http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/phi-natural-therapies tells of the review that the Australian Government Department of Health is conducting on natural therapies.

These therapies are essentially faith based. They are not subject to any review by clinical testing. It seems reasonable that government should not subsidise any of these therapies.

However, if the government no longer subsidises these therapies as I think is proper it should also consider its policies in regard to the chaplaincy program and subsidising religious schools.

The chaplaincy program is also faith based. Scripture Union and Access Ministries hire and train most of the chaplains. Those who apply for the positions must subscribe to various statements of Christian doctrine. There are no tests for the effectiveness of the program. It is presumably cheaper than hiring counselors trained to work with children of school age, but cost should not be a primary consideration when our children are concerned. The chaplaincy program, like the natural therapies is essentially faith based and has not been subjected to the reviews that pedagogical techniques have been.

Religious schools indoctrinate the views of the various religions that sponsor them. In general they have the view that they have a truth denied to those who do not follow the particular world view they subscribe to. As a consequence they generally believe their world view is superior to other world views. This makes religious schools a divisive force in our society.

However, we are a free society, and people have the freedom to make what choices they like. They have the right to use natural therapies, seek out practitioners of various faiths for advice and support and to send their children to schools that promote their particular world view.

Having a right does not mean that government has an obligation to support that right unless it is in the general interests of society. Government subsidies to natural therapies, the chaplaincy program and non-public schools are all forced levies on the taxpayers to support faith based programs which should be no business of government.

I hope government will cease support for faith based remedies, activities or education.

Dear David,

I fully agree with you.
However I don't think our opinion is going to matter
much to the current PM and his administration.

This government cuts university support and funds
priests' training. In its 2014 Federal Budget the
government provided $243.8 milllion over a 4 year
period to continue the National School Chaplaincy
Program and banned the hiring of qualified secular counsellors
for the students. We can question the appropriateness of
having a religious worker in a public school all that we
like, or the breaches of separation between church and
state that this action does, however, things are not going to change.
At least not yet.

Should parents who send their children to Church schools have to pay taxes to support Government schools?

We should bear in mind that the Catholic Schools existed before the Government schools in NSW and that they were partly funded by the Government.
That changed when that famous old womanizer, bigot and Judicial Murderer, Sir Henry Parkes introduced his education act and famously claimed that "... it would sound the death knell of the [Catholic] priesthood in Australia".
This caused the formation of the present system of Catholic Schools.
Why should Catholic taxpayers subsidize a system designed to injure their religion?

Secularist have made such a mess of the education system that they now are looking for Chaplains to clean up at least a little bit of it up. The more money they have poured into education the worse results they get. You don't need more than a small portion of your brain to see that the secularist dogma of moral relativism has led to most smart people avoiding teaching jobs as generally they don't want to do crowd control. Personally I think secularist should stop bludging on parents sending kids to private schools and pay a bit themselves. Somehow they think education is free. Obviously know nothing about economics or accounting.

Dear David,

I agree that government should not support natural therapies.
However, at the moment it unfairly supports conventional Western medicine through Medicare, preventing a level playing field where the consumer freely chooses the services they require.

In the least, those who prefer natural therapies should be able to opt out of Medicare, then pay their own health bills (or establish their own alternative health insurance) rather than pay twice for services they do not require.

In the least, those who prefer natural therapies should be able to opt out of Medicare, then pay their own health bills (or establish their own alternative health insurance) rather than pay twice for services they do not require.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Sunday, 4 January 2015 1:38:21 PM

The cost of the medi-care levy is much less for many people when compared to the cost of private health insurance, then add the out of pocket costs as well.

This type of user pay system is prevalent in third world countries, where your survival from an illness can be reliant on your or your families ability to afford the treatment.