be proselytised in schools, are you? Those who oppose the current system propose an academic course in Faith and Philosophy which would give students more education and more knowledge about religion - not less.

"We also need to understand the root causes of religious fundamentalism."

Religious fundamentalism is exactly what we are opposing in our schools. Access Ministries, SUQld and other chaplaincy/SRE providers are fundamentalist in their views (you need only to read the teaching materials which even Anglican priest Gary Bouma has branded as 'appalling' and 'crap'.) Fundamentalism arises when children are only exposed to a narrow set of beliefs and not given the opportunity to understand how others derive their beliefs and values.

"... Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, have recently expressed praise for the role the King James Bible had on literature and Western culture."

The King James Bible is an important work of literature but its importance to literature and Western culture is not what is being taught in scripture classes. (Remember theologian, academic and Anglican priest, Gary Bouma's assessment of the class content as 'appalling' and 'crap'?)

How many times must we say this? We are not trying to banish all talk of religion from the school room. We are trying to banish untrained fundamentalist 'teachers' who want to make disciples of children. We support an academic course, taught by trained professionals, which discusses major religions and philosophies *including* the role of Christianity in western history, art, literature, politics and culture. (continued)

(continued) "Fourthly, are there not more pressing needs to protect our children from?"

We'd rather spend our time on other things too. Why not support an overhaul of the current system, remove fundamentalist evangelists from the school yard, proselytise within your own church, and support an academic course in Faith and Philosophy in schools and we can all move on.

"Fifthly, what about proselytising? Everyone does it."

"I know first-hand that CRE and chaplaincy goes to great lengths to offer no-strings services and does not attempt to ‘convert’ children."

And we know from the avalanche of letters, emails and phone calls received by organisations such as Fairness in Religion in Schools and the Australian Christian Lobby that they do try to convert - sometimes using fear. The teachers' unions are also fully aware of what goes on these classes which is why the Victorian Teachers Union and the Australian Education Union have spoken out against them.

Proselytising - everyone does it? A footy team doesn't tell a child that if their parents don't barrack for Collingwood they will burn in hell. A soft-drink company spruiking its product doesn't tell a gay teen that their sexual identity is a sinful perversion.

"The Bible is the most influential and inspiring book in the history of humanity, as well as the most read and most sold. Let kids learn about obnoxious bottoms, but don’t deprive them of the beauty, wisdom, poetry, and challenging literature we call the Bible."

No-one is calling for the Bible to be banned. No-one is saying the Bible (and other major religious texts) shouldn't be studied in schools within an academic context.

"Does anyone really want their children to be without knowledge of that heritage."

Australia has a multicultural, multifaith and secular heritage. And no, we don't want children to be without knowledge of it. That's why we want fundamentalist Christian evangelists removed and a well considered, carefully monitored course in Faith and Philosophy implimented into the academic curriculum.

"The Age and its humanist buddies are red in the face crying “Yes!”

Your ears need cleaning. We're shouting "No!"

Obviously I meant Australian Secular Lobby - not Australian Christian lobby in the post above!

Thanks for your comments, skeptic. Probably the best way to find out what churches do is to go and visit one. There you will find everyday Aussies giving of their time, money, and talents to help try and make the world a better place. I won't take up time with examples, but let me add this. One church I worked in offers free meals to the elderly, free care and support to the mentally ill, free financial planning for those with debt problems, has funded and built community buildings in poor nations, offers free counselling, funeral services, and weddings, offers it buildings for no cost to school and community groups with limited facilities, provides meals for the sick, visits to the elderly and dying, drug education programs for families, seminars on parenting and marriage, free courses on learning the Bible, uplifting and meaningful Sunday services, advocating and working for the release of child slaves and prostitutes, free music, concerts, and community fun days, raises 10,000's a year for aid projects, sponsors impoverished children, and free youth group programs.

Christians are not alone in doing such things, but to suggest they just offer words is a bit rough.

Don’t be scared, skeptic, head on down to your local (church!).

"I know first-hand that CRE and chaplaincy goes to great lengths to offer no-strings services and does not attempt to ‘convert’ children."

From the Qld SU web site (referenced a couple of days ago on another thread as well)

"Working with the churches, Scripture Union aims:

a) to make God's Good News known to children, young
people and families

and

b) to encourage people of all ages to meet God daily through
the Bible and prayer

so that they may

come to personal faith in our Lord Jesus Christ,

grow in Christian maturity and

become both committed church members and servants of a world in need."

SU certainly makes it clear that they are about converting children, their may be some spin in the language (they give the message, God converts etc) but it is abundantly clear from the Access ministries material and the SU website that they are about converting children.

The author's contention that they don't attempt to convert children is either a deliberate misrepresentation or he is way out of step with a couple of the larger christain organisations in the chaplaincy and RE business.

As a former christian and former sponsor of chaplaincy work I'm absolutely confident that for many the principle goal is conversion. Generally closing the deal may be done off site (at youth group's, youth camps, churches etc) but schools are used to lay the groundwork.

R0bert

Oh Christ!

Here we go again.

1. There are more religions than just Christianity.

2. There are churches for teaching the kiddies about Jesus.

3. Tax dollars would be better spent on school infrastructure, more teachers, greater variety of subjects: road rules, overall understanding of Australian law, Indigenous history, Music, Art. Literature AND comparative religions anyone?

The arrogance that some Christians have that their bronze age religion is superior to all other ideologies makes for the antipathy Mr Tuohy is whingeing about - Nicholas just try to think how you would feel if the program was Islamic Religious Education - you would be cheering the Age instead of deriding it.

It is precisely the sort of attitude displayed by the author that I regard as being so dangerous to today's children.

One of the main problems the ant-chaplain/RE activists are facing is that they have not talked to schools about what they want.

In 2009, the study “The Effectiveness Of Chaplaincy” by Edith Cowan University and University of New England, found:

that 98% of principals surveyed who currently have a Chaplain want government funding for School Chaplaincy to continue. The national study released in October 2009 also found that 92% of principals and 73% of students say School Chaplains are “highly important” in their school.

According to the 688 principals who participated, Chaplains helped to:

-build the sense of community in the school,
-support the school ethos and
-assist with the integration of potentially “at risk” students, including recent immigrants and Aboriginal students.

98% of principals surveyed said that Chaplaincy was making a major contribution to school morale; it was proactive, unique, effective and important. They urged that Government project funding should be continued when the three year cycle of project funding ended.
The research also found that Chaplaincy in government schools was not only unique, proactive and effective, but also a neutral and non-judgmental service that added long term value to the wellbeing of Australian Communities.

Source: http://www.suqld.org.au/_sys/_data/downloads/The_Effectiveness_of_Chaplainc_BRIEF.pdf

It never ends does it, these sort of articles pushing the line that separation of Church and State is worthy except for schools.

It is dishonest to insist that Chaplains are not using schools as recruitment grounds. That really is the bottom line. It is also dishonest to categorise and stigmatise those against school Chaplaincy or RI as villifying Christians. This is disingenuous. Who is saying ban religion? Those against indoctrination of children in schools are just pleading for common decency ie. spirituality is a personal choice and to leave religious teaching for the home and the Church.

The fact that there are some silly books on the school book list is a whole other issue and probably worthy of attention but is irrelevant in this discussion

Depite Mr. Tuohy bleating as one of Jesus’s flock, no one is suggesting children do not have the right to learn about Jesus and his supposed miracle status. However, Christians do not have the right to preach their particular religious views onto those of different denominations, faiths or those who wish to avoid ancient superstitions. In Victoria 97% of Special Religious Education is delivered by one evangelical Anglican organisation whose Mission Statement is to bring young children into the light of Yahweh’s judgemental love. This is an affront to all the Christian denomination who do not believe as Access Ministries do, other faiths who hold different views of the supernatural realm, and those who wish to keep their feet firmly planted in reality. Faith should remain a personal choice, and not be mandated by Government.

Moreover, Mr. Tuohy seems to completely misunderstand what secularism actually is. While Christians seem to have a deep desire to be the persecuted majority, the reality is a secular education prevents the radicalisation within religions by exposing them all to brutally equal treatment. Currently, one slim view of “god” is presented to children under the cloak of truth. If Mr. Tuohy was sincere about his desire for faiths to be openly discussed, he would be demanding equal time for all faiths within the class room instead of defending the existing monopoly.

Lastly, if Mr. Tuohy believes the Bible is “beauty, wisdom, poetry” will he let me read passages to his children? I have a few lovely passages where god personally kills millions, instructs his chosen people to murder all who oppose them, and force his enemies to eat their own children. Of course, they don’t teach you these things in Sunday school.

"The Bible is the most influential and inspiring book in the history of humanity"

Well that perfectly illustrates Tuohy's arrogance in pushing his own views, and wanting to harness schools to his cause.

Would you mind if Muslims and atheists were given equal time Nicholas? But where would that end?

I agree with everything said earlier by Chrys S.

Religious Instruction in schools should be moved to outside school hours on an opt-in basis and fully funded by whichever religious organization is conducting it.

I also think comparative religious studies, within the mainstream curriculum, is a good optional subject, but high school is soon enough for this. Primary school teachers already struggle for contact time to teach the basics.

One word: projection. The Age is trying to force the Gospel of Marx and Gaia Worship on all of us. Great article Nicholas.

Dear Nicholas,

Firstly, a great many thanks for getting behind the direct indoctrination of the purportedly magical Jew and our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ! I especially like, “why shouldn’t children have the right to learn about Jesus and, if they so want, become a follower or, ready for it, a Christian”.

As you say, why not get to children when they still trust their elders enough to be properly indoctrinated into a divisive and bigoted belief system? Unfortunately, Christianity doesn’t stand up to intellectual scrutiny, so getting to them nice and young and ensuring that they NEVER QUESTION THE DOGMA is just so essential!

Secondly, Christian instruction classes under the guise of religious education was a brilliant initiative! Religious education, of course, would encourage children to look at the social, political, anthropological origins, historical and mythical aspects of all religions, and we don’t want that. Better that we teach kids only the good things that Christians have done (whilst also systematically denouncing all other religions as “pathways to hell”).

Thanks, Nicholas, for being a good Christian Soldier!

Warmest regards,

Jake Farr-Wharton

“Mr. Tuohy bleating as one of Jesus’s flock”
No need for ad hominem attacks…

“However, Christians do not have the right to preach their particular religious views”

Well, actually, in a liberal democratic society EVERYONE has the right to put forth their particular views. Unless of course you are opting for a police state where freedom of speech is removed?
Any faith group is allowed under the Act to offer RE classes- there is no favouritism or preference for Christians. Perhaps because Australia has a Judeo-Christian heritage and that 62% of Aussies call themselves Christian that there would be more Christians offering the classes.

“Faith should remain a personal choice, and not be mandated by Government.”

I agree. If you read the article this is what I argue: people should have the personal right to learn about Jesus and be a Christian if they so freely choose. Most importantly, no student is forced to participate in RE. If they or their parents do not want them to attend, there is no compulsion.

“secular education prevents the radicalisation within religions by exposing them all to brutally equal treatment”

What about exposing secularism to “brutally equal treatment”? You assume that it is some pure objective value-free system. Is it?

“equal time for all faiths within the class room instead of defending the existing monopoly.”

How would this work? There are at least 22 faiths/worldviews with over 500,000 adherents in the world. How do you cram all of that into 20 hours per year of RE? Furthermore, what about the thousands of sects, belief systems, etc. that fall under the 500,000 threshold?
It is incorrect that all faiths are equal. Would you want your children to join the Branch Davidian’s or Heaven’s Gate suicide cults? Of course not, but they are “faiths” and you say all faiths should have equal time.

The Bible has some challenging parts, for sure. But text, context, genre, and chronology are important to understanding ancient literature. You can’t dismiss the whole because some parts are challenging. And show me where Jesus condones the murdering of millions?

What a pathetic series of excuses to justify indoctrination of children. The article basically starts with a false premise, nobody is arguing that children shouldn't learn about Jesus, they are however saying they shouldn't learn about one particular faith while excluding all others.

Maybe if children learnt a bit more about all faiths they would be less inclined to believe the magical thinking that underpins all belief.

Evonne Paddison's own words clearly show she believed this was a perfect opportunity for access ministries to recruit new believers. It says a lot about Nicholas Tuohy's disregard for the truth that he indulges in revisionism and fudging of the facts.

The ACL would be better served being honest with the public, particularly when it (the public) contribute financially to ACL's indoctrination attempts in secular schools.

As a Christian I do worry about the tenor of debate - as sometimes it verges upon vilification of Christians. The increasing double standard between the treatment of Christianity and other religions is palpable here. Promoting intolerance or hostility against Christians is just as inacceptable as the vilification and scapegoating against refugees - as 'political wedge' - that goes on in the right-populist monopoly press.

But Christians should not fall into the trap of 'seeing Islam as the problem' with the association with Terror. For centuries religions of *all kinds* (including the turning of Christians against each other) were used as tools to assimilate, terrorise and control people, and to rationalise the slaughter of war. I don't think this is what Jesus would have wanted.

But one way of addressing this controversy would be to have 'opt in' rather than 'opt out' of religious education. Perhaps then 'proselytising' wouldn't be seen as a problem as it would be unambiguously with parents' consent.

Also the wealthy private Protestant Christian schools are unaffordable for many families who would like to give their children a Christian education. Who then is at fault for not making such schools accessible for lower income groups?

BTW - Christianity is part of the Western tradition - but the Enlightenment was another part - And it had often powerfully anti-clerical, 'perfectiblist' and humanist undertones. Hence the inspiration for the French Revolution, and other revolutions that followed. 'Western traditions' is full of conflict and contradictions. Pluralism is part of the picture - and Christianity fits in here... If we're going to talk about 'Western tradition' we need to be honest and representative of the facts. By being selective we leave ourselves open to valid criticism.

Blair, you said: “What a pathetic series of excuses to justify indoctrination of children. The article basically starts with a false premise, nobody is arguing that children shouldn't learn about Jesus, they are however saying they shouldn't learn about one particular faith while excluding all others.”

Nonsense. They are manifesting at the name of Jesus, while simultaneously indoctrinating children with their apocalyptic “global warming” earth worship faith and embracing Islam, an alleged religion of peace. You need to get out more. Have you read school texts? Or do you just magically believe what the magicians at The Age preach?

“Well, actually, in a liberal democratic society EVERYONE has the right to put forth their particular views. “

No disagreement here. Perhaps your comprehension skills need work?

“Any faith group is allowed under the Act to offer RE classes …”

That’s true, so why do Access provide 97% of CRE when (by your own numbers) only “62% of Aussies call themselves Christian”?. Also, what about non-faith groups?

“… people should have the personal right to learn about Jesus and be a Christian if they so freely choose.”

Right – and they have the choice not to as well. At the moment students who opt-out are not allowed to learn anything during those classes. Absurd.

“Most importantly, no student is forced to participate in RE. If they or their parents do not want them to attend, there is no compulsion.”

How would you feel if Muslims were teaching Islam to 97% of CRE classes, but you had the option of opting out and forcing your child to sit on the bench?

The facts, the facts, and nothing but the facts and all you need to know re the origins and historical development of Christian-ISM as a would be world conquering power and control seeking ideology. Murder and mayhem all the way down especially under the aegis and impulse of Constantine's Sword.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

Plus check out the work of Tony Bushby especially his most recent book The Crucifixion of Truth

Great post by Nicholas Tuohy. It’s funny how circular journalists are absolutely opposed to absolutes. The Age is funny, period, though. It looks like The Age (a dying newspaper here in Victoria with appalling sales) is trying to crucify itself. I’m sick of them disrespecting black Christians too. Just abhorrent. But they have a long history, as predominantly white atheist missionaries, trying to force their new Gospel, according to Marx, on all of us. Again, they’re projecting.

“What about exposing secularism to “brutally equal treatment”?”

Wow – you have no idea, do you?

“How would this work? There are at least 22 faiths/worldviews with over 500,000 adherents in the world. How do you cram all of that into 20 hours per year of RE?”

Now you see the problem. The Government cannot hope to give all religions and faiths equal time. Perhaps they should leave the entire issue alone and leave it to the individuals as I suggested?

“Would you want your children to join the Branch Davidian’s or Heaven’s Gate suicide cults?”

Can you prove them wrong? No. Just like every other faith. That why they call them :”faiths” you know – there is no evidence.

“The Bible has some challenging parts, for sure. But text, context, genre, and chronology are important to understanding ancient literature.”

In what “context” is it alright for God to murder the first born of an entire nation?

“Show me where Jesus condones the murdering of millions?”

Jesus is Yahweh according to the myth. Remember when god flooded the entire world and killed every living thing? Charming fellow.

Interesting statistics, Nickosjt.

But just between you and me, if I was a school principal, surveyed on the basis "would you like some funding, or not", I'd probably support their offer of Beelzebub giving ethics lectures.

>>98% of principals surveyed who currently have a Chaplain want government funding for School Chaplaincy to continue<<

There you go. Funds/no funds. Chaplain/no chaplain.

Tough decision. Most Heads I know would sell their grandmother if it would release enough money for a new bookshelf.

But they have to justify their position. It's not good enough just to say "give me the funds, and the extra headcount", it is important to justify why you need them.

>>98% of principals surveyed said that Chaplaincy was making a major contribution to school morale<<

Ah, that's good. No-one can measure morale, so no-one can suggest I'm just after the funding.

The only surprise is that two percent were dumb enough to say no. Perhaps they misunderstood the question.

But you'd have to be a little suspicious anyway. After all, 98% is the sort of result you would expect to find at the election of a President-for-life in a remote African country.

So, who did the survey?

http://www.suact.org.au/pdf/ChaplaincyReport09.pdf

Oh look.

Dr Philip Hughes is a Minister in the Uniting Church of Australia, and works for the Christian Research Association.

Bless.

The role of the public school is to be non-political and non-religious. Parents have the choice to send their child to a religious school, I assume by the meer presence of catholic, christian, islamic school their is religious instruction, and in a public school there definately should not be.

If you wish to practice your faith that is a personal matter, and not for our public schools to get involved in. Religious leaders have an important role to paly in our communities - and to presume that the only way that the religious arm is present in our community is using our tax paid money to employ their srevice in our public schools is inappropriate and in my opinion needs to stop. If our children need counsellors, provide counsellors that have an impartial view

Nicholas,

You are exactly the type we are trying to protect our children from.

No one objects to Religious instruction being available at schools. What they object to is the mechanism that makes it close to compulsory, and assumed that unless you object you are preached to.

If an alternative were available such as tutored homework classes, the SRI classes were opt in, and the chaplains were not given automatic access to the children, the issue would be dead.

The issue with Chaplains in school is whether in a secular society the state has the right to contract with organisations that make religious belief a requirement of employment. It's not about whether they do a good job or whether principals want them or anything else. Chaplaincy advocates deliberately misrepresent the issue for their own advantage, which is one reason why I am suspicious of them.

This type of trickiness is also evident at my children's school. The chaplain likes to bring 'child development experts' for talks at the school. When I google these people they turn out to be nothing more than church leaders or someone that has a show on the christian radio station. The chaplain also runs bible classes and the like at lunch time and invites students along - technically avoiding breaking the rules but without any concern for how she may be blurring her role.

This type of role needs to be filled by people that are responsible, trustworthy and without ulterior motives - things I haven't really seen from the people and organisations involved in chaplaincy.

To “have an opinion”:

“The role of the public school is to be non-political and non-religious”?

Really. Oh so that’s why The Age is attacking the teaching of Islam and Gaia worship in schools. Oh – sorry, it isn’t. Christians are being singled out and targeted, for some mysterious reason.

“ Parents have the choice to send their child to a religious school, I assume by the meer presence of catholic, christian, islamic school their is religious instruction, and in a public school there definately should not be.”

But not everyone can afford a religious education. Why can’t religion be taught with the option of opting out if the parents hate Jesus with a hot, hot, hate? You’re just singling out Christians. This sounds like bigotry.

PS> Christians also pay taxes, so I don’t buy your tax argument either.

BPT, unlike you I don't set myself up as an expert on all matters nor do I subscribe to conspiracy theories as you seem to do. So people concerned about global warming are also embracing Islam? Interesting. And your expertise on climate science is? You've been listening to too many school chaplains.

You seem to be unaware of the fact that Islamic fundamentalists, just like Christian fundamentalists, oppose the science supporting concerns about anthropogenic climate change, they support creationism over evolution and anything else that is remotely antiscience.

Your attitude isn't surprising really given your preference for magical thinking. But it always does make me wonder why Christians who believe God created everything seems so happy to trash his creation, namely the Earth?

Unlike you I believe very little, I'm swayed by the best arguments that are supported by evidence at the time, my mind isn't welded shut to new ideas as yours is. To date, you have provided neither argument nor evidence, just the usual fundamentalist close mindedness I've come to expect from caring Christians. I can tell you been taking Steve Fielding far too seriously.

Nicholas Tuohy, your defense of proselytising gives the game away. NSCP guidelines forbid proselytising but at least you're honest about it. Evangelising ought to be forbidden too, because it also has little to do with education and everything to do with suggestion and influence.

You might consider the view of your more enlightened Baptist colleague in Melbourne, Reverend Nathan Nettleton, who wisely told a Senate committee on 9 November 2009 that "The state should not privilege the convictions of any particular religious tradition, even a majority tradition, over the convictions of those who dissent from it".

Contrary to what religious supremacists and apologists may claim, Nettleton's philosophy is the true nature of secularism, which is clearly being trampled by the missionary zeal of proponents for the National School Chaplaincy Program and opt-out Special Religious Education in public schools, even as those proponents seek to deceive the public that their activities are purely non-denominational and that they are not grooming school children towards their particular religious beliefs.

It is time for a few reality checks and a proper consideration of what makes good public policy in balance of everyone's common interests. There is nothing that an unqualified chaplain can do that a trained youth worker or counsellor could not do equally well if not better, minus the sectarian baggage and inherent discrimination incurred by the government requiring religion as a qualification for employment. When it comes to religious education, even Christians such as Professor Gary Bouma single out the ACCESS Ministries SRE/CRE curriculum for criticism ("crap"). If RE cannot be broad and academically credible, then it has no rightful place in school time on school grounds at the expense of Aussie taxpayers or our shared secular values. It certainly should not result in kids going home to tell their parents, relatives or friends about going to hell for theirs sins, as has been reported.

"Really. Oh so that’s why The Age is attacking the teaching of Islam and Gaia worship in schools."

Islam and Gaia do not supply 97% of SRI to Victorian schools, nor do they accept million of dollars annualy from federal and state governments to supply representative to public schools. Just like you, I would be fighting against them if they did.

"But not everyone can afford a religious education."

Everyone can afford to go to church. Last time I check many were free, although some ask for 10% of your gross income.

"Why can’t religion be taught with the option of opting out if the parents hate Jesus with a hot, hot, hate?"

Why don't the religious groups offer their views and parents can opt their children in?

"You’re just singling out Christians. This sounds like bigotry."

Oh, you poor, poor Christians with your measly 97% of SRI classes.

"PS> Christians also pay taxes, so I don’t buy your tax argument either."

We are not talking about individuals. The ATO grants tax exemptions to organisations which make supernatural claims.

Raptor says

“Nicholas, You are exactly the type we are trying to protect our children from.”

This highlights the irrational fear Aussies have of faith. I would have thought we would be trying to first protect children from paedophiles, sexualisation in the media, bullying and violence, and obesity. This rhetoric of demonising people of faith is common in these forums and from those who oppose Chaplancy/CRE. The ad hominem attacks are not helpful in the debate.

“What they object to is the mechanism that makes it close to compulsory”

I too would object to compulsory RE classes. Fortunately under the government legislation what we have are voluntary ones.

Chaplaincy advocates deliberately misrepresent the issue for their own advantage, which is one reason why I am suspicious of them.
The “phobia” of people of faith again. Perhaps we need a new term: “Fidephobia”- ‘The irrational and unfounded fear of people of faith’.

“The chaplain likes to bring 'child development experts…they turn out to be nothing more than church leaders or someone that has a show on the Christian radio station.”
Do church leaders and Christians have absolutely nothing to offer society? Should we round them up and imprison them, perhaps? Imagine replacing your phrase to read like this: “they turn out to be nothing more than [women, indigenous people, Russians] or someone that has a show on the [women’s, indigenous, Russian] radio station” Do you see how bigoted, intolerant, and small-minded your comment is?

