Christopher Pyne, a staunch Christian, is now reviewing the national education curriculum. He has appointed like minded people to conduct the review, Kevin Donnelly (a former religious Liberal party chief of staff), and Ken Wiltshire (a strident critic of the current curriculum).

Christopher Pyne has obviously appointed people who will provide the result that "Christopher Pyne" wants.

Kevin Donnelly has now been talking on TV about how religion should be taught in our schools, with a strict emphasis on Christianity. He has also talked about how people consider the sexual practices of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people to be "unnatural". He wants Australia's "Western heritage, and Judeo/Christianity" to be emphasised in schools more.

This Liberal/National coalition government is run by Christian fundamentalists like Abbott (ex trainee priest), Scott Morrison (member of the evangelical Pentecostal sect), Hockey (strict Roman Catholic), Pyne (another faithful and strict Roman Catholic), Barnaby Joyce (a radically conservative religious fundamentalist) .... the list goes on and on and on.

It's *obvious* from public comments made so far by the people involved, that this curriculum review will be used to get religion, meaning primarily traditional "Christianity", preached more as a "subject" in schools. It will be integrated with a new emphasis on Westernised Christian values and history.

Then their coup will happen ... through the back door I bet they'll insert Christian creationism into the curriculum.

Their dream will now be complete. Our schools will be more Westernised, more Christian, more "white" centric and the Liberals and Nationals will be celebrating.

'they'll insert Christian creationism into the curriculum.'

sorry PJack to many god deniers and those who hold to the irrational faith of evolution for that to happen in the public zoos.

PJack, I share your concerns.

Just as our country was moving on nicely towards a more sane, secular society, we have the new Holy Liberal party pushing for 'Christian Reform'.
Shudder....

Unfortunately PJack, you may have noticed this forum is populated with a virtual plethora of Abbott loving conservatives, who will be positively salivating and flagellating themselves in delight at this last desperate push to hang on to the past.

If Pyne wants to teach his kids that human life began with Adam and Eve, whose kids must obviously have had to mate with each other to carry on the human race, then so be it.
But leave all the other kids out of that particular fairy tale please.

Keep religion out of schools. Shorten the reach of religion into the realm of social harm.
Wake up people this 2014, Superstition has no place here. Let's face reality, religious people are the most hypocritical & it is hypocricy that is the root of so much injustice & misery.
Make Australia religion free & ban importing ancient superstition. Anyone wanting to live here officially abandons relifious beliefs by signing a statement to that effect.
Let education be for making people smarter not dumbing them down. We can see the folly of dumbing down on an hourly basis everywhere. It's not working. Just look around, past your bank statement & see what's happening to our society all because of religion. Religion is crap, bury it !

@PJack,

<< Our schools will be more Westernised, more Christian, more "white" centric and the Liberals and Nationals will be celebrating>>

Well, we've had a couple of decades now where you and like minded have celebrated them being anti-Western, anti-Christian and anti-white --share the joy around.

@Susie
<<If Pyne wants to teach his kids that human life began with Adam and Eve, whose kids must obviously have had to mate with each other to carry on the human race, then so be it.But leave all the other kids out of that>>

Holy mackerel!

Look PJack, now you've gone and scared Susie, you ought to be ashamed of yourself!

There is zero to no prospect of Adam and Eve being taught in state schools in place of --or even in conjunction with --evolution, Adam and Steve maybe, but definitely no Adam and Eve.

This whole thread is the result of post-election trauma that many in the left are experiencing right now:

Here's a snap shot of a typical lefty couple --on election night:

Partner A:
"What do you mean Abbott won...it wasn't supposed to happen this way". "Boohoo boohooo ..the ABC assured us that Abbott had no chance
boohoo boohoo ...it is the end of the world".

Partner B:
"We can fight this, we can overcome (gently massaging partner A's shoulder) get out there on OLO and spread some wild rumours"
Posted by SPQR, Sunday, 12 January 2014 7:19:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard

‘morning P Jack,

<< Is the Education Curriculum Review just a sneaky way to introduce creationism into schools? >>

Well obviously nobody knows the answer because it has not yet happened. So that leaves you with “speculation and alarmism”. That’s OK, we all have creative opinions.

But to speculate on what “might” happen and then launch into a credibility attack on the key players for what they “might” do is a bit rich. Obviously you feel threatened by them and their “potential actions”.

You fit the profile of a fellow traveler of the progressive caravan. You are all alarmism and rhetoric. Since this is what brought down the previous government, please feel free to keep up the good work.

I suspect your alarm is not so much about the end of the last government, more that you realize, albeit slowly, that this is just the “beginning of the end” for progressives.

Just so that you understand how much damage you are doing to your own ideology, I’ve included a link to all the alarmist rhetoric that is blamed on CAGW.

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm

Please feel free to have a little chuckle at yourself, although I fully appreciate that the loss spontaneity and humor are hallmarks of fellow travelers.

I don't believe that the Education Curriculum Review is
"just a sneaky way to introduce creationism into schools."

I think that Mr Pyne and other politicians within the
Party fully realise that we have a secular government in
this country (no official or state religion). That
religious laws have no legal status in Australia.
Therefore, introducing Creationism into schools would
not be wise - and would open up a whole pandora's box of
problems - which the current government does not need.
Other religious groups could then demand
the introduction of some of their teachings into schools -
and I'm sure
that neither Mr Pyne nor the current government would want
that to happen.

