Ethics training does not conflict with religious education training. No one is suggesting that ethics classes should replace scripture classes, or even that one is better than the other. I just can't see the downside. NSW schools have to provide supervision for children not attending religious education classes, so there can't be concern about limited resources.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/doing-the-right-thing-20100927-15u2q.html

------------------------

Gus: good one Hecker Klay Lamprell...  But the downside is that the catholic extremists, the jewish extremists and the muslim extremists lose their grip on young minds should they go to "ethics" classes. It's better for these religious nuts, that there would be no secular "godless' competition on proper behaviour... One knows that endoctrination has to happen before the age of seven and pursued relentessly till "kids are adult" — for the brainwashing to be complete.

When I was a 20 year old sailor I was going with a young woman who fell pregnant to me and - as my brothers declared - I should give the child a name by marrying her.  Such was the honour system of that time.  However, as is inevitable and consistent with your correct views on religious schooling, the fact that I was protestant and she was Catholic did not stop her parents from allowing her to marry me in a Church of England Church.

I viewed that as a compromise to both parties.  How wrong I was.

I was obliged to try to keep my Son and his future twin brothers, apart as much as possible from the indoctrination of the Catholic extremists.  I tried to raise the boys as being available for convincing but only when they were old enough for making such a decision.

One of the twins decided to become Catholic and married in the Catholic Church - the other two remained Anglican and married in the Protestant fashion. So be it.

What I am trying to get at Gus is the damned interference of the Roman Catholic Church when they see an opportunity to destabilise a family by declaring it invalid since they did not give their daughter of the Church their blessing on such a union.

The marriage ended after the boys had all passed 16 years of age.  I divorced my wife for desertion when she took one of the twins to live with her privately.

Subsequently I re married with the support of the Church of England since I was considered to have honoured my oaths. 

The son who had been indoctrinated by his Mother’s religion declared that IF my new wife and I were to be parents then the children would be bastards since my “true” wife was his mother.  However, for that to hold one must consider that my marriage to his Mother was permitted by the extreme Catholics, which it wasn’t.

So Gus, my son’s attempt at religiously condemning me and my Wife only raised the fact that such an interpretation applied to his birth which makes him a bastard – and his brothers – and with my marriage in a Church of England would make his Church’s claims illegal by the laws of our nation.

That is a history of just one person’s dealings with the interference of the Roman Catholic Church.

I have no regrets as to my actions due to the pregnancy of my girl friend in 1950 but, I do resent the suggestions that I had to change my religion to make that marriage legal.  I considered that I had given the boys a name by the standards of that time and their childhood was protected from poverty.

My Wife Rosie and I have been together now for nearly 40 years [married of course] but we were not able to produce children.  Nevertheless, some young couple has adopted us as God parents for their baby girl and we love her to bits.  This ensures that my wife will not be alone in the future.

NE OUBLIE.

THE right to teach ethics classes as an alternative to scripture in NSW schools will be enshrined in law by the state government in a bid to prevent the Coalition removing the classes if it wins power next year.

The Minister for Education, Verity Firth, will introduce an amendment to the Education Act today to specify the right of schools to offer ethics to students who opt out of scripture.

The amendment will be supported by the Greens in the Legislative Council, guaranteeing it will become law before Parliament rises at the end of next week and before the election in March.

''The message we have received loud and clear from parents is that they should have the right to choose what is best for their child," the Premier, Kristina Keneally, said.

However, the opposition spokesman for education, Adrian Piccoli, attacked the decision.

He pointed out that the Board of Studies had to remove inappropriate draft course material before the trial of ethics classes earlier this year. ''If they want to legislate for a course, which has previously included subjects on terrorism and designer babies to be taught to 11-year-olds, then that's a decision for the Labor Party,'' he said.

A spokeswoman for Ms Firth said: ''First the Coalition failed to listen to parents and now they're trying to scare them. All course material will be vetted by the Board of Studies''.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/law-will-protect-ethics-classes-from-being-dumped-by-coalition-20101125-18964.html

see toon at top.

Hi Gus,

And Mike Carlton takes the stick to Barry O'Farrell for sadly caving-in to the 'god-botherers' on this ....