"The chaplain also runs bible classes and the like at lunch time and invites students along”

Are they forced to come? Or do we think our students are so mindless, and the education system so bankrupt that they would be unable to make informed choices for themselves? I think our education system equips students to be robust and intelligent enough to decide on what events they will or will not attend. By the way, is it a crime under the law to invite people to read and discuss a book?

Now Nicholas.

Picking on The Age appears to be yet another apologetic diversion.

I see little point in singling them out when the Victorian Education Union voted last Friday 13th (unlucky for some) to align with Fairness In Religion In Schools (FIRIS) and remove the monopoly of Christianity. Then there's the ABC, The Punch, independent writers, religious writers, ABC religion and ethics, etc... And parents, lawyers, supporters. Read the readers comments and do a quick tally.

It's not about "nasty Christians". Far from it. Eye of the beholder might be at play my friend, as The Age is simply the messenger here. It is, and always has been, about the children of Victoria. In a multi-faith community with a plethora of cultures, 96% coverage is of significant concern.

Yes, Evonne has been caught out. The entire transcript is here;

http://www.scribd.com/doc/55338278/ACCESS-Ministry-s-head-Evonne-Paddison-s-speech-to-Anglican-Evangelical-Fellowship

And facts have a way of speaking for themselves. For any interested in a fair education for their children may I point readers to this YouTube channel to keep up with developments, access more material/web sites and review recent events;

http://www.youtube.com/user/religionsinschool

As with many (perhaps most) debates, the opponents on this issue differ on fundamental ideas. The arguments are built on these fundamental ideas yet unfortunatly, the debates are highly rhetorical and emotional and they focus on the details, which takes away the focus from where the foundational points of difference lie.

Here is my take on the fundamental, underlying issue:

In my view, religions should be fundamentally kept away from the state to the extent that no religion should ever have the ability to CONTROL or RUN the government. I would never support a theocracy whereby a religious person, on behalf of their particular religion, effectively serves as the government.

But I do NOT agree that the government should NEVER provide any FUNDING or MONEY to ANY religion at all, or provide any level of support to any religion at all. As long as no religion has any political authority to make decisions on behalf of the government, and must instead lobby for it's own interests alongside every other interest group who must do the same, I am fine with it. And I will consistently hold this principle regardless of which religion we are talking about.

It seems to me that this is the fairest approach, if not the ONLY fair approach. If anybody can suggest a fairer system than this, and a fairer set of governing principles than this I'd like to hear it.

Another totally disinterested commentator with no vested interests that deliberately misses the point that for a lot of people, the primary issue is not even religion, it is *deception*...

This is structured continuing smear, and with a pretty thorough checklist of fallacies and rhetorical diversion tactics to obscure the real issues that are at the heart of the matter -

* Access Ministries are liars (stamping your feet and holding your breath doesn't change this)
* They have complete contempt and disregard for binding legal contracts - and by extension, contempt for the rule of law (which they are above), the government and other citizens
* They continue to siphon money from the public purse while fully aware they are breaching those contracts

There is an endless list of other sleazy behaviour from Access which includes flash-mobbing polls, and an army of shills poisoning newspaper and online forums such as this one to deceptively create an illusion broad public support when in fact that support would absolutely shatter Access were any kind of referendum be held on the issue. Plain english - they would find their ass kicked to the curb before they could blink by the ordinary silent majority. This fills them with terror.

So Access employs shills like you to play sleight of hand on the rest of us to cover up the basic facts - Access are LIARS and they siphon revenue under FALSE PRETENCES.

The Access shills are unable to defend against the charges of deceptive bahavious because these charges are TRUE. So they resort to sophist reality manipulation, fallacious argument, smear (you just can't post anything without using the word "militant" can you?), strawmen and ad hominems - but regardless of how much noise you make, it doesn't alter the fact that they are grubby liars and cheats. Read this next line slowly several times -

RELIGION IS NOT EVEN THE PRIMARY ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS DECEPTION AND ETHICAL/MORAL BANKRUPTCY.

And Access are supposed to provide a moral example to are children? How can you say that with a straight face? [continued]

I have broken the Access abuse of trust and deception down at greater length here -

Access' tactics are broken down into two distinct thrusts -

The first is the concept of the divinely sanctioned lie, the concept of "taqiyya" borrowed from islam - that god is OK with lies for the greater good. This has been failing - the public no longer believe the lies, nor the lies claiming the lies aren't really lies at all.

The second is the now familiar squealing about "persecution" - this is handy because it does not need to address the issue of decpetion or fraud in any way. All you have to do is unleash the crocodile tears.

This two prong attack is the sum of all of Access' defense of their position. And their position is clear - they are liars and they cannot be trusted. Ever. Any promises to not do bad tings in future will be just more hollow taqiyya.

Access CRE contracts need to be shredded, all payments frozen and legal action initiated to recoup money fraudulently obtained thus far for breach of contract.

And if anybody sincerely wants their children to grow up with a solid moral grounding - keep them as far away from Access as possible.

Neglected to include link for the breakdown of Access behaviour -

http://greylining.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/the-passion-of-the-persecuted/

Wow, Franc Hoggle, you sure do a good job of throwing around wild accusations without providing a shred of supporting evidence for your claims.

As I keep saying, we need to quit focusing on the details, and quit being emotional and instead discuss the underlying presuppositions and fundamental ideas about the role of the church and the state. I keenly await for anyone to suggest a fairer alternative than the brief statement I gave my in my above post.

Trav says, "If anybody can suggest a fairer system than this, and a fairer set of governing principles than this I'd like to hear it."

Sure. The state should not privilege the convictions of any particular religious tradition, even a majority tradition, over the convictions of those who dissent from it, including nonbelievers. Religion should be self sufficient for the promotion of its own beliefs. Religion should not occupy a default privileged position in public institutions at the expense of taxpayers or the infringement of state neutrality on religion. Parliaments must be independent from religion in law & custom. Law & public policy must treat all equally regardless of religion. Religion must not be imposed on any public office or person. Taxes must fund public interests, not religious enterprise.

Firstly, why shouldn’t children have the right to learn about Mohammed and, if they so want, become a follower or, ready for it, a Muslim? In your article, you refer to this program as “Christian Religious Education”, which it is not. The program provided by the Victorian state government is supposed to be open to all religious groups, not monopolised by one group.

Secondly, when a militant religious agenda is forced upon a society, people of other faiths can move into a ghetto-like mentality. The way to avoid this is to have open and robust conversation about religion – ALL religions. Equally.

Thirdly, the school system in Australia was specifically set up to be secular, not religious. The fear of religion comes not from the Christian heritage of education and support for the weak, but from the Christian heritage of persecuting non-believers, and trying to impose Christian rules on all people, regardless of whether they want it or not.

Fourth, there are many threats to children (and adults). These include child sexual abuse conducted by priests, and being taught faith as truth before they’re old enough to judge for themselves. Would you expect a child to be a philosopher at 8 years old? Why expect them to be religious?

Fifth, what about proselytising? Access Ministries receives hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers’ money, and free access to impressionable children under the auspices of “education” (thereby giving it an air of respect and authority). If you truly believe your “product” is worthwhile, then spend your own money to promote it, and do it on your own time, not during the kids’ school hours.

Finally, if you truly want to “keep alive the stories of the Bible and the beauty of the language in which they speak”, why is it not still written in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic? Why Latin? Or English? However, parts of it are still great literature, and the King James Bible is one of the great literary works of the English language. Therefore, it should be taught in English class, alongside Shakespeare, Dickens, and Orwell.

Access Ministries DID intend to convert children via the CRE. It was recorded and published on their own web site. To suggest otherwise is dishonest.

There are thousands of churches around the country in which a child & parents can learn from. No child is having their rights removed.

Apparently, 'militancy' is defined by not giving, you and the religious groups you represent, everything you want. That is a poor definition.

Einstein once said 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.' There has been 1500 years to work it out since the last major addition to the Abramiac faiths and very little has been achieved. Why do you think the CRE will correct that? Running secular comparative religion classes would do far more.

There probably is a degree of fear about religion. We see how it has held back major advances in just about every aspect of society from medicine to individual rights. Look how religion is abused by enriching Mega Churches in the US, removal of females from photos for orthodox Jewish consumers. Of course, we don't need to spend much time on the contortions of Islam to support terrorism.

I concur that there are other issues to worry about. However, we live in a society where the public can voice their views on whatever topic we choose. Whether you agree or not, religious training in school is high on the agenda not because The Age is pushing it, but because the public is pushing it and The Age is responding.

The bible is a great work of literature. The King James gives us a wonderful view into the world of language for the time. So is the Koran. So is the Baghavad Gita. Lady Chatterley's Lover is also great literature but we don't expect anyone to believe it literally nor pray and live based on it do we?

Your arguments are work well comparative religion classes. Exactly what you don't want. Be honest. You want to indoctrinate kids exclusively through school.

If Christianity is so great it can stand on its own like other organisations. It does not need to indoctrinate the young. It does not need to be propped up by sub-sections like ACCESS ministries. It does not need to infiltrate schools - it has churches.

Finally it does not need to cast aspersions on others who hold different beliefs.

It DOES need to grow up and acquire some tolerance and wisdom. I won't hold my breath however.

In arguing your points you have attributed comments to me that are not mine but another person's and have again deliberately misrepresented what I have said.

I made the comment that the chaplain invites parents to talks run by 'child development experts' who turn out to be religious types. This is of course not to say that religious people have nothing to contribute rather that most people's idea of an 'expert' is naturally someone that has training or higher learning in a field. Not just someone with an opinion.

I also made the comment that the chaplain invites students to bible readings at lunchtime and said that while this is not technically against the rules it does unnecessarily blur the line between non-authoritarian support person (as a chaplain is supposed to be) and a religious person.

You also avoid the real question of the issue - section 116 of the Australian Constitution and why you don't think it applies in this case.

Brendan,

Thanks for commenting on my views about the role of government and it's treatment of religions.

[The state should not privilege the convictions of any particular religious tradition, even a majority tradition, over the convictions of those who dissent from it, including nonbelievers.]

Why not?

Should the state ever privilege one sporting code over and above others? Should the state ever privilege one set of moral concerns over another? For example, the government is allowed to decide (through the court system and other means) what it's citizens can and cannot do and what activities will be punishable offenses and which ones won't. The government supports all kind of organisations and all kinds of interest groups all the time. Yet you seem to be suggesting the government should never provide any level of support whatsoever for any religion under any circumstances (Correct me if my understanding of your position is wrong).

So, why are you singling out religion for discrimination here?

[Religion should not occupy a default privileged position in public institutions at the expense of taxpayers or the infringement of state neutrality on religion].

I am not suggesting that any religion hold a "default" position, I am suggesting that any position they hold (which does not involve holding AUTHORITY TO ACTUALLY GOVERN) would come as a result of them lobbying for their interests in the same way that any other group would do.

[Taxes must fund public interests, not religious enterprise.]

Which portion of the public? The WHOLE public?

There is not ONE BIT of government SPENDING which every single citizen agrees with. And there is certainly no government spending that every citizen would agree is in the public interest (eg: some would argue that virtually no government spending whatsoever is the best approach). So, how do we decide? Simple- Each person and group lobbies for their interests and/or what they believe is best. This is how democracy works.

I'm simply arguing that religion be afforded the same rights as other interest groups. Yet it seems that secularists advocate discrimination under the guise of "seperation of church and state".

Trav: "Wow, Franc Hoggle, you sure do a good job of throwing around wild accusations without providing a shred of supporting evidence for your claims."

Thank you Trav for supporting pretty much all of them. It is polite to read what I said, including the link I gave due to space constraints here, before hurling a handful of mud and seeing if any sticks. But this is how Access and its apologists operate - ignore what is being said, and then distract with some irrelevant slur as you have. That or whine about "persecution" and some nebulous secular conspiracy. There is not much point anybody providing you with evidence if you refuse to see it or acknowledge it.

Access have been recorded lying. Their website, despite their frantic efforts to sanitise it, still oozes with evidence of the same lies. You too are participating in the lie, the sacred taqiyya, either consciously or because you choose to remain deliberately ignorant.