P Jack, there's something in your post which reveals a bias.
You say that this push toward "creationism" will make the schools more "White" and more "Christian".
First off, is it not the case that all religions teach that the world was created by divine intervention?
Secondly Christianity is not a "White" religion in 2013, quite the opposite, it's overwhelmingly a "non White" religion, you're actually describing Third World values in your condemnation of these (as yet unannounced) changes. So the values Pyne is promoting are more accurately described as "Brown" and common to all faiths, his stated aim is social inclusion and cohesion so this (as yet unstated) tactic makes perfect sense.
You have clearly hold an Anti White bias which prompted you to write this post, not a genuine concern over "creationism", presuming that you're even sincere (which 99% of Anti Racists are not) it appears that you know very little about the world around you.

It's actually quite sad,

The Loony left whingers have for 4 years made up wild and unsubstantiated predictions of what Abbott and the LNP would do, with a accuracy of 0%.

Perhaps this is brought on by the expectations labor set of doing exactly what they promised not to, and not doing what they promised.

So far the Coalition is doing exactly what it said it would.

Dear SM,

Let's try not to make this into a
Left versus Right debate.
Let's be better than that, and keep the
lines of communication open. Let's try
to rise above Party politics for a change.

Hell it might be even worse than they thought.

They might actually introduce some real education into the system.

Talk about horror, there "MAY" be no time available for all that lefty/aboriginal/green/bleeding heart/multiculirist pretend stuff they have shoved in over the last few years.

God imagine it, educated kids, instead of "rounded" [think left leaning] human beings coming out of our schools. The universities could close those remedial math/science/English classes they have to run now.

Sorry Foxy my sweet, there is no way the left/right/feminism can be removed from this particular debate, that is what is at the bottom of it.

Jay, I did NOT say "creationism will make schools more white". It's a greater emphasis on Westernisation within the school curriculum (which is proposed by Pyne) that will make the curriculum more white centric.

Foxy, the "creationism into schools" push within the radical elements of the coalition would fully realise it can't be achieved quickly. They would likely wait till after the next federal election, and then slip it into the curriculum under the guise of "history" or something similar (their new "politically correct" curriculum would have been firmly in place by then). Their creationism will be taught alongside evolution, as if they are both scientifically and academically equal.

Individual, was your post sarcasm/joking? Sounded like it. If it wasn't, then you should be informed that in a free, democratic society people have the basic human right to have any religious belief whatsoever. You have no right to force "your" opinion onto these people, or to forcibly stop those people from believing what they choose. Just as they have no right to force their belief onto anyone. You sound like your mind still exists in the Dark Age. Sad.

SPQR, you write that our schools are "anti-Western, anti-Christian and anti-white". Clearly you are on either cocaine or LSD, and I'd advise you to give up the drugs immediately.

Spindoc ..... this is not "speculation on what might happen". The curriculum review was only announced a day or so ago, and already (before the review has even started) we have public comments from the people involved that the purpose of the review is to increase the exposure to school children of (1) Judeo/Christianity ethics, (2)Specifically a much more "Westernised" view of our history. All the people involved are far right wing, extremely conservative, and all rigidly follow a very Westernised form of right wing Christianity. They couldn't have made their intention more clearer.

The FACT is -- Christopher Pyne handpicked 2 like minded individuals, who have theological and political views that are nearly identical to Pyne's views. This way, Christopher Pyne gets the results that Christopher Pyne wants from the review.

Dear Hassie,

All you have to do is watch Eddie McGuire's "Hot Seat,"
any day of the week to see how lacking this country's
education system has been. It's crystal clear that many
young people don't even seem to have a basic knowledge
of the geography and history of Australia let alone the world.
And consecutive governments have to take responsibility for
the current failed education system. There are qualified
professionals giving governments advice on what improvements
need to be introduced to the education system, but they
continously are either ignored or blocked. The most recent
recommendations by the Gonski Report (and I don't know the
full details) the current government chooses to ignore.
So what future does our younger generation have to look
foward to? Already on the international standing our
education system has dropped drastically.

P Jack, that's not how the last line of your post reads but let's put that down to poor writing.
"Westernism" isn't "White" either unless you're using both as pejoratives, ask any White Nationalist what they think of "Western" culture and the Liberal party and you'll get a string of expletives and the phrase "Race Traitors" will certainly make an appearance.
There are Indian Westerners, Chinese Westerners, Westerners from the Phillipines and every other country, in fact all the people who migrate here are basically Western before they step on the plane.
These days it's Multiculturalism which is only skin deep.

Furthermore, if the people migrating here do so to take advantage of a "Western" education system why is it a bad idea to make that system more focused on "Westernism"? Westernism is a common set of standards and a code of conduct which allows people to transfer from one part of the empire to another, it has it's own language, customs and protocols. So a person born in London,Mumbai or Beijing who is raised to be a Westerner can function equally well and have the same standard of living in any of the above locations. It's called globalisation P Jack, the Lib/Lab/Greens are all globalists.

amazing how many people are threatened by creation.Just because everytime you open your eyes you see design, creation and pattern should not threaten you so much. What the god deniers don't want exposed is their hopelessly flawed evolutionary faith. The new fundamentalist athiest are really frothing at the mouth. Its bad enough for them that their other fallacy (man made gw) has been exposed as a myth.

Jay, I'm referring to European centric Westernisation (I thought that was obvious considering the context of the thread subject matter). But clearly that went over your head, and I'm happy to now clarify it so you can comprehend). No need to thank me.

Currently we have a reasonable balance, regarding historical accuracy, in the school curriculum. Truthful Aboriginal history, and the complexities of mutliculturalism and migration, are NOT hidden away from school children like they were in the ignorant past of political correctness.

Pyne wants the old political correctness restored to our school curriculum, with a MUCH bigger emphasis on European centric Westernisation coupled with Pyne's version of Judeo/Christianity. It's political correctness gone mad.

PJack,

<<SPQR...Clearly you are on either cocaine or LSD, and I'd advise you to give up the drugs immediately>>

No doubt the voice of experience ...I couldn't believe some of the stuff they were teaching either when I first heard it.

