A really interesting conversation that opens up a broad range of issues in the private/ public debate on education.
Keeping to the thrust of this thread though, i didn't feel that Dr Wright in any way suggested that Public schools should have to have RE. Jane was favorable to studying religions in a more analytic way.
Despite my standing firmly against RE in primary schools, I don't disagree with her but preferably only in the latter high school years.
Trying to avoid falling into the pattern of previous threads on this subject i rather ask what is the genuine educational value of RE and can this be better served by any other approach to imparting the core information that is seen as important.
I know this is leaning to the ethics classes, but what is the core information that RE offers that cannot be covered in a non religious manner?
Probably the most key point i heard was that the freely available and now legally required education of the population is central to the strength of our democracy. This i strongly support, a mind that has the essential education in the three "R's" and a grounding in basic science and history is capable of questioning their community's values and then form their own opinion. I do question though whether RE offers an understanding of community values and morality or does it simply engender a focus belonging to only a part of that community. If so it would best be left out of education in the public sector.
As for private religious schools, we live in a free country with free speech so i can not see any objection. This of course includes islamic schools. Freedom is freedom, you ban one you ban them all.

I agree wholeheartedly, nairbe.

nairbe... as I understand the history of 'RE' (SRE, CRE, RE, RI in different states) we are lumbered with it in the 21st century because of the fears the Christian churches had back in the 1800s, when public education got going, and churches were relieved of being the sole educators in the Colonies.

You can hear the NSW Anglicans screeching about 'being promised this in 1860', and still expecting the reluctant promise then to be adhered to without review all these years later.

There was a Denominational War back then, with Anglicans fighting Papists and both fighting 'the others', but all were Christian, which is why legislation only refers to 'denominations'.

The role of 'RE' was only ever to keep the flock together, and recruit more if possible, but the rules allowed very little poaching, then.

Now, certainly in Qld, the bulk of RI volunteers (they are NOT teachers) come from the renewalist wing of Christianity, and they do actively seek to recruit from the 'unchurched' to their own pews.

The activity is poorly run, organised and is non-educational.

It should be ditched, all around the nation, and an alternative form of educating students about major belief systems should be inserted into the school curriculum, delivered by school teachers, not a hotch-potch of (perhaps) well-meaning, but unprofessional and unskilled volunteer evangelisers.

As for faith schools, they are one thing, but public funding of faith schools is another.

These schools, as Jane suggests, undermine the collective needs of democracy to have some sense of 'unity within diversity', if I can borrow from a secular state with a preponderance of Muslims living in it.

Faith schools are as undermining of social cohesion as are private shopping centres and housing enclaves, be they for the wealthy or 'the poor folk'.

As Jane said, public education was a genuine 'education revolution', Gillard's pathetic efforts are nowhere near that.

A reinjection of 'revolution' into the education sphere is overdue, and we could start by ensuring public schools were genuinely secular.

Here's a goody from the UK:

UK: Private schools forced to offer more free places

Graeme Paton, Telegraph, 7 July 2010

In an unprecedented move, two independent schools have become the first in England and Wales to increase the amount of money set aside for bursaries under pressure from the official charities regulator.

The move could have serious implications for a number of other fee-paying schools as they battle the threat of falling income in the economic downturn.

Last night, private school leaders warned that the rules could “jeopardise the future” of some schools.

The Independent Schools Council is now seeking a judicial review of guidelines issued by the Charity Commission amid claims it is acting “illegally”.

Under Labour's 2006 Charities Act, fee-paying schools are no longer automatically entitled to charitable status.

They must prove they provide "public benefit" to remain in business and retain tax breaks worth around £100m a year.

See that, all those fees from parents, and a tax free ride of over $200m a year! And that's just for starters.

Underfunding of public schools and overfunding of private schools is a national disgrace.

Furthermore....As most religious people have only a very simplistic knowledge of the Bible and it's teachings....one could hardly call that Education.

Perhaps these illustrate the problems

1. What does the word apocalypse mean? If you thought "end times" or similar you are wrong!

2. The Baptism and Temptation of Jesus -

The Baptism told for Children...http://tinyurl.com/2wkryhp

Post Baptism, the heavens open up and the holy spirit (spirit of God) descends upon Jesus...and then GOD allegedly says "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased".

Here are biblical versions...http://tinyurl.com/26b6q63 (NOTE...click on the white V to the left of the verse, it will give you various interpretations.)

Surely Jesus knew who he was - Matthew 3:15. But of course he did, to many, he is also God. After Matthew 3:16 he definitely did!

How silly is the temptation?

The Temptation told for Children...http://tinyurl.com/3ywl5wu

The Biblical version...http://tinyurl.com/2b47frq

Jesus led off into the wilderness by the spirit...(no less)...is allegedly tempted by the devil.

Jesus is offered:

Firstly food...afterall Jesus/God was hungry...lol

Secondly all the kingdoms of the world (but he's God/Jesus he already owns them)

Thirdly he tries to get Jesus to jump off the temple (Wow a human wouldn't even fall for that one)...lol

It's pretty ridiculous isn't it?

Jesus knows he is the Son of God/God...So knowing this why would he be tempted, even for a nanosecond, by the lowly devil, he saw him fall?...Luke 10:18...http://tinyurl.com/2uv4o6r

Surely Jesus/God is smarter than that?...He made everything...even the devil, he owns everything.

Furthermore if God/Jesus knows all things past, present and future then he must have known he would pass the temptations...He/she/it is God afterall!

And this is the rubbish we include in education?

If the Bible is inerrant and Christians don't know their Bibles,

Do we teach:

God is a vengeful, jealous God?...Exodus 20:5 http://tinyurl.com/28zaubd

Not keeping the Sabbath you will die?...Exodus 31:15 http://tinyurl.com/27w9mb9

What Moses did?...Numbers 31:17 http://tinyurl.com/32sbzge

OR do we fib in Religious Education by leaving these and other yucky bits out?

Before we head down the track of 'underfunding' and 'overfunding', here's something to consider:

http://www.apfacts.org.au/documents/schools_funding_brochure.pdf

I am aware that the 'hidden agenda' of this brochure is a government attempting to explain and justify an unpopular funding process, but the numbers really do speak for themselves. At the end of the day, fee-paying parents relieve a considerable funding burden from the government sector, as do organisations such as churches who contribute funds to these schools as well.

Sorry for this off-topic content - I just thought it might bring some clarity to the issue.

Anyway, obviously I am in a biased position when I support public funding of faith schools, so I'll lay that out there straight away. I do think, though, that if the faith schools are honest, open and accountable with their practices, there is a place for public funding. Parents make choices about the type of education their children receive. Perhaps, by sending their kids to Catholic schools, they do challenge social cohesion. I don't know. Certainly my current crop of students seem to engage quite well socially with the last batch from the state school 2km away. Every day, I'm bombarded with questions along the lines of 'do you know ...' or 'did you teach ...'. The real difference is that these students' parents have chosen an ethos through which they want their kids to be educated. As taxpayers, I think they should have that right.