There is no way to really combat this kind of filth - I know I have no hope of changing your mind or theirs. But what I can do is counter the orchestrated propaganda of articles like these to remind people of the indisputable baseline facts -

Access Ministries are liars and they are frauds.

I do not have jesus on my side to make the blind see though. But I will continue to do what I can for others that Access are trying to deceive.

And yes, I can suggest a fairer system Trav -

Access and providers like them can start behaving with the same honesty and basic common decency that the rest of society expects from us all. If they can start doing that, this argument will solve itself. But that is too much to ask - without the glue of deception, their whole house of cards falls down. So if they refuse to participate in an open and honest society, the only option is to remove them from it. You can waffle and distract all you like, but its really that simple. No more lies.

I wonder how many would feel if the minister was not from the Christian community. How would they feel if an atheist took one of the positions.

What if they came from the Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist or other religions. Especially if this occurred in schools that high numbers of the faith attending.

I can imagine the outcry.

It is time for some research on how the system is working.

How do children of other faiths or no faith benefit.

It is time to research what types of schools are taking up the options.

I would also like to know what the views are of the staff, participially the principal's belief of why they support the programme.

Is it because they see it as a way of getting extra staff, regardless of their skills or because they believe Christian religion should play a part in public schools.

If you check out this chaps website - A Splinter in the Mind - you will find all of the usual right-wing true-believers nonsense and so-called apologetics.

But what is most striking is the in your face obvious is the sado-masochistic image which heads the page. This dreadful image is supposedly what inspires his religion.

My advice would be to flee with all of ones strength from any "religion" that uses such a dreadful image and simultaneously talks about "good news". I would not let him anywhere near any child that I know.

Even the title of the blog - A Splinter in the Mind - is an exercise of sado-masochicism.

Truth is entirely a matter of the feeling-heart.

The happening of Truth is not through the mind - it is at the heart. Truth is self-evident, because the heart authenticates it in the moment of reception.

Truth is an embrace, just as love is. You do not get argued into love (using splinters). It is self-evidently right.

One responds to Truth as one does to love, simply through recognizing it. It has nothing to do with splintered mind arguments.

True Religion is about Beauty. God IS Beauty.
Anything less than that is an abomination.

"The quantitative and qualitative study, commissioned by the National School Chaplaincy Association (NSCA) involved feedback from school principals, chaplains, teaching staff, parents and students."

Nickojs. Note who requested the report.

Franc Hoggle speaks forcefully, but I can assure you there is evidence for everything he alleges and it is mounting by the day.

Nicholas says: "[The state should not privilege the convictions of any particular religious tradition, even a majority tradition, over the convictions of those who dissent from it, including nonbelievers.]

Why not?"

Because, Nicholas it is prohibited by Section 116 of the Australian Constitution. It is, not to put too fine a point on it, against the law. That is just *one* of the reasons why the Federal Government and Scripture Union Queensland will be fronting up at the High Court in August having to answer to serious claims about the method in which the ill-conceived National School Chaplaincy Program has been financed. Worse, S.116 seems not to be the only section of the Constitution that may have been breached.

But, instead of the good Christians at SUQ saying, "If we have broken the law, or the Commonwealth Government has broken the law in providing us with millions of dollars in taxpayers' money, *of course* that needs to be established and we welcome the issue being decided by the full bench of the High Court." But no. They have cried bloody murder. Never have I heard such wailing and gnashing of teeth!

Fortunately, the High Court only considers matters on their merit, not on the amount of whinging undertaken by a defendant. On that basis it has decided Mr Williams' case has sufficient merit to be heard - a process which has taken several directions hearings and which suggests strongly that Williams case is seen as credible and by no means vexatious by the High Court. As Franc Hoggle explains in his inimitable style - if fundamentalist Christians would display a little more respect for the ethics, values and laws that ordinary Australians live by, your claims to be the guardians of Australian values would, perhaps, not ring quite so hollow.

Trav,

When the state privileges some religious traditions over those who dissent, anti-egalitarian outcomes of discrimination, corruption & conflict occur. The state, having surrendered its neutrality, is party to this. You consider this the best and fairest approach?

You seem to think that competitive religious democracy is the best decider. I think that the state not being embrangled in private belief is a better way because it better aims for impartiality of the state with regard to religion. Governments have no business privileging nor persecuting religion - which is about personal belief, not public enterprise, collective need, a sporting hobby, or an alternative legal system. Religion is not like other "interest groups". Comparing privileging of sporting codes to religion is wrong. Sport is not a set of supernatural truth claims held by individual belief. I don't get your point about the state endorsing particular ethical concerns either, as this means establishing common law for the common good, not public funding for the promotion of private beliefs.

You asked for alternative principles to yours. I gave you some ideas. I never said everyone must agree with every cent of government spending. What I did say is that religion should be self sufficient for the promotion of its own beliefs. It should not occupy a default privileged position in public institutions - which it does - at expense of taxpayers or infringement of state religious neutrality. I'm not singling out religion for discrimination; I'm defending religious neutrality - the state not directly or indirectly picking winners & losers - which protects everyone's beliefs from infringement by the state or pushy majority religious traditions over others. In contrast, the federal government's National School Chaplaincy program guidelines REQUIRE chaplains to be affiliated with religion, which is blatant discrimination in employment on the basis of religion. Rejecting unreasonable demands and bad public policy is not discrimination.

Geeeez.... who let the angry christians out?

After reading your very long and boring article this one sentence stuck in my mind:

"Fourthly, are there not more pressing needs to protect our children from?"

The answer to this question my dear angry christian is NO! There are no more pressing needs to protect our children from than the OVERWHELMING BRAINWASHING that is going on in schools. How dare you advocate that in the year 2011 we pay teachers to teach our kids superstitions?!

Does turning around 3 times, clapping your hands and spitting over your shoulder ward off demons? I'd really like to know so I can warn my (future) kids.

Why wasn't atheism in my school curriculum? That would have really sped up the process of my enlightenment to atheism - it took me a while to shake off the well-developed brainwashing techniques employed by you angry angry christians.

As Pink Floyd very wisely sang:
"We don't need no education,
we don't need no thought control.......
Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone!"

Peace

It seems the minister is having a bit of fun by wilfully playing the victim card. Surely you aren't serious minister, not in a country where the christian church has so many benefits already (benefits denied to others).

I will keep it short as quite a few people have already made their corrections:

By all means teach children about religion - ALL religions and NONE. Schools are not your exclusive playground minister. This would seem to clear issues 1,2, 3 and 6 from your list but i imagine that you would need teachers without an axe to grind for any one system, do you think Access Ministries could do that because the evidence against it is mounting fast.

As for 4 and 5, are we all really so restricted in our resources we can only handle one thing at a time? By all means address pornography and obesity and a host of other issues too. It seems you are also confused about the difference between advertising and proselytising, the first one doesn't lie about what happens to you after you die or state how you should mistreat people. Just a hint.

Kind regards

Maybe we should spend the time allocated to religious education in schools by explaining the basic principles behind a broad range of religius beliefs? That way, the kids can at least be informed about the differences between the various religions we have here. I know I am ignorant of the fundemental differences between Anglican, Catholic, Methodist, Baptist and all of the other religions.

Australia is a nation born from, and built on, Christian values and that is the way it is. Our job is to educate our children so that they can make informed decisions of their own in the future; not to force any one religion upon them - IMO.

Thanks

Not happy to have achieved massive increases in abortion, pornography, sexualisation of young girls and boys and rebellion the secularist at all costs want to 'protect'the children from getting some values that they have rejected themselves. No wonder the 'religous' schools are being flooded by those claiming no faith but can clearly see the putried outcome of an education system that basis its beliefs in pseudo science and godless values. I would guess the real reason so many protest so loud about chaplains or anything else decent is because they don't want their own godless values exposed for what they are. There would be far less need for chaplains if the kids did receive love and discipline at home. It seems many secularist hate the family unit so much that it is unlikely they will receive what is needed at home and want at all cost their kids receiving some decent morals at school. They want kids given nstructions on how to put on a condom but don't want them to know anything about faithfulness. They want kids to be guilt free about breaking every moral law in the universe but then complain about youth suicide and are blind enough to know the causes. Oh that's right if only secular schools were not underfunded all these ills would go away. The latest Government funded research says so. How do we have a PM stabbed in the back and few blink an eyelid. Drr I wonder why?

“Father, forgive them, they know not what they do…” ...

... was not in the first bibles - Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus - so must be a later addition. Why was that?

runner,
None of those are achievements and none are sought.

As Mahatma Gandhi said "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

Freedom from religion please.

http://www.venganza.org/

http://www.lyricsmania.com/the_pope_song_lyrics_tim_minchin.html

Radar: "Maybe we should spend the time allocated to religious education in schools by explaining the basic principles behind a broad range of religius beliefs? That way, the kids can at least be informed about the differences between the various religions we have here."

Radar, that would silence even the harshest critics of the chaplaincy sideshow. So naturally, it is the last thing that the religionists want.

Comparative, as opposed to indoctrinational, religious studies are anathema to people like Access Ministries and the author of this article. Most kids aren't stupid. They can put 2 and 2 together. If they were presented with the whole spectrum of religion in an objective, fact based manner, most of them would see it for the sham that it is and ditch it as a strange curiosity, not a lifestyle.

The whole point of Access CRE is to deny kids the chance to a broad overview and instill the terror while their minds are still young and malleable. This is the whole point of Loyola's famous quote - "Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man" - if they can indoctrinate them early enough, most will be scarred that way for life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaOVPaYf780&feature=related

:) or are you the....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atTSwau9fwM&feature=related

Well:) I hope not, because we love you too............unless you have a hidden agenda.

And even if so, I'll tell you a great secret......your not alone:)( Huamns! what will we do with our-selves....I don't know....THINK!...:)

Peace for all that live on this planet.

Now! 7 billion and growing.........what are we going to do?

LEAP

McReal you write

'runner,
None of those are ac hievements and none are sought.'

Aids is also not sought but it is obvious the outcome of sex with someone else infected. Cause and affect comes into play when you deny the moral laws of the universe. And yes to have moral laws one must acknowledge the Lawgiver.

Like most apologists for CRE you haven't addressed the facts. Why have Access Ministries lied and why is CRE opt-out in public schools? Only 65% of Australians are Christian and many of those Christians would not agree with Access Ministries providing most CRE and chaplains. Far from being a vocal minority I think you'll find that as many as half of Australians would be adamantly against CRE and Chaplains in public schools and many more would have reservations. The vocal minority, who seems to have the government's ear, is the group of Christians represented by AM.
The Bible is inspirational? You mean the same bible that makes a hero out of a guy, Lot, who gives up his daughters to a mob to protect a couple of "angels"?
"Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. "

runner, your vilification of the defenders of secularism - the cornerstone of religious freedom for all Australians - is bilious and evil.

"Moral laws of the universe"? Got any hard evidence of that? I thought the laws of physics were the laws of the universe and that they are distinctly amoral.

By the way, which particular "moral law of the universe" consigns innocent children to suffer molestation by clergy or other devout men in positions of trust and authority?

Runner,

Society has moved forward at a slow pace. Sometimes, even backwards temporarily, but always onwards. We've fought long and hard for the betterment of our situation in the world and who have we fought? People like you.

What you ask is to get back to some genuinely disgusting views.
Slavery
Condoning rape
Chattel slavery of women.
Burning and killing people who don't act like they should or speak out.
Killing and slaughtering of people who happen to live where our God grew up.
Torturing people who believe differently.
Denouncing, intimidating & killing people who advance our real knowledge of the world.
Sending young pregnant girls away.
killing people because they don't believe in the same god as we do, you know, the one that preaches 'Thou shalt not kill.'

We live lives of happiness, safety, health, opportunity, joy and freedom than most generations before us couldn't even conceive. Yet you besmirch this.

Runner, you have it so damned good. You have it better than any of your ancestors. Instead of valuing that, let alone doing anything to improve things yourself, you just focus on the problems that haven't been solved yet. You spoilt, rotten child.

"Firstly, why shouldn’t children have the right to learn about Jesus and, if they so want, become a follower or, ready for it, a Christian?"

I take it that you are comfortable with the current indoctrination-fest making way for an objective and factual comparative religion class?