Back in September Barry O'Farrell sent me a glossy brochure setting out his plans for government. It was more a motherhood list of good intentions than anything that looked like solid policy, but he had stuck a handwritten note on the front of it.

''Who says I'm against ethics classes in schools?'' it read.

Well I do for one, Barry. Unless, of course, you are prepared to repudiate your education spokesman, Adrian Piccoli, who announced this week that the Coalition would scrap the ethics lessons due to start in NSW state schools next year.

Or could it be that you have buckled to the nutters of the Opus Dei wing of the Liberal Party, also known as the Taliban for their hardline religious fanaticism?

Every opinion poll I have seen on this issue says an overwhelming majority of parents wants ethics offered as an alternative to the so-called Special Religious Education lessons.

As a Herald reader wrote on Thursday: ''My children have been shown the same Wiggles video week after week and told to sit still and watch it: appropriate for a two-year-old, perhaps, but not a year 2 student. How can an education department justify wasting children's time in this manner?''

The god-botherers have pulled every trick in the book to force their beliefs on the rest of us. One of the many specious arguments is that their kiddies would be deprived of the ethics teaching given to other children.

The sensible solution, then, is to get rid of the religion classes. They should not exist in a publicly funded, secular education system. If you want to fill your children's heads with this mumbo-jumbo, there are places you can do it. They are called churches, synagogues and mosques, and there is one near you.

Barry? Are you there, Barry?

Special ethics education should not be allowed for children not attending scripture classes. Nor should ethics education be "special". Rather, it should be available to all children, not only those withdrawn from scripture classes.

We have a serious problem. Even though special religious education (SRE) accounts for only 3 per cent of teaching time, it is outrageous that some students not doing SRE are left doing nothing educationally worthwhile. I have witnessed such myself in the inner-west this year. This is an intolerable injustice that ought to be deplored by all concerned parents and educators.

A solution needs to be found and found immediately. But is special ethics education the only or appropriate solution to the problem? Is it possible to address the legitimate concerns of non-SRE parents without raising the ire of SRE providers?

I say it is.

Ethics as a subgroup of philosophy should be taught to all students in the mainstream curriculum. There is already ample provision within the syllabuses for human society and its environment and personal development, health and physical education for the teaching of values and informed decision-making.

However, I would go further. The author of the present ethics trial curriculum, Associate Professor Philip Cam, has recently worked to integrate philosophy into the teaching program of years 7 and 9 at Ashfield Boys' High. Rozelle Public School this year ran a philosophy course for primary students in the mainstream curriculum. Both have been highly successful.

Professor Cam and Dr Sue Knight (author of the final report into the ethics trial) both assisted in a working party that argued last year for one hour a week of philosophy to be included in the proposed national curriculum as part of civics and citizenship.

Such a course would have the advantage of being taught by qualified professionals rather than well-meaning volunteers with just two days' training. Let us introduce philosophy and ethics to everyone through the front door, not to non-SRE students only through the back door.

Ethics Should Be A Course For All Pupils

The state opposition has dumped its promise to remove ethics classes from NSW public schools if it is elected, as 57 schools prepare to start teaching the new course within weeks.

View the complete list here

In November the opposition education spokesman, Adrian Piccoli, said a Coalition government would remove the classes being offered in schools as an alternative to special religious education, or scripture classes.

The announcement prompted the government, with the support of the Greens in the upper house, to enshrine the right to the classes in legislation, meaning the Coalition would be forced to legislate to remove them.

Mr Piccoli told the Herald the Coalition has decided against that course of action if it is elected next month.

''We voted against the legislation, so once the legislation passed through the Parliament there was a recognition that ethics classes are going to be in place,'' he said. ''The view was it has been legislated and we are going to allow them to continue. The battle over ethics classes is finished and we will be part of it.''

Mr Piccoli said a Coalition government would work with the St James Ethics Centre, which had designed the classes and special religious education providers ''to create a course that makes everyone happy''.

The not-for-profit organisation set up by the St James Ethics Centre to run the classes, Primary Ethics, completed a two-day training workshop at the University of NSW for 90 volunteer ethics teachers yesterday.

Before the government introduced the right to hold ethics classes, NSW Education Department policy had banned them running in competition with special religious education.

The Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, George Pell and the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, have been vocal opponents of their introduction.

57 schools prepare to start teaching ethics classes

Ethics class in action.  Image: Primary Ethics/Summer Hill Media

Imagine for a minute that you’re the parent of a young child and you’ve just received a letter from his or her school asking whether you would like your child to be included in scripture classes or not. You re-read the letter, wondering if there’s an alternative option you’ve missed, but it remains a simple yes or no. So you say yes and send it back, glad that your child will be included and hoping the school will provide important moral teaching.

If you had said no, however, you would have received a follow-up letter informing you about ethics classes that are being offered as an alternative. These are the volunteer-provided Primary Ethics classes that were created to provide children with a secular alternative to scripture classes in New South Wales (Australia) government schools, which are nominally non-religious. The program, funded by the St James Ethics Centre, aims to teach children about ethical decision making, how to think logically, formulate arguments and rationalise information in an inclusive environment. It was initiated in 2010 partly for children not taking part in scripture classes, whose only alternative had been being physically separated from their classmates without alternative class work. According to Helen Walton, the president of the Federation of Parents and Citizens’ Associations of New South Wales, “ethics classes provided parents a choice in how their child was meaningfully engaged when other students were participating in SRE (Special Religious Education)”.

Despite a trial conducted by the Department of Education in 2010 finding 97% approval from 750 submissions on the introduction of ethics classes, politicians such as Christian Democrats MP Reverend Fred Nile have consistently attempted to block the classes. The Legislative Council of NSW resolved in November 2011 to conduct an inquiry into the ethics classes program in response to a bill introduced by Nile to abolish ethics classes.

Nile has declared that he would “torpedo” government legislation if the classes are not stopped, though the Premier of NSW has denied making a deal with the Christian Democrats, which hold the balance of power in the upper house.  In response to queries about possible miscommunication caused by the follow-up letter, Nile claimed,“It’s appropriate that the main policy emphasis is on scripture classes. Ethics is an alternative. We don’t want to confuse people.”

If withholding information from parents and denying them the ability to make an informed decision is Nile’s plan to prevent confusion, then I suggest he enrol himself in an ethics class.

http://atheistalliance.org/news-a-articles/archive/597-opting-out-the-only-way-to-opt-in

THE future of ethics classes in NSW is in doubt, the provider says, after the federal government refused to allow it to collect tax-deductible donations in the same way providers of scripture classes in state schools do.
Funds established for providing religious instruction in public schools in Australia can claim Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR) status, a provision that is used by some religious groups to fund training and support for scripture classes in NSW.
The provider of ethics classes, Primary Ethics, which receives no government funding, made a special application to the federal government to also be granted DGR status, to fund ongoing training of its own volunteers and to develop its curriculum.
The chairman of Primary Ethics, Bruce Hogan, said the organisation was surprised when that request was recently rejected by the federal government, despite the growing demand for ethics classes in this state.
''We have spent two years quietly really trying to make the Commonwealth government see sense,'' he said. ''If Primary Ethics is to survive we can't let it rest.''
About 7000 students in NSW are expected to take ethics classes this year as an alternative to scripture, though many schools have waiting lists or do not provide the classes because there are not enough trained volunteers.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/ethics-classes-at-risk-as-plea-for-tax-relief-refused-20130301-2fbj7.html#ixzz2MM6nKmld
---------------------------------------


There comes a dilemma... Is Primary Ethics the only provider of ethics classes? So far it is as part of the St James umbrella. Is there other organisations — from humanistic to atheistic organisations that can provide the same service without pushing their views?...
Note: It has been my personal observation that few if any organisations are politics or religions free of influence or do not have a soap box. Often small and discreet pointers can lead to forming a point of view about a set of events or ideas, and there is nothing wrong with this, as often "balance" is a crock... 
Reading the objectives of Primary Ethics, I am worried that it has already been highjacked by the religious (and possibly commercial) lobbies away from proper humanism. As such it has some conflict of purpose between:

Provide philosophical ethics education to children in New South Wales public schools who do not attend special religious education classes.

and:
Provide a developed curriculum and learning/teaching materials for use by faith groups, to use ‘as is’ or to amend in accordance with the frameworks of their particular religions.