Tell you what, next time you're in Sydney let me know and I'll take you around to some of our premier educational institutions and you can have a listen in, you will conclude that either they are stoned--or you are.

Foxy,

"Let's try not to make this into a
Left versus Right debate."

Are you kidding? Did you read the blatantly party political crud in the opening post? Pjerk cannot be that stupid to believe that. It is yet another straw man made up by the left whinger Pjerk in the same vein that Juliar was trying to intimate that the coalition would ban abortion.

There are too many liberals in the coalition to let that happen.

Dear SM,

I was appealing to you because I have every confidence
that you're better than that. We can't be responsible
for the actions of others - only our own, and a New Year,
is a good place to make that start or at least try.

I see that Shadow Minister is name calling.

When they do that they know they've lost the debate.

Sorry Foxy my sweet, I don't watch Eddie McGuire's anything, but I'm not surprised. Those so called qualified professionals you mention, mostly feminists, have pushed so much garbage in to the system there is no time left for teaching facts. Haven't you heard, facts are testable, so a very dirty word from the feminists point of view. Girls do better without any facts to stuff up a good story.

The Gonski Report is just another union push for more money, nothing to do with improving education. Everyone knows our kids learnt more 30 years ago, so a simple return to the curriculum a teaching methods then in vogue would be a good start.

I could say a return to the pay rates of 30 years ago would be a fair thing, with the lousy effort most current teachers are doing, at least then the pay would reflect the quality of the teaching.

In the 50s, every kid of 10 could draw a map of Oz, with states, cities rivers, & main geographical features, or they would wish they had bothered to learn. Today I doubt most school leavers many could do more than tell you where the best pot was grown.

Rather than throw more money at the clowns, we should be reducing rumination to match results.

Hasbeen, writing endearments every time you reply to Foxy is a bit condescending, and quite frankly, getting a bit creepy.

A return to the good ol' days of '50's education would be less than useless in our current world Hasbeen.
It has all changed now out there in 2014, if you care to look.

I'm wondering whether it is the far reduced amount of one-one time that parents get to spend with their kids these days that could account for lack of Mathis, reading or spelling skills in some kids.

Mind you, with the widespread use of computers and calculators these days, kids only have to learn IT to access spellcheck etc.

One thing for sure, the very last subject that should be made mandatory in public schools is anything at all to do with religion.
That subject can be studied in history...

I can just imagine a 1st year science class. in a public school. Brother Christopher has taken over the class from that blasphemer The Science Master Mr Dithers who had 30 years experience.

Br C; Now boys (only males in this school, girls don't need an education to be good wives and child bearers). tell me how long did it take to create the Earth?

Hands shoot skywards.

Br C; Billy Blogs.

BB; 4 billion years, brother.

Br C; Blogs you idiot! go to the dummies corner. I'll cane you later.

Br C; Anyone else... Pius Peter.

PP; 6 days brother.

Br C; Why was that Pius Peter.

PP; Because on the 7th day God rested.

Br C; Very good answer Pius Peter, come to the front and get a holy picture. The rest of you get your bibles out and start studying the great flood for next weeks science quiz.

God Suse, with your math, perhaps we do need to go back to the 50s. When even my youngest kids went to school 30 years would take us back to, wait for it, 1984.

Even my kids learnt that much math, you must be from one of the last batches Suse, to get it that wrong.

Oh & Suse, jealousy is a curse. You should resist it.

[Deleted for abuse.]

>>Is the Education Curriculum Review just a sneaky way to introduce creationism into schools?<<

They can run it up the flagpole to see if it flies. And I've little doubt that in some schools it will... but they're probably the sort of schools already that pay little heed to the curriculum at it currently stands.

It won't fly in government schools (who educate the majority of the children) and it won't fly in the Catholic private schools (who educate the biggest slice of the minority). It may fly in some kooky weirdo private schools that teach abstinence from dancing as best-practice sex ed.

I don't think it behooves one to worry too much about that breed of nutter when there are far more dangerous nutters to worry about.

Cheers,

Tony

Hasbeen, "In the 50s, every kid of 10 could draw a map of Oz, with states, cities rivers, & main geographical features, or they would wish they had bothered to learn."

Didn't you mention the '50's? Yes you did.
Try reading what you wrote before having a go at me Hasbeen.

PJack, lol, sounds interesting but I think I will pass...

Tony, the "creationism" thing is something I'm using primarily to get more attention to the thread, especially from the religious fundamentalists.

The "real" problem is not that they'll try to get creationism into schools. but their admitted agenda to "Westernise" the curriculum. In other words, to reinstate the old time educational political correctness from the 50s curriculum where multiculturalism, migration, diversity and a full and frank account of aboriginal history are pushed way into the background, almost as if they don't exist. Pyne and co. want a European centric Westernisation view of Australia's history to predominate, and it's accompanying Judeo/Christian version of Australia's history. Pyne has already admitted that he will be forced to give at least what I describe as "token" acknowledgement of the truthful Aboriginal history. But that's all we'll get from him -- "token".

If these 3 people (Pyne and his 2 puppets) succeed, our school curriculum will be ruled by political correctness that pays homage to 1950s Australian social and religious values.

@ P Jack,Sunday, 12 January 2014 7:24:59 PM

Just taking Professor Ken Wiltshire for example, what evidence do you have to suggest he is Christopher Pyne's "puppet", who would be "praising [his] Lord and Savior should that happen (and probably speaking in tongues too)"?

Professor Ken Wiltshire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Wiltshire

P Jack,
Don't try and patronise me, why write the word "White" if you're not trying to make a point about my ethnic group? So now you're using the word "European" to try and weasel out of a jam, in case you haven't noticed we don't live in Europe, we don't live in the West, we live in the South.
I take you point about political correctness though but it seems the best solution and the one I'd favour is the abolition of state sponsored arts, civics and humanities education in all tiers of education. I have kids at school, one in grade six and one in year ten, they hate humanities, it's seen by the kids as a waste of time and they learn nothing of value from the units. FYI they still teach the same dishonest "Black Armband", Anti White view of Australian history, mainly because the senior teachers still can't let go of the dogma they were taught in the 1980's. The younger teachers are somewhat less biased,for example my older daughter actually learned the truth about Communism and it's connection to the immigration story in Australia.

Onthebeach, it's interesting, and revealing, that you specifically chose Ken Wiltshire and not Kevin Donnelly.

Why did you do that? Here's why -- the religious and political opinions of Donnelly can easily be found in a 10 second internet search. They are splashed all over the internet. It doesn't read well, regarding his "independence". Whereas, it's much more difficult task with Wiltshire, as evidenced by his Wiki page that gives out zero information regarding his political and religious views. Therefore, you thought you "had" me. FAIL.

Tasmanian Education Minister Nick McKim said of the review, "Professor Wiltshire (as well as Donnelly) is ON RECORD as supporting compulsory religious education in schools". Ken Wiltshire has also publicly branded the curriculum as a "failure" in Jan 2013. He has also been publicly critical of Labor's educational reforms. Therefore, his religious and political bias is *OBVIOUS*.

I've also just come across a written statement from Kevin Donnelly from 2012, he wrote "Multiculturalism is based on the mistaken belief that all cultures are of equal worth". No doubt, he'll be injecting this version of political correctness into the review.

It's clear that Christopher Pyne, and his 2 puppets, will get the results that Christopher Pyne wants, from the Curriculum review.

Jay, *YOU* were the person who first wrote of a connection between creationism and white ethnicity. I then replied immediately that was incorrect, that I didn't infer that .. though you assumed I did, and that the connection was between Westernised European centric views and white ethnicity (haven't you seen all those paintings of a "white" Jesus?). You then didn't like it because I clarified my view by including "European" (I clarified it because you thought I was referring to people of Asian and Indian ethnicity).

The fact is that Christopher Pyne has chosen 2 like minded people who will provide the results that Christopher Pyne wants. That's obvious to all but the blind. PS: Please don't write a long, long reply saying that I'm now discriminating against the blind. Please. Pretty please.

P Jack,

Your reply is ridiculous. Your original allegations are entirely without basis it would appear.

Onthebeach, it's interesting that you couldn't refute even 1 specific fact that I presented in my reply. That's cool. You don't "have" to. It's not compulsory. Have a nice sleep.

>>I have kids at school, one in grade six and one in year ten, they hate humanities, it's seen by the kids as a waste of time and they learn nothing of value from the units.<<

It might just be their teachers, or the way it is taught. I didn't like my humanities lessons at high school but I liked doing my citizenship badges in Scouts... maybe we should have Scout Leaders teaching civics?

>> but their admitted agenda to "Westernise" the curriculum. In other words, to reinstate the old time educational political correctness from the 50s curriculum where multiculturalism, migration, diversity and a full and frank account of aboriginal history are pushed way into the background, almost as if they don't exist. Pyne and co. want a European centric Westernisation view of Australia's history to predominate, and it's accompanying Judeo/Christian version of Australia's history. Pyne has already admitted that he will be forced to give at least what I describe as "token" acknowledgement of the truthful Aboriginal history. But that's all we'll get from him -- "token". <<

I'm not convinced it matter so much what they teach, as how they teach it. Modern Western history contains the single best of example of why intolerance is bad, mmkay: the Shoah. Chuck in some Apartheid history and some Abolition history. Kids will quickly get the message that when one section of society comes to view another section as sub-human, atrocities will inevitably follow. It's not quantum electrodynamics. It's not even rocket surgery.

Cheers,

Tony

I did think twice before approving this post, but if I can approve posts on UFOs by Arjay, I guess this one can pass as well.

It's an extraordinary caricature of what Christopher Pyne and the Abbott government stand for. First there is this assumption that they are creationists. What's the basis for this? Well, they're Christians, so apparently that's QED. In fact Pyne, Hockey and Abbott, are all Catholics, educated by the Jesuits.

So is Barnaby Joyce (despite being described by the poster as a "radically conservative religious fundamentalist"). A-G Brandis isn't mentioned, but he's Catholic too, but educated by Augustinian priests.

The Catholic Church endorses evolution, and I'd be shocked if there is anyone in the cabinet who believes God created the world in 6 days. Certainly you wouldn't find that taught in any Jesuit school. You certainly won't find it taught in an Augustinian school - it was an Augustinian, Gregor Mendel, who discovered genetics.

Second, no-one is talking about introducing additional religious instruction into schools. Donnelly is on the record talking about increased knowledge of the world's religions, including Buddhism, Islam, Confucianism and Hinduism, not just Christianity.

The current curriculum mandates knowledge of Aboriginal spirituality and culture, so why not everyone else's?

It appears to me that this poster is strongly bigoted against Christians and is using this as an opportunity to vent his spleen.

>>I did think twice before approving this post<<

Why?

>>It's an extraordinary caricature of what Christopher Pyne and the Abbott government stand for. First there is this assumption that they are creationists. What's the basis for this? Well, they're Christians, so apparently that's QED. In fact Pyne, Hockey and Abbott, are all Catholics, educated by the Jesuits.<<

I've not mentioned Catholics. Or Jesuits, Augustinians, Franciscans, Benedictines or any of the other Catholic monastic or mendicant orders.

>>The Catholic Church endorses evolution, and I'd be shocked if there is anyone in the cabinet who believes God created the world in 6 days. Certainly you wouldn't find that taught in any Jesuit school. You certainly won't find it taught in an Augustinian school - it was an Augustinian, Gregor Mendel, who discovered genetics.<<

The Vatican Observatory, staffed by Jesuit priests, is in fact a very strong pro-science voice in the tiresome and pointless debate between science and religion. You won't find it taught in many schools but it was actually a Jesuit Priest, Georges Lemaitre, who first proposed the 'Big Bang' theory: his preliminary work was tidied up by other physicists who stole his glory.

>>It appears to me that this poster is strongly bigoted against Christians and is using this as an opportunity to vent his spleen.<<

It seems to me that you're reading much into my posts that isn't there. What's up with that?

Cheers,

Tony

Not talking about your post Tony. And thanks for the information on the Big Bang theory. I was referring to the original post. I think we probably agree on the likelihood of the government introducing creationism into schools - zero.

>>Not talking about your post Tony.<<

Sorry, mate.

>>I think we probably agree on the likelihood of the government introducing creationism into schools - zero.<<

It does seem unlikely: in all but the kookiest of kooky religious schools they'd never get it past the parents.

Cheers,

Tony

might not be taught by the god deniers however it is a thousand times more rational than evolution (whichever version they are up to).

>>might not be taught by the god deniers however it is a thousand times more rational than evolution (whichever version they are up to).<<

And right on cue we have runner, always happy to don his bit for the tiresome and pointless debate between science and religion.

Thanks, runner. What would the forum do without you?

Cheers,

Tony

sorry, that 'don' should have read 'do'

Cheers,

Tony

I would suggest we would be far more likely to see creationism taught in public schools before we are ever likely to see aliens anywhere, but both threads will generate plenty of discussion.

And isn't that what this forum is about...discussion?
I would hate to see any discussion thwarted on a religious basis.

Tony,

<<I'm not convinced it matter so much what they teach, as how they teach it>>

It's probably both --but it is more to do with what is taught.

Here are some recent examples:
1)"The Boat" by Nam Le is a collection of short stories from various locations around the globe. The lecturer zeroed in on one story which included the murder of a Chinese woman in a country town in Oz --the murder is only mentioned in about six lines of the story & in no way could be said to be even a major theme, even of that one story-- yet the lectures and discussions around the book centred on this one story which was held up as exposing white Australians racism and xenophobia.(Abbott's refugee policy also got a mention)

2) The film "Japanese Story" a Japanese executive/tourist visits Oz and drowns in the outback. Four critiques were endorsed --every one of those critics presented the film as an espose of white Australians racism and xenophobia (Abbott's refugee policy got a mention here too)

3) Another lecturer talking about the novel "Robinson Crusoe"saw great significance in the fact that Man Friday was portrayed as brown rather than African-black. According to her it was some sort of attempt to whiten things up. She was apparently unaware that the natives of the south Pacific were not African.

4)Another lecturer who had the name "doctor" as part of her title.Bemoaned the fact that Americans were still going on about the twin towers attack "It was outrageous". Yet she just loved to spruik American slavery, set Toni Morrison novels which usually include reference to slavery and cite W.E.B. Du Bois. She also professed that the British conquest of India was more destructive than any other--she obviously had no knowledge of the Mulsim conquests. (she also commented on Abbotts refugee policy)

And I could add more...

Now admittedly my examples are all from tertiary level, but with novels like "Rabbit Proof Fence" hot favourites, and multicultural days and sorry days being pushed I shouldn't think secondary would be any better.

As an old lefty, I have no trouble with considering Marx to be a product of the Enlightenment, and the Enlightenment a progressive product of a long and violent Judeo-Christian tradition.

While I'm a bit wary about teaching religious studies in schools, there certainly should be room for basic philosophy, ethics and morality, notions of justice and human rights, the nature of the universe, etc., from the earliest years, tailored appropriately for the age of children of course. As those important principles relate to the evolution of related religious ideas, then - good and bad - religion should be explained to children.

That would include, on the one hand, 'turning the other cheek', the good Samaritan story, 'love the sinner', attitudes to war and peace; and on the other, slavery in the Old Testament, and in the Koran, as it was practiced over the last few hundred years by ostensibly Christians and Muslims, and currently in much of North Africa by Muslims. Perhaps the notion of 'jihad' should be explained to children, the idea that non-believers (such as myself) should be put to the sword - perhaps children in higher years should be encouraged to ask themselves if lying and brutality are permissible in order to conquer the world and bring about one world under a god, the divine brought down to Earth, etc.

And for balance, yes, something should be taught about the massacres of out-groups in fascist AND 'socialist' societies, with parallels drawn about conquest-strategies between those 'Utopian' ideologies and more contemporary ones such as Salafism.

Just suggesting :)

Joe
www.firstsources.info

The common quite true statement
Do not pray in our schools and we will not think on your churches.
Is quite true and a good rule to abide by.

The education system needs to be overhauled.
The kids need the tools for life experience.
The teachers cannot teach in fact they cannot even spell or add up
Books that were once prescribed reading are now banned
White man killed the black man
Never the other way round
Truth has been executed along with the truth teller
Maybe we need God back in our schools
But not on God's terms

PJack,
Six day Creationism is not a part of Jewish / Christian ethics it is an aside.

The 10 commandments might be a part of ethics but they do not mention the 6 day creation. They teach equality and respect of all and aspirations for high ideals of character. Values that are sadly lacking in popular music, video games and so called entertainment. Violence, drunkenness, aggression and social destruction is the food fed to teenagers today in what they listen to and value.

In fact Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism and Christianity all teach divine intervention in the origin of all reality. That man has a responsibility and accountable for his being. Six day Creationist is just a red herring and not involved in Christian ethics. I attend Church regularly and only heard it preached once in the last ten years.