"Secondly, we often hear about the need to understand and address the root causes of terrorism"

Religious fundamentalism can be addressed when discussing topics like the crusades, the inquisition and Osama Bin-Laden and Pat Robertson.

"Thirdly, I think Australians are largely fearful of religion."

That would be a result of thousands of years of religiously sanctioned murder, rape and slavery. It's great to be living in a world where the ability of organised religion to supress information of it's atrocities from the general population is limited to those who cloister themselves away behind the four walls of their churches, mosques and synagogues.

"Fourthly, are there not more pressing needs to protect our children from?"

Priority one, keep our kids away from these pedophiles who for too long have been shielded by the hierarchies or religious institutions.

"Fifthly, what about proselytising?"

Not in our public schools.

"Let kids learn about obnoxious bottoms, but don’t deprive them of the beauty, wisdom, poetry, and challenging literature we call the Bible."

....and the genocide, rape, torture, incest, slavery?

The discussion has been interesting. Something else to think about.

Whether chaplains are in schools or CRE or RE or RI is taught in a state school
or not, the Living God is (present tense) still there in the school. God is ALL knowing, All powerful and All seeing. (reflect on that for a moment...awesome).
Jesus is God's son and He points to (or is the bridge to God because he makes us clean from our sin) and a Holy God can then look upon us.
The triune God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit just like I am a mother, sister and a daughter.
No God, No Peace -- Know God, Know Peace. (Think about it....) with God. It is all about Peace with a Holy God who is both loving and just (Isaiah Ch1 -66) ...read the whole book of Isaiah.)
The dastardly acts mentioned in the Bible and referred to in this post are usually committed by people in the bible who are far away from God in their hearts.

The Good News is that when peoples hearts are submitted to Gods truths God can offer a New beginning to individuals. Hope for the future.
All of us fall short of the Glory of God (Romans)
And except for the Grace of God anyone of us can be lost forever.

Every time I read an article like this, my heart sinks.

I had a Catholic education. That was my parents' choice, and I'm glad they made that choice. Many of my friends had a secular education, and they turned out as good, as charitable and as 'Christian' (for want of a better word) as me. Until recently, the secular education they enjoyed remained untapped by evangelists and Christian fringe groups.

Shortly before I finished teaching in the state education system, though, that changed. Our school employed a fulltime chaplain. I'm not sure what church he was from, and I will admit that his intentions were good. However, his presence in the school irked me. When he led us in prayer on assembly, I was uncomfortable. It wasn't praying that was uncomfortable to me - I do enough of that. It was the imposition of an odd style of prayer that didn't sit well with me, and must certainly have alienated those who had no religion or who were not Christian. If their parents had wanted them to pray at school, they could have forked out a little bit of cash and sent them to one of the many Catholic or other Christian schools in town. I suspect that many didn't want this at all.

There is certainly nothing wrong with learning about Jesus, but there is something wrong with indoctrinating people whose parents don't want them indoctrinated. In my opinion, there's something wrong with flooding kids with beliefs and values that may contradict those they are receiving at home and in the wider community. Kids are impressionable and (though it sounds condescending) easy to 'mess up'. I also think there's also something wrong with taking those vulnerable kids from the fringes of our society and preying on that vulnerability to breed disciples.

If parents want religious instruction for their kids, they have that option in Christian schools. Many do: 40% of students in Catholic schools in my diocese are not baptised Catholics. Their parents support the schools' religious programs because they chose them. The choice should be there.

Oh Sandpiper. Typical Christian who doesn't know really what it says in the Bible. It isn't all milk and honey you know. It is typical of Christians to only take what they need from the Bible and ignore what doesn't fit in with their world view.

Lot is recognised by God as a righteous man. God even sends a couple of angels to save Lot and his family from Sodom. The people of Sodom see the angels with Lot and say they want a piece of that action. So Lot instead offers the people his daughters to be raped instead. Nice.
Later Lot gets drunk and has sex with his daughters. I kid you not.
Righteous eh.
Or how about Elisha calling on God to kill the boys who called him "baldy". God obliges and sends a couple of bears to make short work of the children. Good one God.
And we can't not mention the abhorrent Jephthah who promised God that if he wins the battle he will sacrifice whoever meets him at the doors of his house as a burnt offering. Who does he meet first? His daughter. Of course he kills her and burns her and God is apparently pleased because he didn't step in to stop it did he.
Thank you God. I never realised what a misogynist you are. When Jesus said "Suffer the little children" it never occurred to me how literally he meant this.

I think you'll find, Sandpiper, that most of the dastardly acts in the Bible are committed in God's name or by God himself.

Brendon Lloyd asks

'By the way, which particular "moral law of the universe" consigns innocent children to suffer molestation by clergy or other devout men in positions of trust and authority?'

In actual fact secular moral relativist would find it very difficult to argue that these molesters were not born that way. That is why some of your high priests like Singer condones bestiality.

Runner says
'In actual fact secular moral relativist would find it very difficult to argue that these molesters were not born that way. That is why some of your high priests like Singer condones bestiality.'

No. Singer stated that sex with animals that involves harm or cruelty to the animal should remain illegal.

Whatever. Singer is just one philosopher. He writes philosophical discussions that some people agree with, some people disagree, and almost everyone considers thought provoking. It is not dogma that is blindly followed like, oh I don't know, the Bible.

The author states <"According to the 688 principals who participated, Chaplains helped to:
-build the sense of community in the school,
-support the school ethos and
-assist with the integration of potentially “at risk” students, including recent immigrants and Aboriginal students."

I would imagine that any trained psychologist could do just as well as these chaplains?
Why does the 'qualification' of knowing more than the average about one's religion make a person more 'qualified' to do this job in public schools?

The Government no doubt pays peanuts for these chaplain's wages, when they know they would have to pay more for properly trained people who wouldn't have a religious bias.

I'm with you there, suzeonline. Our kids (who are our future) are far too important to place in the hands of ill-qualified, under-scrutinised practitioners. I had to attend uni for four years to be allowed to have a role in the formation of children's literacy. How long do these chaplains have to study (and at what level?) to be allowed a role in the formation of children's world views, moral outlooks and social capabilities?

runner: "In actual fact secular moral relativist would find it very difficult to argue that these molesters were not born that way. That is why some of your high priests like Singer condones bestiality."

Cherry pickers through and through. You do it with your bible and you do it with everything you read. Actually, "read" is a misnomer. I doubt you have actually "read" anything in an absorptive and interpretive way. More likely, you don't even do your cherry picking yourself, some helpful spook/shaman does it for you and tells you what to go out and yap yap to the world about. It's all sound bites and tapeloops and mindlessly repeated dogma. The average literacy of the average apologist here is that of a 12 year - it's all here in these pages...

This is the end result of the type of education people end up with when CRE style teaching methods get a foothold in the system. You don't want schools, you want madrassas. Sit in circles and repeat chants and praise jesus for his goodness - you just need to take a look at the gibberish in the curriculum documents scraped off the Access Ministries websites. It is horrifying. It is this atavistic yearning for a new dark age - burnt libraries, science pronounced heresy and of course, a steady feed of scapegoats for the pyre. We have an appetiser of this with the language being used to demonise and denounce all these wicked "secular humanists" that want to ruin your superstitious party.

You want to rot kids minds with nonsense? You go right ahead. Just do it in your own schools and let the rest of the civilised planet get on with their lives in peace.

I have genuine pity for you and your desperate need to cling to imaginary comfort blankets. You are disabled, dysfunctional hollow shells. If you were a dog, you'd probably be shot out of mercy. Unreal.

Otokonoko and Shagger,
Just a point about the story of Lot - God saved Lot because of the fervent prayers of his uncle - Abraham. I only learnt that last week. All the Bible stories have layers and layers of meaning and knowledge and depending on where one is in life's journey those childhood stories have lessons for adults too. (Yes, I said stories).
A challenge for you... revisit a few of those "stories", check out a few versions for meaning (the meanings will be consistent-just put differently). Read with an open mind and ask for God to give understanding of the passages. Keep asking questions.

"The Bible isn't milk and honey" -true. It is "milk and meat" for our souls both now and in the future. The meat is sometimes hard to chew.

Sandpiper

>> "The Bible isn't milk and honey" -true. It is "milk and meat" for our souls both now and in the future. The meat is sometimes hard to chew. <<

Oh well, that justifies the punishment of Lot's wife, the rape of his daughter's, in fact all the general rape, pillage and sacrifice demanded by god then.

The slaughter of innocents is a common theme in the bible, the Q'ran, the Torah - whatever it takes to make the f&ckers believe in god.

Sounding a little like a Osama bin Laden pep talk to the troops there, Sandpiper. And you want this bilge taught to our children.

The trick is, to read the Bible for yourself, then meet others in a group for discussion and question time.

Another trick is to start reading in the gospels--- Matthew, Mark, Luke and John or perhaps the Psalms.

Pray first for an open mind and heart.

May God Bless your reading of God's HOLY Bible.
Definition of HOLY -- set apart.(like no other book)
There are New International Version and NEW King James Bible versions online these days. Even Youth Bibles, Kids Life Application Bibles. Study note and commentaries.

askegg,
'Remember when god flooded the entire world and killed every living thing?
Charming fellow."

The story goes: God saved Noah and his family because they listened to Gods instructions, unlike those around him who scoffed Noah for building an ark when it had actually never rained on planet earth until the flood. The community thought Noah was stupid. It is exactly like that today. Jesus saves. The next act of judgement will not be a flood though. That is the promise God gave when he sent the rainbow after the 40 day flood.

The Holy Bible is full of promises from God to those who want to listen. Amen

Sandpiper,

"...when it had actually never rained on planet earth until the flood."

....really and truly....?

Gee I'm glad my son is home educated if this statement is any indication of the religious mentality broadcast in CRE at school.

Sandpiper,

If the Bible was the word of a god, then it would be so amazing and beyond what we can currently comprehend that you wouldn’t need tricks to take it seriously.

If the Bible was the word of a god, it would be timeless; not requiring educated and civilized modern day people to allow for the fact that it was written by savages just to take seriously.

If the Bible was the word of a god, then there would be no competing holy books as no human could possibly compete.

Instead, the bible is one of the most horrendous, violent and disgusting books that still inhabits our bookshelves.

<<The Holy Bible is full of promises from God to those who want to listen.>>

The Christian god is incredibly stupid if it wants to get its message out through texts, anecdotal testimony and old languages that die out. They are not pathways to truth and anything that could possibly be considered a god would understand this.

Which means that either your god doesn’t exist or it doesn’t care enough about people who understand the nature of evidence to bother presenting it,

I’m guessing it’s the former.

@Sandpiper

Thank you so much for providing us all with such a fantastic example of why fundamentalist religious people should have no access whatsoever to indoctrinate our kids via any sort of back door religious instruction program in public schools.

Your ignorance is a shining light and testament to the dangers inherent within the best of 15th century thinking.

Thanks
DJ

I don't think it helps at all to continue to sidetrack the discussion into the validity of christain teaching/myths.

The main issue has two parts
- the role of a special interest religious group taking time in the school timetable to promote their views As I understand it the humanist society has been denied a similar opportunity in one or more states.
- the fundamental dishonesty of much of the christain response to campaigns to change what's occuring. In recent articles we had an argument based on "cultural heritage" and now the claim that RE providers don't try and use access to schools for evangalistic purposes. SU Qld makes a lie of the latter and I've not seen any sign of the cultural heritage issue featuring on RE providers websites.

The churches and many of the supporters of RE are clearly willing to engage in either outright lies or deceptive behaviour in defense of their access to school children.

I doubt that many who have had anything to do with chaplaincy or RE programs really believe that it's about cultural heritage or that it's not treated as an outreach program by most of those involved.

The defense of the program is fundamentally dishonest.

R0bert

As someone with a lot of firsthand experience with the Christian church and its theology, I can second what R0bert says.

Christian theology teaches that they go forth and proselethise (and so they should considering how grossly negligent it would be to - according to their beliefs - allow others to go to hell or miss out on an eternal reward).

So for them to think that they can fool us into thinking that they’re chaplains are simply going to act as counselors and resist their childishly uncontrollable urge and their DUTY to convert people is a bit rich.

They know they’re being disingenuous and deceitful when they speak of cultural heritage but they’d either be in a deep state of denial about it, or they’d justify it by assuring themselves that god would overlook their little indiscretion because they’re spreading the “good news”.

Evangelicals will go to all sorts of dishonest lengths to convert others and should always be treated with suspicion.

---

djarm67,

Welcome to OLO!

I’m a subscriber of your YouTube channel and have even linked to some of your videos here before.

Keep posting. Your contributions will be valuable!

There are two issues here. Chaplains and school time allocated for religious instruction.

The first is no doubt against Section 116 of the constitution and plenty has been said about that by previous commentors. I await the court case.

I really struggle with the second - especially in state primary schools.

Someone famous once said public education should be: "Compulsory, free and secular" (and can people *please* understand the difference between "secular" and "atheistic" - they are completely different).

I tutor mathematics at all levels and I am sometimes quite dismayed by lack of mathematical ability and scientific knowledge displayed by our kids and our grown-ups. Science teaching in primary schools is usually at the bottom of the pile - probably because it can be hard to teach. This 30 minutes a week of religious instruction in primary schools would be far better off to be replaced by 30 minutes of fun and engaging science.

Primary school time is valuable and needs to be allocated where it is needed.

R0bert: "I don't think it helps at all to continue to sidetrack the discussion into the validity of christain teaching/myths."

Nor I. The two main items, as have been pointed out, that no one should be distracted from are - 1) The practice of apparently divinely sanctioned deception, and 2) when all else fails, to play the persecution card and imply, without any supporting evidence, a "secular conspiracy" that is hell bent on destroying christianity. This is from the gutter end of wedge politicking.

R0bert: "- the fundamental dishonesty of much of the christain response to campaigns to change what's occuring."

No. This dishonesty commenced long before any response to the protests or The Age story ran. Access Ministries was lying well before the chaplain/CRE system even began. Their lies were premeditated, they were consciously aware they would be in breach of the CRE agreements and proceeded into CRE with the intent of breaking those agreements anyway. This was not "response", this was "proaction" - a coldly calculated, premeditated and conscious deceit.

Access Ministries are liars. Assurances to not lie in future are lies. The deceit and the fraud has divine approval. This will never change. As liars, they are in no position to claim they can offer a foundation of moral education to children. They need to be removed from the system entirely, all funding frozen and that which has been paid recovered for breach of contract, and any organisations such as their's in future need to scrutinised continuously. People that believe god is OK with deception have no place anywhere near children.

When you lie for Jesus it isn't a lie. Little things like laws and constitutions are minor hindrances when you can only accept a higher power. AM can't not lie about their motives and mission. To do so would be to deny Jesus (in their minds).
For that reason they have no business being involved in public secular education and counselling. They have an agenda driven mission that is directly at odds with providing a non sectarian education. Chaplains by definition provide spiritual solace. Most issues kids have need support from professional counsellors and not platitudes from predators only interested in saving souls.

Sandpiper,

Fascinating insights into the story of Lot. Why were they directed at me?

Franc,

Apologies- Your link came after I was already in the process of posting. I have made one comment at that link.

Brendan,

I am not advocating “competitive religious democracy”, I am advocating democracy. Full stop. Sometimes democratic ideals interfere with other principles we may hold, and in this instance I consider democracy to take priority over the idea that religion should be kept completely 100% away from state business.

The only fair way to administer a society is, to put it very bluntly, give the people what they want and that way the majority opinion rules. Otherwise we arbitrarily and unfairly validate one person’s opinion above another’s, which is ironically what you claim to be trying to avoid. As I have said, the government itself must remain neutral, and that is a principle that I would put ABOVE anything else. So my principles are 1. Government neutrality and 2. Democracy does the rest.

Yes, religion is fundamentally different to sport- of course- but I do not see how this is relevant to the practical application here. The fact remains that the government must act in a way that is fair to all who reside within its jurisdiction, and as it does this, it must pick and choose and it must fund some things and not others. The key here is how it goes about making those choices about funding. Who decides what the common good is? If the majority of our population were to believe in polygamy, or that heroin should be supplied by the government and that these things were for the “common good” (to use some extreme examples…) would those things therefore be for the common good? I venture a guess we would both answer with a resounding NO. But that’s my whole point- it is a matter of opinion. And as I’ve explained above, the only fair way to avoid arbitrarily validating some opinions above others is to use democracy as a complete and guiding principle combined with government neutrality.

(continued below)

Finally, To pad out my point with an example and to illustrate one area where your understanding is flawed: You claim that once a government funds any religious activity it loses it’s neutrality, but I strongly disagree. As long as no religion has the right to make decisions on behalf of the government, and as long as no religious body is automatically, by default, privileged over others then the government itself remains effectively neutral.

I am an AFL footy fan, but I would not argue that the government is biased towards athletics and therefore not neutral if it gave more money to an Olympic bid compared to say, a new AFL stadium. I would recognize that the government believed, on the basis of the arguments put forward that this was the best allocation of that money, and as long as the decision making process was fair and without undue influence from either sporting body then I would have little grounds for complaint.

Cheers

Thanks for all the comments. I should point out that this piece was published on my blog and I wrote it in about 20 minutes, so it is not meant to be an extensive or intellectual analysis of all the issues. Thanks to all who "like" it, and apologies to those whose right to "dislike" is taken away by Facebook.

Here are some facts of SRI classes and chaplaincy (not readily reported over at The Age):

• -Re/SRI Classes total around 1.5% of the school curriculum (30 mins per week). This hardly seems like a likely springboard for a religious take-over of society.

• -No student is forced to attend RE classes and can readily withdraw.

• -All faith groups have access to provide classes or chaplains- so Christians have no ‘advantage’.

• -The class teacher is present in the RE class the whole time to oversee proceedings (are we saying we don’t trust our teachers to look after the welfare students?).

• -Schools have to voluntarily apply to have chaplains and are not forced to do so. The vast majority of schools who have them want to keep them. (see report by by Edith Cowan University and University of New England http://www.suqld.org.au/_sys/_data/downloads/The_Effectiveness_of_Chaplainc_BRIEF.pdf).

• -If any group has violated the government codes and regulations, they will be dealt with by those agencies.

What is unfair here?

Finally, here are some important points from The Victorian Governments Education and Training Reform Act 2006:

a. the persons providing the special religious instruction must be persons who are accredited representatives of churches or OTHER RELIGIOUS GROUPS and who are approved by the Minister for the purpose;

b. attendance for the special religious instruction IS NOT TO BE COMPULSORARY FOR ANY STUDENT whose parents desire that he or she be excused from attending

Sandpiper, you'll be pleased. I took up your challenge.

>>All the Bible stories have layers and layers of meaning... A challenge for you... revisit a few of those "stories"<<

Since you mentioned Lot, I looked him up, and found this:

"...the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: and they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us... and Lot went out at the door unto them... and said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof." Gen 19:4-8

Unless you read it differently, here's a father offering his daughters' virginity to a crowd of men, in order to protect his guests.

Wow!

And a bit later, his daughters repaid him for his generosity of spirit.

"And the firstborn said unto the younger... Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him... And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father... And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him... And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him... Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father." Gen 19:31-36

This is the guy saved by Abraham's prayers? Whose wife was murdered for looking over her shoulder?

This is what you want to teach our kids?

Give us a clue as to the "layers and layers of meaning" that make this an OK story.

Nickosjt

OK.

If RE is as harmless as you say and the in class teacher is able to monitor the RE teacher (provided they are not busy with the opt-out students). Is there harm?

YES:

Why can't RE simply be an Opt-In class? Those who really want to attend can and the others can study a topic of their choosing, or more appropriately comparative religion and philosophy.

The fact that students are marginalised for the benefit of RE classes is nothing more than dressed up discrimination.

And to repeat the bleeding obvious; RE is what churches should be doing not schools.

Nick, if you replace 'religious' with 'political' (just as an analogy) in your writing, then then the objections of people who do not share your faith have will become immediately clear.

Nicholas: "Re/SRI Classes total around 1.5% of the school curriculum ….

The budget allocation for chaplaincy alone amounts to around 25 per cent of the total Federal education budget. Consider the time kids spend with the chaplain in the playground or class room; or at lunch time prayer groups. Then there’s church camps promoted by the chaplain, relying on peer pressure and pester power to get the kids away from their parents where Education Department restrictions on proselytising don’t apply. Plus kids’ involvement in Trojan horse gendered religious programmes like Shine and Strength. Don't play games, we know how far fundamentalist religion has infiltrated into our secular schools.

Nicholas: "No student is forced to attend RE classes …”

How about the estimated 80% of kids in RE classes in Queensland who, according to the department’s own guidelines shouldn't be there because their parents didn’t nominate a religion on their enrolment form. EdQ knows about this, but won't take any action. Some parents don't even know their kids are taking RE - we've certainly heard from some who got a hell of a surprise when their child came home spouting Scripture!

Then there’s the 'un-churched' kids who are bribed into attending with lollies and promises of 'lovely presents' at the end of the year. Or the kids who are made to feel so isolated, punished or bored for being left out of RE that they beg their unwilling parents to let them attend.

Or how about the kids from Ulladulla who were made - against their parents express wishes - to sit in the back of the RE class. In that case, the RE teacher and chaplain posted on the internet praying these kids would hear Bernie's words and be converted. When parents complained, the kids were put just outside the door of the RE class - with the door open and Bernie talking as loudly as he could so they wouldn’t miss anything.

Either you are woefully misinformed about this whole catastrophe or you are lying for Jesus.

Nicholas: "All faith groups have access to provide classes or chaplains …

... The major employing bodies to whom the vast majority of taxpayers' cash is going to are Christian and require their employees to be Christian. People without an affiliation to a religious organization are excluded from chaplaincy unless all attempts to secure a religious person have been exhausted. Humanists, pagans, Wiccans etc are excluded from giving SRE classes - so not all beliefs are catered for. The Buddhists have already complained they don't get funding.

Nicholas: "The class teacher is present in the RE class the whole time …”

Teachers have better things to do with their time than to babysit SRE teachers - just one reason the Victorian Teachers Union, the Australian Education Union and many appalled teachers oppose the classes.

One teacher from wrote to me just this week. She said, "I am absolutely FURIOUS at the moment … I had to endure yet another scripture lesson with my high school class today ..."

Apparently, apart from urging the kids to attend her church for a ‘fun event’ the SRE teacher told them what they were learning in about evolution from their science teacher wasn't true - in fact it was 'far-fetched'.

Nicholas: "Schools have to voluntarily apply to have chaplains and are not forced to do so.”

If the government provided schools with the choice of a chaplain or a trained youth worker which would they'd choose? If they let schools choose between half a billion dollars for more teaching resources or for chaplains - which do you think they'd choose?

Nicholas: “The vast majority of schools who have them want to keep them. (see report by by Edith Cowan University …"

That report has been thoroughly discredited and is not worth the paper it's written on. Let Mr 97% Porkie tell the story here: http://bit.ly/jrBbXd

Nicholas: "If any group has violated the government codes and regulations, they will be dealt with …”

The Australian Secular Lobby has been reporting these kinds of violations to Education Queensland for years and they're largely ignored. I've heard the same stories in other states.

Nicholas: "What is unfair here?"

Nickosjt: "What is unfair here?"

What is unfair Nicholas, is that you avoid all of the questions that really count and persist in your smokescreen of the same, tired recycled sophistry to do anything other than address those questions. There is nothing complicated about this, but lets try again -

* Access Ministries have been caught lying
* Access Ministries are consciously, and with premeditation, breaching binding CRE contractual agreements
* Access Ministries, in the knowledge that they have breached their agreements, are still siphoning funds from the public purse. I'm not a lawyer, but I would say that is tantamount to obtaining funds fraudulently

I posted these same questions to your blog. You not only did not approve them, you deleted the entire blog. And here you are at it again trying to distract everyone's attention from the fact that Access Ministries are liars and frauds.

C'mon Nicholas. No one believes that you're wearing any clothes here except you. Address the issues - we're not interested in your spin and damage control. Do you find Access' behaviour acceptable and do you think they are an appropriate moral role model for children? No more nonsense. Put up or shut up.

Dear franc hoggle. You are quick with the accusations.Either you are lying, or you just got things wrong. YOu said on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 4:06:22 PM:

"I posted these same questions to your blog. You not only did not approve them, you deleted the entire blog."