Now, in the ethics teachings, is there elements of subtle political indoctrination — especially discreetly positioned towards ethics in an expansionist capitalism opened to religious undertones? Fair question?... In the end who pays the piper?

The only answer is to closely follow the "teaching" and the curriculum of the ethics classes which, so far, cannot be found in detail... unless I am dumb which I could be.
So far all I can find is the old stuff from the previous (Labor) government which had no indication on the teaching material and concepts used in teaching ethics as it was booted out before defining such.

My mistake if I am wrong.

Victoria's Education Department has launched an investigation into what it calls inappropriate and offensive religious material distributed at a primary school.

The ABC understands religious educators handed out material at Torquay College last year that instructed children to seek counselling if they had homosexual feelings.

The material also claims that girls who wear revealing clothes are inviting sexual assault and that masturbation and sex before marriage are sinful.

The so-called Biblezines were given as graduation gifts as part of a program run by the state's Christian education provider Access Ministries.

Naja Voorhoeve, whose seven-year-old child received the material from an older student, says special religious instruction (SRI) providers should be banned from public schools.

"If the SRI providers were prepared to breach our trust in this matter, you have absolutely no idea about the other things that they're doing, about instances in other schools where this material might have been handed out," she said.

"My personal position is that SRI volunteers should not be allowed in schools because their programs cannot be adequately monitored.

"What they do is not part of the curriculum... so they're basically let in on their own."

The department says it has launched an investigation into the material and the actions taken by the provider.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-23/biblezine-complaint-sparks-probe-into-religious-educator/5277766

---------------------

Gus: The Biblezine line of book/magazines is a disguised way to underhandedly introduce the bible into the mind of young kids, in places where they are "not allowed" to do so. They are using SELECTED "proverbs" found in the bible to push their religious agenda. 

These BibleZines (made and most likely printed in the USA) are described as thus :

Women—Becoming

Girls 8-12—Between

Teen guys—Refule

Teen girls—Revolve

Looking at the content, one should be aware that these magazines are about cash as well as the promotion of "christianity" (the view of christianity by the owners of the publication). They rely heavily on advertising and "sponsorship" (Red Bull for example), letting the advertisers know that for the "Teen guys" for example "22 million college students wield more than $400 billion in spending power"...

But in some way, it is hard to know if the "owners" of BibleZines are some colleges or the bible-pushers... 

It’s term three in Victorian primary schools and for the first time, 50 schools will not hold religious instruction classes.

Lara Wood is coordinating a parent-led campaign against religious instruction by Access Ministries, an organisation that provides Christian education in Victorian public schools.

‘At our last count 50 schools have chosen to cease the program due to lack of interest,’ she says. 'It’s very significant. We feel that our campaign has been very successful. We feel that we are making history here.'

In 2011, religious instructors were present in 70 per cent of public primary schools in Victoria. Today, they’re in less than half.

Scott Hedges, a father of two who is also part of the campaign, believes it’s only a matter of time before the classes are axed altogether.

His daughters, who went to a primary school in Melbourne, found the religion classes confusing.

‘I felt, very, like, pressurised by doing it because it’s like, forced, like they force you to believe this sort of stuff,’ says one.

George Aslanis, a former Access Ministries teacher, now believes the classes are inappropriate.

‘I didn’t see it different to a Sunday school encounter—similar sort of format, a bit of play, some songs some fun activity, some drawing in, some Q and A, and ultimately, where possible, just putting a seed there, just hoping that it would grow one day to mature into a fruit,’ he says.

However, under law, Access Ministries are not allowed to attempt to convert children. The group’s CEO, Dawn Penney, says evangelism is not the point of the classes.

‘No, we do not proselytise; it is not something we promote,’ she says. ‘It is clearly in our training that it is not the way that we wish Access Ministries to be seen in the school.’

Earlier this year the group was embroiled in a scandal when one of their instructors handed out copies of a booklet called The Biblezine

It preached against safe sex and said homosexuality was a sin. The Victorian Department of Education investigated, and concluded that the incident was in breach of policy.

Penney, however, denies there’s a problem.

‘I don’t think [there is a backlash] at all,’ she says

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-08-31/5699360