That Human society has purpose and responsibility is a Christian view of ethics rather than just an accidental emergence from mud with no higher purpose than existence to feed ones appetites.

Political correctness should be outed as well. Where is the science in feminism? Repudiation of science is the truth of it.

Amazed that Eighties feminist bores (more like razorback boars) ensconced in education promote 'alternative' (read as feminist), interpretations of Shakespeare, and put boys off literature forever by insisting they read Jane Austen (again from the hard line feminist perspective).

Maybe some here who are trenchant critics of religion can demonstrate why the elephant in the room, the Political Correct B.S., shouldn't suffer the same fate as religious studies? A return to the old school inspectors in guvvy schools please.

Chris,

A bit off-topic but your assertion that " .... White man killed the black man Never the other way round .... "

is not accurate, at least for South Australia. There were far more killings of whites by blacks (and blacks by blacks) in the early days than the other way around, at least from the official record. We could start with the killing of 28 whites, shipwrecked on the Coorong :)

And as for hangings, my colleague Alistair Crooks has been transcribing those from 1838 until 1964. The last Aboriginal man to be hanged in SA was in 1862, the last white man in 1964. The great majority of death sentences for Aboriginal people were commuted, especially those of Blacks killing Blacks. And in Alistair's transcriptions, only two Aboriginal boys, out of 57, were caned or flogged between 1910 and the 1960s, and that only for robbery rather than the usual sex crimes.

But your point about the truth is key to what kids should be taught, not ideology but reality and truth, evidence rather than assertion.

Joe
www.firstsources.info

I don't think Christopher Pyne is seeking to introduce creationism necessarily but it is concerning that religion is creeping back into schools more formally.

It seems for every step forward, the Libs move the country one step back each time they are in government. Labor was not much better with their decision to keep the Chaplaincy program, which highlights the influence of certain lobbies in Australia.

Australia is a secular society and if Christianity is taught in schools then to avoid discrimination there should be Islamic, Buddhist and all manner of other religious instruction. Why not just teach an overall history of religion and leave it at that.

The government should not be used by certain groups as an indoctrination tool for any religious agenda.

Much rather religion be a private and personal matter leaving governments, through the public schools system, out of it altogether.

pelican,
The development history of Australia is based on the views, passions and actions of its people. You might prefer to have any influences by Christians wiped from the history of Australia, but much of it was developed by people of the Christian faith; i.e John Flynn, Mary McKilop. Our early laws and justice was formulated by people of the Christian faith. Do you call that teaching religion in schools? Islam and Hinduism played very little in the development of the institutions of our society, though they want to bring about historical change today. The Afghan cameliers to the Northern territory may have been Muslim but that was incidental to their role in Australian History; It did not happen as a conviction of their faith, but as experienced desert dwellers.

Josephus
I am not disputing the influence of Christianity in our history. You may have missed where I also wrote about teaching religious history. Indeed a study of comparative religion is an important part of world history. This is very different from religious' instruction' which is nothing more than proselytising.

It is not about wanting anything 'wiped'. The use of this sort of language is emotional misdirect.

My own preferred state of affairs is to keep religion and state separate which is something for religious groups also fought and this is well documented throughout history.

Religion is a private matter and nothing to do with governments who act for all people especially within a multi-cultural society. The Liberal Party also promote multi-culturalism in their policies.

Pelican, that's right -- religion and government policy MUST be kept separate, otherwise as history shows, that will be the end of freedom.

The many Christian and Muslim theocracies throughout history have clearly displayed the violence, control, domination and inhumanity within these 2 religions, when it's let loose without control. Many other religions have also shown horrid brutality throughout history.

People have the absolute right to personally believe in gods and follow religions. They absolutely DON'T have the right to force the religious morality "they" believe in onto other people, via secular or religious laws. That results in the anarchy and brutality of religious theocracy.

We need to put the "factual" history of ALL religions into the school curriculum pertaining to actual History (the good, bad and horrendous). We need to remove the teaching of ALL religious instruction from the school curriculum. If someone wishes their child to receive religious instruction in the religion of their choice, then they can quite easily approach the authorities within that religion and arrange for the child's instruction and indoctrination. They have the right to do that.

Christopher Pyne, and his 2 puppets doing the curriculum review, want a specific type of morality ("their" version of Judeo/Christianity ethics) to be given more prominence ---- plus "their" version of Euro centric Westernisation to be more dominant. It's political correctness gone absolutely crazy.

On page 7 of this thread a person called GrahamY wrote this personally abusive, inaccurate quote about me, "This poster is strongly bigoted against Christians and is using this as an opportunity to vent his spleen".

GrahamY wrote that after, I repeat .. AFTER, I had written the following quote earlier on about religions and religious belief. GrahamY please read the following quote 10 times, then show you are man enough to apologize - - -

"In a free and democratic society people have the basic human right to have ANY religious belief whatsoever. You have no right to force your opinion onto these people, or to forcibly stop those people from believing what they choose."

GrahamY --- I await your humble apology.

(I wonder if he'll censor this post like the way he's censored other things I've written in this topic?). Hmmm.

There's no need for an apology PJack. You demonstrated bigotry in your first post. In the way you misdescribed and miscategorised a variety of people who happened to be Christians, and on the basis of this attributed an intention to them to introduce creationism into the school curriculum.

Just because you try and muddle it up by professing tolerance at some stage in a debate doesn't change your basic attitude.

Bigotry is defined as: "intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself."

synonyms: prejudice, bias, partiality, partisanship, sectarianism, discrimination, unfairness, injustice;
antonyms: tolerance

Your comments are predudiced, biased, partial and partisan, as well as intolerant, sectarian, discriminatory, unfair and unjust. Seems to cover the gamut.

[Deleted for abuse.]

Back to topic, PJack. Don't get too far up yourself.

