seriously, look at this …
I don’t see how it could be considered anything but old-fashioned Religious Instruction.
Shamelessly blatant example of proselytising.
Garrett doesn’t want to know. It is backyard pushing of their religion. They know the longer they become part of schools the harder it is to get rid of them. They associate with the local church, get the kids going to that church and their job is done. Can someone take out the ear plugs and night glasses from Garrett’s eyes.
Is there any regulation in Vic that says there is to be no proselytizing during SRE (I’m in a different state and unfamiliar with the regulations)? I ask because I can’t see how SRE can be anything but proselytizing; the SRE volunteers certainly aren’t going to present anything in a way that makes it sound like anything the kids learn is anything other than a fact, or that believing it is optional. I’ve heard an example here in Qld where the RI (SRE) instructor told the kids that if they didn’t believe the story about Moses parting the Red Sea they were ‘hard-hearted’ and not soft-hearted children.
In Victoria this is SRI, Special Religious Instruction, note the “Instruction”. Yet the Access people, one can hardly call them teachers, are not supposed to proselytise, which is a fancy word for instruct. The whole thing is a mess, but as both sides of politics will be hoping to gain off-the-books campaign support from the groups behind Access, a change of government is unlikely to make any difference.
Further, undeniable proof that this should not be allowed in our government schools.
Whoops! There’s me getting all my acronyms mixed up! Thanks for the info Andy. I agree that, unfortunately, a change of government will make no difference, although here in Qld I imagine things could actually get worse given the proclivities of the new(ish) state premier to pander to the Christian right of his party.
Is there really any need for further debate as to whether or not SRI is proselytizing?
We ALL know why Access Ministries are in schools. It couldn’t be any clearer. Paddison told us EXACTLY why they are in the schools – whatever she may have said afterwards when that speech became public was nothing but shameless self-interested damage control.
It is the age of the children that Access Ministries have access to that is KEY to this whole affair. They cannot wait to get those children in to rooms with their volunteers.
Sit a child at that age down in a room with an agreeable authority figure and they’ll basically swallow anything hook, line and sinker.
What I also find incredibly offensive about this is how the cutesy little stories they have designed to drum their personal religious beliefs in to children almost seemed designed to undermine the parents role as the source of authority and love for their own child by introducing them to the notion of an invisible being in the sky who loves them, who they should trust, pray to and try to emulate.
If I caught anyone trying to run that nonsense to my children I’d – as Woody Allen used to say – tell them to go forth and multiply.
Yes this is evangelism however it is closely edited to make it sound like a class of education.
The first this was that the class notes ALWAYS seem to point towards Jesus Christ and makes no reference to other religions as what would Buddha or Mohammed would say. Yet in the Whitehorse Leader where she claims to teach about other religions (that they are false).
SRI / CRE must not be held during school hours.
I hate this stuff as much as you do, but I don’t think you could make a charge of proselytizing stick. ACCESS would say:
– proselytizing is about converting people and, as only kids whose families want them to attend will hear it, it’s assumed kids from other beliefs or no belief won’t be attending to be proselytised.
– it’s CHRISTIAN SRI, so of course they plug Jesus and assume only kids from Christian families attend. Other beliefs are equally free to run their own SRI and plug their own hero (non-believers can’t of course, because they are not a religion!)
Again, I’m totally against SRI in schools, but you have to understand the other side’s arguments if you want to beat them.
I wouldn’t be too certain about all that Rod.
Paddison made it perfectly clear that the aim of Access Ministries was to go in to schools and make christian disciples – she was obviously talking about making new believers in christ, not about preaching to the converted. The converted – by and large – already attend church. This is purely about making potential believers.
Access Ministries are so keen to get in to schools precisely because they believe that they will reach children from family backgrounds of no or toekn religious belief. They want to get to the children who they don’t see in church. Paddison used an ancedote about a child attending SRI badgering her parents about attending church as a result of what she was taught in SRI and the parents relenting and becoming church goers.
Like a football club, they are after new members.
The assumption you yourself make in declaring that the no children from the families of non-believers or followers of a different faith would attend christian SRI is wrong. I expect many parents will have their children attend SRI as they consider it preferable to dealing with the concerns they may have with what non-attendance would mean for their children.
I expect you are also aware that the issue of proselytising is only one of the reasons why the current RE situation should be discontinued.
Your first point has been refuted by the fact that ACCESS Ministries has deliberately set the education department to ensure that it is an “opt out”. This means if you don’t specifically sign your child out, he or she will be taught. How many immigrants that are unable to read English and follows another religion have their child in SRI / CRE classes? Also those whom have opt out are given menial tasks such as pick up rubbish on the playground, sit outside in the corridor, etc. What ACCESS Ministries have done is basically punish those whom opt out.
Your second point has severe ramifications where that certain Islamic groups are doing similar and who knows you might have Jehovah’s Witnesses or the Mormons et al. That can do exactly the same.
John Van Den Akker has already pointed out many issues that ACCESS Ministries are willing to do in order to “Go and make Disciples”. I would not past them one bit.
What we mainly want is that SRI / CRE be made outside of school hours and an “Opt In” therefore stopping any segregation of the children. Also note that many religious institutions will have their own children education of their respective religions such as Sunday School etc.
I agree with you both, and I have no doubt that ACCESS has a (poorly) hidden agenda to convert kids (especially kids of non-believers). I was describing what ACCESS will officially say, not what they think and do. They will say the things I wrote when they claim they are not proselytizing.
The points you’ve made are valid and need to be heard. All I was saying is that waving around ACCESS course books and saying the content is proselytizing won’t work – they will just counter with what I said. So forget that line and just go with your points about them manipulating the rules to get to kids whose parents actually don’t want their kids indoctrinated into little evangelical christians.
We hear you Rod.
It is similar to what I have said that they are carfully constructing these course for the child to ask questions and it always points to Jesus. This is proselytizing by stealth and it appears on the outside as educational material.
Please note that Peter Garrett is a “born again” Christian ergo Evonne’s answer to his investigation gives the appearance as biased.
Well to expect that Access would do anything other than deny the charge of proselytizing is absurd. They are aware of the guidelines and they know that to admit to anything contrary to those would threaten the current arrangement they have in schools.
The material they use points to the truth of what they are about. The fact that christians themselves are the ones teaching RE is another illustration of what the true intent behind christian RE is.
I expect that ifthe nature and history of religious belief was taught as a properly constituted academic subject by qualified teachers then the material used would be markedly different.
Yep, once again, I agree totally.
I don’t expect that Access would do anything other than deny the charge of proselytizing.
Thanks for keeping on top of this Scott. It is important to know as much information as possible on what jibber jabber ACCESS are trying to feed our kids. There is a paragraph on the side of page 2 (numbered as 23) THE ROVING EYE, with notes on keeping eye contact, moving around the room to another vantage point.
(this quote is straight out of their own handouts) – “…. all of which lets the student know you are a ‘real’ teacher who knows everything….”
So there you have it…. Volunteers dressed up as ‘real’ teachers