I remember scripture lessons in my NSW school days. The Anglicans stayed in class, the Catholics went to another room and watched old cartoons of Bible stories and the Muslim and the Jew sat in the corner. Even then I thought it was unreasonable. I enjoyed Catholic Scripture time, but didn't learn much from it.

Really, though, I object to religious education at state schools altogether - especially the insidious chaplaincy program that is worming its way into QLD schools. Our chaplain is a really nice guy, but I always feel like we are violating kids' rights when we ask them to 'bow their heads and pray' at assemblies. Why should they? There are plenty of good Catholic schools, a good Anglican school and a couple of good generic Christian schools in Townsville. If the kids (or their parents) wanted religion as part of their education, they could have it. Sometimes I think the Scripture Union is trying to take the easy way out - rather than building, funding and running its own schools, it is trying to convert the state schools. That's not what we are about.

As for a comparative religion subject (which, I agree, is perhaps a 'Plan C' behind ethics and philosophy), the QSA has one, taught primarily in Catholic schools. I learnt more about Buddhism and Islam in high school than I learnt about Catholicism, and I think the experience was enriching. They left the religious doctrine to the church, and taught a sociological subject focusing on the social construct that is religion during schooltime. It worked.

Otokonoko,
It stands to reason that the subject would become progressively complex/in-depth in sync. with the year level's average capacities.

It seems to me that there are two primary objective in my selection are;
a. to foster greater understanding between different peoples. As this is the most achievable
b. to teach children HOW to reason.
c. to remain relevant to the upcoming generations to encourage informed and reasoned involvement as adults.

I guess thinking more deeply about it the solution is " a little from option column a. current event from different national perspectives.
a little from column, b. Philosophy and c. comparative religion.

While I object to RI for probably the same reasons as you I don't underestimate the 'proprietary' ferocity of the Scripture Union on behalf of the churches. First law of organizational practice is 'to ensure its own longevity and prosperity'.

From some of the posts I am given some concern as what is meant by ethics. Some of out the currently understood "ethics" are simply legal codified religious doctrine by way of 'culture'. The problem is that some of these are either 'outgrown' religious control (conditioning) mechanisms or that allow unnecessary victim stigmatising and facilitate/encourage power abuses.
What do you think?

Pelican

As stated many time I have no problem with personal private religiosity or spirituality et al. but what practically does that mean? Have you ever tried to discuss esoterica with average adolescents? They're just not engaged or interested.

I would suggest that the only realistic way to raise the level of public behaviour is to work with realities.

This is fun.

We have a dysfunctional over-bureaucratised school system that cannot effectively teach relatively straightforward subjects like high school science and mathematics. Don't even talk about grammar!

And yet the posters here think the state school systems are capable of teaching ethics and philosophy to primary schoolers?

I hope this goes ahead. I am DYING to see what sort of syllabus they come up with and what sort of buffoons they get to teach it. At my age I've learned to take my laughs where I can get them and this would be a good one.

However, to me, cricket still seems a better option.

Steven makes a good point. Examinator, your suggestion of discussing current events would effectively mean it's impossible to create a syllabus for this to be taught.

With no universal standards for teachingt the subject, it's going to become one of those boring pointless classes that quickly loses all value. Who is going to teach this?

I've still yet to see anything convincing that would show that 'ethics' classes would in any way improve the moral character of people. That link I posted earlier shows that there has been no link between knowledge of ethical frameworks and people behaving in a moral way.

Nobody has shown anything that gives me the slightest reason to believe that teaching people about ethics in any way makes them more ethical.

As for your comment about reasoning, Examinator, that's why I'd suggest classes in critical reasoning instead. We can lay out quite a specific framework, focusing on particular fallacies and we can actually outline methods to deconstruct particular arguments step-by-step. It's not light material, but it can be made very specific and it can be standardised.

CJ, instinctively I love the idea. I wish you could persuade me the kids would like it as much as I do. As it stands it seems most of the adults on OLO have trouble with grasping the concepts behind ethics, so methinks the kids would have no hope.

Still, it is far too attractive idea to give up on easily. So how about civics? Expose the kids to Fredrick Toben thoughts and debate the idea of whether we get to shut him up, drag them along to the local council sittings, force them to sit down through an hour of parliamentary debate, pick up the newspaper and discuss the stories - hell even get them to write responses to OLO posts. In other words if they aren't interested in how God's kingdom is run, teach them how we run ours.

Hmmm...this one is a good one and is bound to bring out some 'interesting' responses to say the least. I hope mine is one based on reason rather than rhetoric, prejudice and unsupported assertions.
It is a bit of a false dichotomy here.Rather than having all those who opt out go to an ethics class, I strongly advocate for the introduction of ethics/morality classes as a compulsory subject for every school student.
Yes, my dream would be to cut out all religious instruction in school and leave it to the parents, but if we did that some valuable ethical/moral ideas would be lost. However, by having ethics/morality classes as part of the core curriculum, we would be introducing students to some of the worlds finest thinkers, whether they be Catholic, Protestant, Hindu, Muslim etc.
A lot of people continue to have the view that all of our ethical/moral reason is based upon religion especially the Christian based ones, therefore views like mine do suffer plenty of flak, albeit poorly supported.
With the teaching of ethics to kids we would be introducing them to a great many tools especially that of putting together an argument that is based on sound reasoning and consideration of all viewpoints, rather than unsupported assertions.
So yes, at the moment, bring on alternative classes in ethics. Hopefully one day the need for spiritual 'education' in schools will be a thing of the past.