The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Pollies in a spin over chaplaincy challenge > Comments

Pollies in a spin over chaplaincy challenge : Comments

By Chrys Stevenson, published 2/3/2011

The High Court challenge on school chaplaincy is about funding, not whether the program can survive, despite what politicians tell us

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
There is no doubt in my mind that Wilson and Dick are not only using spin in regard to the High Court Challenge, they are being deliberately deceitful. Politicians and political commentators sometimes bemoan the fact that most Australians are apathetic about politics. Why wouldn't any sensible person be apathetic about politics in this country? On almost every issue the two major parties manage to take opposing positions, and mount seemingly convincing arguments supporting their positions. Often people don't have the information to judge who is right, but they are smart enough to know that they can't both be right and that both sides are applying large doses of spin. Usually the issues involve considerable uncertainty or they are matters requiring subjective judgement, so when politicians take dogmatic positions people know they are not being honest. Sensible people simply stop listening, or at least stop believing anything politicians say.

The granting of monopolies to faith-based organizations to provide chaplains to state schools and the requirement that only people who belong to a faith-based organization can fulfill this role is both morally and legally wrong. It is morally wrong because it discriminates against people who do not belong to a faith-based organization. It is legally wrong because it contravenes Section 116 of the Australian Constitution. By stating that the Australian government should not pass laws establishing any religion and should not impose any religious test for holding public office, Section 116 makes it quite clear that the writers of the Constitution intended that religions should not hold any position of privilege in Australian society. However because of the somewhat imprecise wording of Section 116 governments have always felt that they could safely ignore it. Nevertheless, the chaplaincy program as it now stands, the teaching of religious instructions in state schools, the funding of faith-based schools and tax breaks for religious organizations all contravene the Australian Constitution.
Posted by Neil of Ipswich, Friday, 4 March 2011 12:06:29 PM
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
There is a tendency to see any comments about Chaplaincy as anti-religion. Surely Christians and others must see the perils in a too close relationship between State and Church.

The government should not be about dictating personal beliefs into the wider school system IMO. Religion is not something that should be pushed overtly or implied through these programs.

As a parent I would not want to see any sort of religious representative in public schools whether it be Imams or tarot card readers, even if many might make good counsellors in their own right without representing any particular group. That is not the same as implying people are not free to choose these lifestyles for themselves. It is not an attack on Christianity - please keep some perspective.

It is hypocritical when some from Christian lobby groups then argue against secular ethics classes or like the following:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/nonreligious-chaplains-idea-angers-christians-20110212-1ardz.html

Why are we even having this discussion in an enlightened age? Keep religion out of schools. Many professional counsellors may have religious leanings themselves but they are employed for counselling purposes without the pressure or implications of representing their creed. The role of cousellors should not be proselytism.

Bottom line is there have always been school counsellors, what was the impetus establishing a Chaplaincy Program, why not just fund more quaified counsellors.
Posted by pelican, Friday, 4 March 2011 12:53:55 PM
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
Unfortunately a lot of state schools are religious environments even without chaplains and the other Christian programmes. My kids have been at schools where well over half the teaching staff are aggressive Christians. Neither is this an accident; staff are often hired based on this tacit credential if the principal is so minded. This is not gossip, but from the horses mouth, that is from a very experienced deputy principle and teaching staff I'm friendly with.
RI is also commonly foisted on kids whether they've signed up to it or not, based on the spurious protocol that they must opt-out.
If kids were trotted off to RI based on their explicit request, the whole nonsense would quickly become an elective due to lack of interest.
But RI is often maintained via such unethical means. Classroom time is turned over to these doctors of spin and the little heathens are sent to twiddle their thumbs in a corner, even in the same room! Told to close their ears perhaps.
Such travesties have gone on long enough. No more institutional religious opportunism in schools and teachers, to the best of their abilities, should leave their ideologies at the gate.
Learning should be facilitated in places of education, not manipulated.
These ought to be ethical truisms, and not federal or state political stakes.
Posted by Squeers, Friday, 4 March 2011 1:46:13 PM
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
Here's my view (not necessarily focussing on QLD as I live in Vic.):

Parents should have a big say in their kids education. If a particular program enjoys popular support in a local community then why stop it? 

What percentage constitutes popular support. 51%, 75%, 98%? I'm not sure. But I don't see why a minority should stop a popular program. I don't think democracy is the tail wagging the dog. 
Posted by Dan S de Merengue, Saturday, 5 March 2011 9:08:02 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
Dear Dan,

Programs whether popular or not must conform to the law of the land. The suit is to determine whether such funding is consistent with the law of the land as embodied in s. 116 of the constitution.

The rights of all must be protected. The public schools are for all children not just for Christians or those whose parents approve of the chaplaincy.

Justice is not served by adopting a popular course. It is served by observing just laws and protecting the rights of all.
Posted by david f, Saturday, 5 March 2011 9:28:49 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
I would add to that, David, that such popular determinism shows zero regard for the child. We have to get over the mindset that we have a right to manipulate a child's intelligence. We ought to regard children as our equals in all bar experience. That single inequality that exists between us is thus hardly an ethical target for manipulation.
Whatever its age, that constitutes a person's life in the world, with no guarantee there's more to come, and should be uniquely respected.
Religion should be "opt-in" in life in general, and especially when it comes to children!
It's nothing less than disgraceful to impose our nonsense on childish innocence as if it was our right. Not even parents have the right to brainwash their kids, rather they should point out dangers and help them to adapt to their environment thoughtfully, creatively and for themselves.
If we brought kids up that way, I very much doubt the world would be in the shocking state it's in.
Those who patronise and pervert children, with their perverted dogmas, should hang their heads in shame!
Posted by Squeers, Saturday, 5 March 2011 9:50:52 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy