Religion in schools?
Only if the children a told the real truth of this new militant forced religious superstition by the shadowy groups behind it.
The reason for almost 2 millennium of constant religious genocide and war.
Why in that 2 millennium, virtually no woman was permitted to paint sculpt or write any work of art. And any male was required to do so only if it were a religious work.
Women only receiving the right to a vote one hundred years ago because of religious pressure.
Even in the last few centuries, women had to use a mans name to be published.
Religion has held mankind back from centuries of development and will so again if we are not constantly vigilant against it's oppression.
Such was the choking oppressive strangle hold of religion on our society, on democracy, medicine, science, art, etc, etc.
Even today the new militant evangelical religious creationist charlatans involved in the infestation of religious frauds in our public schools and politics is a frightening sight to see in our democracy.
The republican party in the USA and Liberal, National etc, etc, parties in Australia are an affront to a free society. Christian fundamentalist believing the same ridiculous creationist beliefs and superstitions as their brethren in the Islamic fundamentalism.

I think you might be surprised at the number of freethinkers who would agree there should be education ABOUT religions in schools. What they don't want is instruction in the specific doctrines of any particular religion.

The curriculum for such education should be developed by professional curriculum developers accountable to State education bodies. It should include education about non-religious worldviews and methods of ethical inquiry.

It should be delivered by qualified teachers rather than volunteers (no matter how well meaning).

The Rationalist Society of Australia would support the development and delivery of such a curriculum IF AND ONLY IF all 'special religious instruction/education' is removed from existing government school timetables.

Quite a good essay altogether.
But who said that astrology, chiropractic healing, and homeopathy have been discredited. They have not.
Such a claim is just part of the intolerant dogma of one-dimensional Newtonian scientism which now pretends to be the arbiter of what is real and possible.

Astrology has always been an integral feature of most if not all of the old-time religions all over the world. Astrological symbolism was very common in the case of old-time pre-Renaissance Christianity. There are numerous astrological and numerological references in the Bible.
The Renaissance, and then the so-called "enlightenment" were followed by the simultaneous rise to cultural ascendency of the equally anti-magical phenomenon of Protestantism and scientism.

What we don't need are 'policy analysts' and 'independent scholars' using the category 'religion' as a boojum in their self serving narrative.

"..religious neutrality is a myth. Basic social institutions inevitably claim the right to make decisions on matters of life and death, and to demand sacrifice—even extreme sacrifice—of personal interests. To do so, they must be seen as grounded in ultimate realities regarding the meaning and value of life, and thus correspond to an authoritative religious outlook." http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.com/articles.aspx?article=1815

Instead of being culpably blind to his own ersatz religion he could maybe attempt to argue for it? Haven't we grown tired of the idiotic caricatures secularists present of competing understandings of ultimate things? If he's truly interested in the vigour of our intellectual life - Australia's ability to accurately map the structure of reality - then Mr Chao could take a lead by letting go of his conceptual crutch 'religion' and begin some mature analysis.

This is a refreshing essay, soundly argued.
I grew up in other people's countries because my father was in the RAF. We learnt at school about the countries we found ourselves living in, including the history, geography, culture and religions of each country. We celebrated all the Christian festivals AND all the local religious festivals, and learnt about the significance of these from local children. It gave me a balanced view of religion which has stood me in good stead in my adult years in writing ethico-legal policy where an understanding of different religious perspectives is useful during both the policy development and implementation phases.
I wish my children had the same opportunity, but they grew up in Australia where they were offered "religious instruction" but only in one Christian denomination, which I declined because this was delivered as narrowly-focussed indoctrination not education. I agree that students should learn about the various religions of the world and the denominations within them thereby generating more tolerance and understanding across cultures. I did what I could to pass on my knowledge and understanding to my children, but it isn’t the same as talking with other young people about their experiences

I am weary of writers who triumphantly proclaim the "rational invalidity of religion" as if that settle the matter. I am not for religion in general but rather against. I was reminded the other day of a quote from Walter Winck that says in effect that it was not irreligion that nailed Christ to the cross but religion, it was not lawlessness that did so but the law. Consequently one can neither live by religion nor the law. I agree that "religion" in general is rather a nasty thing but faith is something quite different. Faith is not irrational, while it cannot be tested under the regime of scientific reason it has a rationality of its own that can express the essence of the human dilemma. A disciplined study of Christian theology makes one aware that it is governed by a rationality different from scientific rationality but a rationality all the same that governs what can and cannot be said about God. The writer suffers from the usual modern blindness to any rationality but scientific rationality. Even he would not apply such rationality to his major relationships or in pondering the depth of a poem or the true of a narrative.
Teaching about religion in schools may be handy but let us not confuse it with what the church does, inculcate the faith.

Peter Sellick