The school curriculum, state by state: what needs to be revised, or dropped, or included ? 'Creationism' is a red herring.

Joe

Loudmouth, you should maybe realise that the opening poster has already advised in one of his posts that the 'creationism thing' was used by him in a sarcastic way to get the various OLO fundamentalists' attention. He just used it as a tool to get more attention for his topic.

His basic points are obvious if you read his posts properly. He seems to be saying we should keep religious tuition out of public schools, and let the churches handle that. He's also saying that the history of all the religions should be taught as a part of the history curriculum, including the bad things that the religions have done, not just the good things.

It seems he also thinks that Christianity should not be emphasised more than it currently is in the curriculum, and he says the same thing about our Western heritage, meaning our English, USA, European values. He obviously thinks we currently have the balance right with these things.

His language is a bit confronting for some here, but his actual expressed opinion (apart from the sarcastic creationism tug) is quite middle ground and makes a lot of sense. Don't forget that in Australia 'today' a right wing religious view of society and the country is very much a minority view, unlike back in the pre WW2 era.

GrahamY,
I have to ask the question;

Where is it a crime to be a bigot or predudiced, biased, partial and partisan, intolerant, sectarian, discriminatory, unfair or unjust?

Surely in censorship you expose your true self nature.

Wow all those good God fearing Christians looking out for our best interests and those of our childrens education. No doubt they will be slogging it out spending days conferring with parents, all over the state. To review the curriculum, and to address any concerns parents may wish to address. I have a sneaking suspicion that not many of the parents will be pleading 'oh my child will benefit so much from more religion classes'
If the suspicions are correct, I would seriously doubt the justification of those bulging pay packets and the other freebies the hand is accustomed to going out for. Allow those concerned and who will ultimately benefit, to have the ultimate say. It is the hard working families battling to to get by as well as get the best education for their kids. Listening to the people who you probably say a little prayer for every now and then wishing there were more you could do to make life less of a struggle.
As has been mentioned earlier religion is a personal choice. To push the idea of creationism onto a class room of possibly up to eight different faiths sounds like yet another stupid narrow minded idea. There are schools who cater for those needs. And telling a thirteen year old he is now going to learn all about god.
Good luck with that.
Im not a mum but spend alot of time with kids in their late teens in the work place. A few things they didnt learn :Appreciation, of anything. Respect for anything is pretty up there too. Respect your elders..oh i think thats long gone. To understand that $1000. a week should, without doubt last more than five days. The people you work with have responsibilities, mortgages, bills, and are not there to babysit feed and sympathize. A bit of self respect,hygiene a biggie. Respect for money, some poor single mum with kids struggles to survive on half of what you earn. Only ate half the pizza, dont throw it away. Wasteful, throw away, irresponsible bla bla. Boot camp in the curriculum.

I think GY was saying that he doesn't like trolls.

Was just reading up on the Catholic Church. Not alot of good going around. Lucky they are the richest institute in the world, regular million dollar compensation payouts...
Back to the subject, most kids these days arent dumb and to try and get them interested in something that may seem to them as believable as santa? As I said before dont like your chances.At a very early age maybe when they believe in santa too. Children whos families have taught them the story and practice the faith are more likely to enrol their kids in a catholic school, with the idea of a more thorough religious education.

Hi Jodelie,

Creationism in schools is not gonna happen. Let's look at more relevant issues, such as curriculum content and in-service teacher refresher courses, especially in basic literacy and numeracy, and parental awareness, so that, absolutely no child will be left behind, on the Dutch model, or the Finnish model. It's a tragedy that Bush & Co. hijacked that slogan.

Joe
www.firstsources.info

Dear ChrisGaff1000 it is a crime to be a bigot in Australia. See the laws on racial vilification. I don't think it should be a crime to be a bigot and we don't generally edit on the basis of bigotry.

We do edit on the basis of quality, and if all someone is offering is a low-grade rant, then there is a chance that they won't be allowed to start a thread.

That doesn't mean that a low quality rant will be deleted if it occurs in the course of a thread.

Censorship means that a particular view can't be presented. There is very little that we would censor, but we might require you to express yourself in reasonable language.

I approved PJack's piece of bigotry to start a thread, so I'm not sure what your complaint actually is.

The comment that I deleted from him was abuse of another commenter.

[Deleted. Arguing about moderation. Breach of site rules.]

Everyone has biases. All we can hope is that each of us look openly and honestly at what is being said and judge the intention and essence of the argument without knee jerk reactions. I certainly have read far worse than PJack's comments which, looking through it again, were mild and merely putting forward an argument.

I note over the various times I have visited OLO there has been no incidences that I recall where abuse directed to an atheist or a Green has been censored in the same way. However, in the interests of free speech letting comments stand often say more about the poster than the recipient (excepting of course highly abusive posts).

Offence is a funny thing. Someone may be offended by creationism another person offended that someone is offended by creationism. Are people these days too easily offended? Can one argue or challenge a point without being offended by the fact that others might disagree or have a different world view.

GrahamY,
I fear you are getting your views of the law mixed up.
Yes there are laws that make racial vilification a crime though it is almost impossible to prove since that requires a definition of vilification first and there is no codification of definitive vilification yet available the best the prosecutors can hope for is a guilty plea by some unsuspecting dunderhead.
Personally I believe there is nothing wrong with healthy racism provided it is the truth.
A black man is a black man and a white man is a white man.
They have proven differences in their brain capacities and their intellectual capabilities so to call a person a black bastard if they are black and they have no idea who their father was then that cannot be construed as being racist.
However having said that after 40 odd years as a law officer I have never come across a law that even mentioned the word bigot.
Perhaps you can enlighten me and the rest of the forum where we can read about these laws dealing with bigots.
As far as editing (censoring) based on quality and rantings I draw your attention to the scribings of one "One under God" whos meaningless prattling clutters up the whole board and only lead to dissent.