If you go to my blog now (16:17, 18/5)http://mindsplinter.org/2011/05/the-ages-reporting-of-christian-religious-education-on-line-opinion/

you will see your comment was approved and responded to by me at May 18, 2011 at 9:49 am- over 6 hour before your ill-informed rant.

I await your apology...

If Access Ministires are guilty of the crimes you suggest they are, I have full confidence in the appropriate government departments to intervene.

Nicholas, are you serious? Are you really saying this with a straight face? First, your followup post mentions the article, but links back here. Second, it does not appear in the index of your site blog posts. The only way to get to it in fact is to manually scroll through your page and know what you're looking for. I'll apologise about that bit, I did eventually find it - but I am curious why you avoid linking your own pages?

Your response there is the same evasion, the same babble about "rights" (which I assume is your "right" to mandatory "opt-out" only - thus enforcing your "right" to christianise children without full disclosure to parents), and a closing, Sophist academy award winning counter-punch that would make Loyola proud -

"I am interested to know how you justify your moral stance that fraud and deception are wrong."

Nice card trick and par for the course in Access apologetics. Were I to leap to conclusions I would counter that you evidently are implying that sacred taqiyya is right and decent. But I won't. You are, however, attempting to derail here by plunging into the depths of a philosophical argument that will still occupy people for millenia. However, try as you might to distract, the question here does not have any complexity you are trying to confuse is with. This is clear cut - [continued]

[Deleted for abuse]

Nicholas, a simple question for you.

Do you accept the statements made by Access and SU Qld (referenced earlier) regarding the use of access to schools to bring children to faith in Christ to be contrary to your claim that RE is not used to convert children?

As a refresher from the SU Qld website
http://www.suqld.org.au/home/index.php

"Welcome to SU QLD... We're the largest employer of school chaplains in Australia. What makes us tick is that we want to bring hope to a young generation. And we do this through our school chaplaincy service, camps, holiday programs and kids-at-risk programs. Please stick around to find out if we can help you or your family in any way.
Tim Mander - CEO, SU QLD"

http://www.suqld.org.au/about/index.php

"Working with the churches, Scripture Union aims:

a) to make God's Good News known to children, young
people and families

and

b) to encourage people of all ages to meet God daily through
the Bible and prayer

so that they may

come to personal faith in our Lord Jesus Christ,

grow in Christian maturity and

become both committed church members and servants of a world in need."

R0bert

Nicholas,

Careful, you'll break your violin. If anyone owes anyone an apology it is you. You should apologise to The Age and Jewel Topsfield. You are slurring them for doing what they are supposed to do as journalists - it's their job. To be our eyes and our ears - and a large part of that is uncovering corrupt, deceptive and fraudulent practices in government and the private sector. Worse, you are hinting that they are part of some octopoid, all-encompassing conspiracy to destroy christendom itself. That's the kind of thinking that's normally called "paranoid", with a good dollop of sheer narcissism in that you consider yourself to actually be that important.

In effect, when you sweep away all of the confidence tricks, deranged persecution fantasy and outright codswallop, all that you are really saying is that we should simply turn a blind eye to Access. That there is an exceptionalist case to be made for them on the grounds that they are really nice, devout churchy people - and that they are somehow above both the law and the social contracts that the rest of us have to live by.

That works really well, making religious organisations unaccountable to either government or rule of law. Just look at success stories like Iran.

franc hoggle- not sure what your issues are with the blog- both posts are on the front page.

I stand by what I said about Access Ministries:

"If Access Ministires are guilty of the crimes you suggest they are, I have full confidence in the appropriate government departments to intervene."

Beelzabubba:

YOu have not followed The Age's coverage of this issue if you think it is fair. The Age newspaper, which I have been an avid reader of for the 18 years I have lived in Melbourne, has foregone objective investigative journalism and has now moved into the domain of political advocacy and lobbying on behalf of Humanist groups and opponents of Chaplaincy and SRI. It is an alliance that should concern all for the reason that we look to such organisations to provide fair, factual, and balanced reporting of issues. But in recent times, The Age has published a 7-1 ratio of articles and opinion pieces concerning anti and pro arguments for SRI and chaplains. They have ignored the fact that both Labor and Liberal federal governments have supported the program, and they have failed to report that the vast majority of school principals are supportive and affirming of chaplains in their schools. This disturbing alliance of a credible media outlet and a lobby group must stop.

I thank everyone for engaging with my thoughts on this issue. I am signing off for now. Try to be kind and do unto others...Kind regards. Nicholas

"It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them."
Mark Twain

Nicholas you’re right. The Age actually has a long history of Christophobia – and it is one reason why I don’t buy the paper. Sales are right down. The good news? They are becoming more irrelevant in many parts of Victoria.

They have a culture of censorship and are now projecting onto others more militantly. I’d also add that they don’t treat their own workers fairly, so their poor treatment of Christian educators doesn’t surprise me one bit.

I'm assuming that you also think the chaplain of Melbourne Grammar(senior school) is Christophobic?

http://mike-stuchbery.com/2011/05/18/919/

"The problem begins at the basic philosophy of education. Serious Religious Educators have recognised that the context for religious &#8214;instruction&#8214; is the church and not school classrooms. The classroom is a place for reasoned, open and honest debate about religious ideas and an examination of how the spiritual dimension can affect human existence. The state school classroom is not the place for conversion or proselytising, and while Access Ministries would claim that‘s not what they do, I‘m afraid that is their default position and, when challenged, they will revert to that stance."

[Deleted for abuse.]

Nicholas, cherry picking Twain quotes is naughty. Ol' Sam would probably not have associated with the likes of your good self and Access Ministries.
The quote is an aphorism attributed to one of Twain's characters, Pudd'n'head Wilson. A bunch of the those aphorisms were collected in a calender and used a promotional gimmick for one of Twain's novels.
Given Twain's views on organised religion there could possibly be a hint of sarcasm in the quote. Clemens/Twain was probably a mild atheist or maybe a deist and to think you'd use a Twain quote to support your position is laughable.

I've got another Clemens quote for you. It came from his autobiography published recently:

"There is one notable thing about our Christianity: bad, bloody, merciless, money-grabbing, and predatory. The invention of hell measured by our Christianity of today, bad as it is, hypocritical as it is, empty and hollow as it is, neither the deity nor his son is a Christian, nor qualified for that moderately high place. Ours is a terrible religion. The fleets of the world could swim in spacious comfort in the innocent blood it has spilled."

I grew up in the non-denominational Christian school system. We had neither a chaplain, nor RE - it was the belief of the school that the church was in the best position to provide RE. I agree with this idea - one of the problems with having such a narrow band of approved organisations and material (including some which, looking at the Access Ministries website, is theologically unsound from a mainstream Christian perspective) is that Christian parents are denied the right, if they send their children to a government school, to educate their own children about religion or to send their children to a church which teaches what they believe, and not what some evangelical organisation believes should be forced down their children's throat, often without their express permission. The organisation has ducked and weaved when confronted with its own misdeeds in the public arena, and has not to my belief acted in a Christian manner. It is up to parents to decide this, and their wishes should not be violated by totalitarians in the Education Department and the likes of Access Ministries.

[Deleted for abuse]

[Deleted for abuse.]

[Deleted for abuse]

The religion itself isn't the problem - some of its purported followers who ignore or outright defy its core tenets are. The people from Access Ministries don't even seem to see the damage they're doing to the public perception of the faith through their "ends justifies the means" attitude to media management. It is a good demonstration, and not the first I've seen, of how corrupt institutional religion can become when a wad of money is waved in front of it.

[Deleted for abuse.]

I'm happy for my son to learn about different religions at school. He can then choose if he wishes to take any of them further outside of school.

Which part of this is difficult to understand?

I'm not happy that religious preaching is federally budgeted into the school system on an opt out basis.

It should be opt in, at that particular religions expense and outside school hours.

There are plenty of religious schools around if people want their kids to have their brand of religion taught to them.

Which part of this is difficult to understand?

Hopefully the Section 116 court case will prevail and common sense will be restored.

When it comes to hatin' on black Christian men, I don't think that you could do much worse than FOX news, BPT.

The question is, is FOX news a white-majority atheist establishment organisation?

Glenn Beck's a mormon (yes it has an m), so your guess is as good as mine.

It is quite sad that discussions about religion consistently bring out the worst in both sides.

On one hand, we have Christians at their worst, insulting and belittling non-Christians. Generally speaking, those in this camp are embarrassing in their inability to construct a rational argument. They consistently help to prove the case against them.

On the other, we have non-Christians at their worst, insulting and belittling Christians. Apparently, we have sneaky plans to take over the world one child at a time and are the most bigoted people on earth. The standard Christian rebuttal to this argument tends to support it, rather than offering opposition.

The reality is that, if the most vehement posters in this and other religion-related threads took a look back over their posts, they would find that there is little difference between them. Christians and religious people in general are far from having a monopoly on bigotry; atheists are far from having a monopoly on arrogance and ill-manners.

Thankfully, there are many of us in both camps who work hard to put aside the vitriol and go about our lives in peace, trying to make the world a better place simply by living our lives as well as we can. If somebody who sees what I do, how I do it and why I do it decides to explore my faith, then that's fine. If that same person simply lives a good life without setting foot in a church, have I failed in my Christian duty to 'spread the word'? No. As recognised by the Catholic Church way back in the '60s, there are many routes to heaven - not solely through explicit acceptance of Catholicism. In essence, one can live a Catholic life without ever being a Catholic, and that is fine. Take heaven out of the equation and you still have many good ideals to guide your life in a positive way. Sadly, so many of the Christians who attack 'heathens' and 'heretics' fail to live by these ideals. Perhaps they need to discover their own faith before insulting those who don't share it.

" If somebody who sees what I do, how I do it and why I do it decides to explore my faith, then that's fine."

That's exactly was is NOT happening at the moment. One evangelical Anglican organisation provides 97% of Special Religious Education and Chaplains into Victorian schools, and 98% of Chaplains supported through to National School Chaplaincy program are Christians from either ACCESS Ministries or Scripture Union.

I am happy to support your idea of letting you do your own thing and informing interested parties - this is why I support a secular education system, and why you should too.

It's a funny thing Otokonoko, there's heaps of people who live a Catholic life without being Catholic, but apparently are going straight to hell because of it.

I've never ceased to be amazed at how the True Believer's God is always so perfectly in agreement with the True Believer.
Posted by Grim,
Amazingly It is the other way around. The believer in God, is trying (with God's help) be in perfect agreement with God. Hence Prayer and Bible reading. The Christian world view is from God view not our own.

Darwin's theory of evolution is just that.. a THEORY. Darwin had many arguments with the church leaders of his time about publishing his work and due to the expansion of print media his theory has been spread far and wide.
By the way according to Darwin’s son, towards the end of Darwin's life he turned back to God and regretted developing his theory. But the scientific world has run off with the "THEORY" as if it is gospel truth.

God's signature is everywhere in creation so how can anyone say they can't see God or ask where is God?
Yes, God the Father is invisible, God the Son,(Jesus) is God who made himself visible and God the Holy Spirit is God working in men. Yes, one God with three natures. Similarly, I am a mother, a sister and a daughter. One person 3 roles.
God created Adam and Eve and it "WAS" good. God walked and talked with Adam and Eve. God did not walk away from that relationship it was Adam and Eve who separated from God-they hid........ . Genesis. God’s INVITATION today is to return to a relationship with Him through His Son Jesus. Cont... next post.

In Queensland bible reading has always been allowed in schools. Schools have never been totally "Secular".
Chaplaincy in schools is always begun at the community. Chaplains are not appointed to schools unless there is a ground swell from the community. So no Christian is imposing their religion on anyone in the schools. SU facilitates Yes and isn't that fantastic that there are some checks and balances in place. How could the schools provide the time to manage the whole process? SU has many volunteers to assist and then each community requesting a chaplain has the best management process in place as SU overseas the whole state rather than each school "re-inventing the wheel" so to speak. Absolutely brilliant.

By the way, I am a Christian and I detest the term religious.
I am not religious - to me religious can be all about showiness, rituals etc. it does not reflect the heart. A Christian has a heart for God, an obedient, heart and they are more interested in their walk before God than what "men" may say about them.
God is the God of individual hearts and the God of the Nations. The Government is on Jesus shoulders and God has appointed Jesus to be the Judge of every heart at a future time. As I have said before even though some might like to "believe" schools are secular they are not God is still there. He is not a God just for the Christian schools He is God of ALL. It is not about evidence and facts if is about faith. In fact science is starting to prove the bible and many historical events confirm biblical events. Lets let a little LIGHT into the world.
Jesus is the Light of the world.

[Deleted for abuse]

Bugsy, that may be the stance of many people who call themselves "Catholic", but it is not a stance supported by the Catholic Church. Lumen Gentium - one of the more enlightened offerings of the Catholic Church in recent history, in my opinion - acknowledges that many live according to Gospel values without knowing the Gospel (http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html). This document asserts that these people are also worthy of salvation - in short, their lack of religion (or following of other religions) does not prohibit them from entering heaven. Articles 15 and 16 deal with this.

Obviously, there are many who have no interest in entering heaven, often because heaven is not part of their belief system. The Catholic Church does not expect them to change this, but still holds the belief that the gates of heaven are open to these people. The key is to lead a good life - not necessarily to be explicitly and devoutly Catholic.

I consider this document to be enlightened because, despite including lengthy Bible extracts and theological analyses, it acknowledges two important things:

1) Belief in God alone is not enough for salvation. Salvation comes to those who lead good lives.

2) Atheism alone is not enough for damnation. Damnation comes to those who unrepentantly lead bad lives.

While we can debate the extent to which a Catholic life is a "good" life, surely we agree that encouragement to live properly rather than simply going to Church each Sunday is a good thing?

By the way, askegg, I, like you, am fully supportive of secular education. Certainly not to the extent that religious education should be banned, but I believe that it is proper for state schools to be entirely secular.

Oh, good for them. What a progressive organisation.

I didn't realise they were so 'new age'.

Atheists in heaven?
Awesome.

Nice, Bugsy. Rather than finding fault with anything that is said, you ridicule those who say it. In your own words, I guess there's no pleasing some people.

Oh I'm sorry, do you feel ridiculed?

Oh dear.

No, Bugsy. I don't feel ridiculed. If ridiculing me was your intention, you failed dismally. A more successful approach would be to highlight the flaws in what I have said.

As a matter of fact, if ridiculing me was your intention, it raises serious questions about your capacity for intelligent and mature discussion.

I keep gettin emails telling me there are more commments. So one last post:

Just for the record:

I don’t support covert or manipulative attempts to get people to believe something. When people have positions of influence and trust over minors, they need to be especially careful not to do this. My point was simply that people should be free to learn about Jesus if they so choose, and become a follower if they so choose.

I have read the Age for many years and trust it as a source of robust journalism. But he reporting in The Age has not been fair or balanced on the chaplaincy issue. It has been advocacy and lobbyng with the promotion of websites of anti-chaplaincy groups and stifled voices. For example, a cartoon from a SRI class was published with the headline “Teacher fury over God comic”. This is the same newspaper that (rightly) took an editorial decision to not publish certain cartoons in 2006 in order to not offend a religious group. I agreed with them then, and I only wonder why they moved away from that stance when it came to Christians groups.

I agree that religion, or any worldview for that matter should not be forced upon people, as this would contravene the teachings of Jesus. But I am not convinced that this is the heart of what chaplains and SRI are doing. Sure, there are rogue elements in every organisation. As I have said on my own blog, if providers have failed in their contractual obligations then the appropriate government departments will address it. And in this I completely respect the right of parents to withdraw their children from SRI.

Continued-

-continued

I understand the challenge it is for parents to opt-out their children from SRI, and I am not against an opt-in system, where parents choose for their children to do SRI. But I don’t see how this deals with claims of division and exclusion. Either way some students will opt in and some won’t. You will still have a situation where children are divided. I understand the concerns, however, I am not sure the solution of opt-in resolves it.

Finally, I know this will only invite further insults, but I am astounded at the nastiness and vitriol that has been evident in the comments, and on other blogs. I have no problem with people disagreeing and many have made some great points and helped to clarify my thinking. But is the best way to have a conversation by hurling insults, cheap shots, false accusations, and character slurs? For example, one comment called me a criminal. Does that person really think I should go to jail for publicly expressing an opinion? Then there was the person who decided I was some right-wing nutter due to my blog having a picture of Jesus on the cross. The image is from a work of modern art called “Crucifixion” (circa 1945) by 20th century English painter, Graham Sutherland (1903-1980), and is held in the Vatican. Is having art on your blog equal to being an extremist?

This is exactly why I think students need to be free to learn about Jesus. He showed such grace to his enemies, taught about being kind and compassionate, about forgiving and loving others. It is pretty obvious that even those who believe in him and seek to follow him have a hard time coming near his example. But is the answer to assign him to the scrap heap? Who would teach us such things and give us a worthy vision to follow? As infuriating as that may be to some, none of the replies from my post has attempted to refute the powerful and inspirational example of Jesus. So I say again: why remove him from society?

Sandpiper: "Darwin's theory of evolution is just that.. a THEORY."

I wish you folks would stop using words you have absolutely no idea about. This is what happens when scientific illiteracy becomes endemic in a society, caused mostly by nonsense such as Access CRE. Coherence ceases. Even 20 years ago, the averagely educated person would never use the term "theory" as cheaply and as tritely as you do, because basic high school science explains "theory" in terms well beyond your common pocket dictionary. This nonsensical misrepresentation is what is known as equivocation. You know that when someone like you misuses the word "theory" in this manner, any hope of having an equal and two way dialogue is simply impossible. You are dealing with a broken unit. Nothing to see here, move along.

Sandpiper: "God's signature is everywhere in creation so how can anyone say they can't see God or ask where is God?"

Indeed. This usually manifests as pareidolia (finding jesus in a piece of burnt toast) and apophenia (finding meaningful connection in completely unrelated data) - spooks love spontaneous cancer remissions that coincide with prayer, even though cancer remission happens all the time with or without spooks. You could draw an equally significant statistical link between remission and black cats given the time and the funding. Of course this kind of lateral observation is not likely to ever cross the mind of a "believer". Both of these phenomena indicate minds that are really not up to speed at interpreting observed data intelligently. Of course, religious types tend to call them "saints" or some similar nonsense.

And if you want to talk about god's love, maybe you should ask why Zahra Baker has had the phenomenal run of "love" that she has. It's kind of what I would label a "reverse miracle" were I into making up nonsense for stuff I was too lazy to think about. No I won't tell you who she is. Get thee to google.

But then again, you really shouldn't be allowed on the internet if you are this befuddled with nonsense and ill education.

At least if the children hear about Jesus they can then make an "informed" decision as to whether they believe in Him or not.
Anyhow, nobody can MAKE anyone else believe in God.
Jesus warned His disciples about stopping the children from hearing Jesus speak.
The disciples thought the children would be bothersome but Jesus clearly corrected the disciples. This is still true for today just look at this debate.

Sandpiper: "Jesus warned His disciples about stopping the children from hearing Jesus speak."

If hearing about jesus is as critical to your children as you are telling us it is,

and,

the only way that your children can hear about jesus is at school,

then,

>>>YOU are a derelict parent<<<.

Your logic, it burns me, oh yes it does. You are simply beyond belief. How can you be so intellectually vacuous? You are truly beyond repair.

For example, a cartoon from a SRI class was published with the headline “Teacher fury over God comic”. This is the same newspaper that (rightly) took an editorial decision to not publish certain cartoons in 2006 in order to not offend a religious group. I agreed with them then, and I only wonder why they moved away from that stance when it came to Christians groups.

Posted by Nickosjt, Thursday, 19 May 2011 10:58:33 PM

That is a very false analaogy.

One presumes you are referring to the Mohammed cartoons.

The cartoon you referred to vilified teachers, and was a cartoon produced by a Christian and published by a Christian organisation. The Age article was about the vilification of teachers by Christians, not about the vilification of Christians or to vilify Christians.

Double thinking producing 'special pleading'.

"I agree that religion, or any worldview for that matter should not be forced upon people, as this would contravene the teachings of Jesus." So why do you special plead for that in your article? -

"why shouldn’t children have the right to learn about Jesus"

"Fifthly, what about proselytising? Everyone does it."

Nick, you are sticking to your original propaganda which has been thoroughly debunked. For someone criticizing the Age for irresponsible journalism, you are pretty immune to the facts yourself.

"this is exactly why I think students need to be free to learn about Jesus ... is the answer to assign him to the scrap heap?"

Nobody is inhibiting children's freedom to learn about Jesus. We have advocated something better than 'opt in' system for religious education which would achieve exactly what you don't want - a proportion of kids would not learn anything about religion. Instead we suggest that *all* children participate in an academic course in which the world's major religions and philosophies are discussed. That way *all* kids would learn about Jesus and the basic tenets of Christianity.

As the curriculum would be academic, the children would probably not be taught that "God loves you more than your mummy", "Buddha is Satan's friend", "Evolution is just silly, isn't it? Who would believe God made people out of puddles!", "Homosexuals are perverts" and "Eat avocados, girls, they're good for your ovaries" - but then even you probably concur this wouldn't be a bad thing.

A common misconception is that kids are being taught some benign form of Christianity. They're not. They are being taught a pernicious, nasty form of fundamentalist Christianity which favours discrimination and hate, is anti-science and has theocratic aspirations.

That's not the Christianity most Australian Christians embrace - but that's what we've let into our schools. That's why theologians like Scott Stephens from the ABC, Professor Gary Bouma and even the chaplain from Melbourne Grammar senior school are speaking out against it.

What we suggest does not 'throw Jesus on the scrapheap'. It elevates him to the level where his story is taught by trained teachers and his teachings will be fairly represented and carefully discussed in a serious manner. Kids won't be sprawled on the floor colouring in Jesus on the cross. They won't be bribed with lollies to attend. They will learn more and gain a deeper understanding of those things you hold dear.

Nickosjt wrote: "I don’t support covert or manipulative attempts to get people to believe something. When people have positions of influence and trust over minors, they need to be especially careful not to do this."

Excellent! That's great news that you no longer support these actions by Access Ministries. I hope you are now more vocal in your opposition to the lies and manipulation of this organisation.

DJ

[Deleted for abuse.]

It's difficult to correlate the competing strands within the current set-up to the guidelines in place for the promotion of Christianity outside of a church setting.

From the Victorian Government Education website:

"Only instructors who are accredited by and coordinated through ACCESS Ministries (previously known as the Council for Christian Education in Schools) should be permitted to deliver agreed Christian Syllabus...."

This from the NSCCC Chaplaincy Code of Conduct:

"While recognising that an individual chaplain will in good faith express views and articulate values with his or her denomination or religious beliefs, a chaplain should not take advantage of his or her privileged position to proselytise for that denomination or religious belief."

From Evonne Paddison's speech:
"Never before have we had such open access....Christians from other countries envy our opportunities, they can't believe we have this situation. I believe this is the greatest field we have in Australia: our children and our students. Our greatest field for disciple making.
What's your strategy...."

It is patently obvious that the so called christians will not give an honest answer to any of the questions raised.

Their sole mission in life is to preach and convert others to their way of thinking. Anything that gets in the way of that including the truth is shrugged off as the ends justify the means.

There has been so much un-christ-like behaviour that it has removed christianity as the issue. The only motive is political.

You cannot tell a goat to not be a goat, so there is no point in getting upset.

Hope you don't mind me cross-threading this link Ammonite. Absolute Classic:

http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/outreach/tracts/may21/

It's Judgement Day tommorrow so I'm off to Dan Murphy's for some champagne and then off to my armourer for a scorpion proof suit.

P.S. My wife is very pleased she gets to celebrate her birthday before the big scorpion in the sky gets her.

[Deleted. Refers to earlier abusive posts by another commenter.]

[Deleted for abuse.]

Having survived the rapture I found another evil article from that instrument of the devil, The Age:

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/priest-urges-end-to-forced-religious-education-20110521-1exyv.html

BTW I hear Harold Camper is being consoled by his followers saying "it's not the end of the world Harry".

So long since I have heard of The Age, I forgot it existed. Soon to go the way of The Argus. Their flagging sales needs someone to berate in a non-election year I suppose.

I hear Harold is not a happy Camper.