"

OUG has as much right to post his opinions as anyone else, chrisgaff1000. If you don't like his posts you can just ignore them or move to a different forum.

Dear Chris,

Why don't you Google the
Racial Discrimination Act? I'm surprised that as
someone who claims to be a law officer you seem not
to be aware of it as well as the fact that people
who enjoy the rights of free speech have a duty
to respect other people's rights. A person's freedom
of speech is limited by the right of others. All
modern societies including democratic ones put
various limitations on what people may say. They prohibit
certain types of speech that they believe might harm
the government or the people. We have laws against
libel, slander, public decency, and hate speech, and violence.
And as a law offcer you should be well aware of that.
And calling someone a "black bastard" just as calling
someone a "ni**er" today would not be acceptable to most
people.

Foxy and Mustard, we don't necessarily agree, but I think on this issue we are as one. I'm interested to see Chris's examples of "healthy racism".

I'm tempted to say "Gaff by name gaffe by nature", but I'll resist.

[Deleted. Breach of forum rules. You can argue about moderation with me, but not on the forum, as that leads to the issue of moderation being republished, defeating the moderation.]

Phillips there is a world of difference between criticizing the contents of a post and verbal abuse. One is debate and the other is trolling and spoiling the blog. If neither you nor Pjack can see the difference or failed to read the forum rules then don't be surprised if you get booted.

Seems the NSW Liberal Education Minister Adrian Piccoli, who is on a $43,000 tax payer funded "fact finding" mission to of all places Finnland, missed the meeting. Could that have been caused by the time wasted by Piccoli arguing with QANTAS staff at the first class book in counter, wanting to know why he had been booked into Business Class and not First Class. Piccoli knows how to spend a quid (taxpayers that is), seems his wife was also on the gravy train when the NSW taxpayer picked up the tab for her first class stay in Vietnam last November, this has been refered to the head of the Premiers Department for investigation. The kids might be missing out on the education dollars, seems Adrian Piccoli isn't.
I must say Piccoli's exploits for his wife pale into insignificance, almost, when you take a look at ex Liberal MP Alex Somlyay pay day for his better half. A mysterious Ms Donovan was employed by Somlyay in his office. Unfortunately Ms Donovan couldn't make it into work for 3 years but still managed to collect a hefty tax payer funded pay packet. And who is the mysterious Ms Donovan none other than Somlyay's cheese and kisses Mrs Somlyay.
A foot note, Somlyay was one of those high moral ground Liberal's who pursued Peter Slipper.

Paul1405,
My understanding is that the lady was working from home. Isn't that a modernism that Labor invented so the women could be closer to their children?

There certainly is a need for reminders in ethics within Parliament but I suspect the problem is worse the longer a person is in politics. That is the growing sense of entitlement and the more they feel it's okay once in a while to extend the boundaries a little more until we get what we see today. Complete conflict of interest and billing taxpayers for private activities. I really do wish the Lord's Prayer made a difference but alas, it seems not.

Rorting entitlements seems to be so normalised in Australia that many people, including the media report on it but there is little follow up and no referrals to the DPP. Or if there are referrals to the DPP they don't pursue any further. But get a member of the voting public person ripping of Centrelink and there is no hesitation. Why is the treatment different?

Chris, you know what I suspect Ms Donovan or Mrs. Somlyay or what ever her alias was, was doing for the tax payer for 3 years, judging by hubbies efforts in parliament for that time, NOTHING! except collecting a big fat pay packet.As a top notch investigator even you could gather the evidence for that one. Another Liberal, another snout in the trough.

Paul1405,
It wouldn't matter what side of politics was running the show there will always be those who believe they have more entitlements than the others.
Personally I think there is a rat in the closet but I also know that we don't have a big enough trap to catch them and if we do there are too many holes in the net for them to get out.
The first thing that has got to happen if for any complaint or suspicion to be investigated by an independent body outside the mechanics of the parliament and for that body to have a direct link to the DPP with powers to file a brief.
Then we have to find ju8dicial officers that will deal with the case without favor or fear and that will also be hard to find.
Thus Paul1405 I thing we are stuck with what we have.

Just ducking back to the original subject for a tick.
If this is the case, it is dishonest, and reeks of bible 'pushing'. Taking into consideration a strong Catholic following, bonding he and his cronies, maybe even self serving.
NO...
Pelican& chrisgaff1000 posts friday 17th.
How is this allowed to happen? Clear blatant rorting of entitlements and whatever else. Is there not someone honest who can step up and do whatever the hell they have to do to bring these crims up before the Department of Public Prosecutions? Or has this institution become one full of cover-ups and corruption also.
'lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil'
Independent DDP, non-government appointed lawyer, to present the cases to be prosecuted.
I cant think anymore and its probably not helping anyway. :)

Religion is neither necessary nor beneficial to the majority as a school subject.

One of the other subjects being shown alot if interest is 'Standing up to big booze'. First suggestion was to raise the legal drinking age.
20, 21, 22. Too late, kids are drinking in their early teens. Extra taxes, did nothing to deter teens before, or if it did only briefly. Annoyed the parents, paying extra for their own drinks and putting up with kids asking for or taking money.
Early education to nip it in the bud. Taught in class with no special teacher required. Information available on the net, local cops or individuals would be willing to volunteer a couple of hours a week for the cause.
Probably ages 10 -12 could be where to begin. Their brains are little sponges now and I dare say the subject will keep their attention. Maybe include mildly graphic video or pictures. We dont want to put the fear of God into them, but do want to instill all they need to know about the dangers of drinking too early. Avoiding alcohol until a lawful age, and responsible drinking and not succumb to peer pressure.