A dishonest campaign against ethics classes

A browse around some of the web sites dedicated to the issue of SRE and ethics classes can be quite revealing. Have you seen the Youthworks site http://www.sreontrial.com.au/? On the front page is the following statement: “While the “ethics” program might seem admirable… proclaiming that it promotes practical thinking and decision making… what parents and teachers are not told is that the Ethics course is not a belief-neutral alternative to SRE” (their emphasis).

What do they mean by this? The statement that the ethics course is not belief-neutral indicates that it is either based on one or more beliefs, or is anti-belief, and the meaning in this context is of course the latter. Perhaps this reflects a genuine misunderstanding of the ethics course, but this seems extremely unlikely, since information on the course is freely available. None of that information suggests that the ethics course will teach children that there is no god, or will be negative in any way toward any belief system. On the contrary, it is very clear that the course is based on questions related to everyday scenarios, allowing children the opportunity to consider how to act in certain situations. So, this statement is false and misleading.

The site also goes on to refer to a Sydney Morning Herald article (http://www.smh.com.au/environment/exterminate-bunnies-kill-whales-big-questions-for-ethical-children-20091206-kcyl.html) as a “report into the ethics trial” (it was in fact simply an article on the trial) and picks out one sentence stating that children will encounter the higher level thinking of certain philosophers. They paint this as a very bad thing on the basis that the ideas of those philosophers are based on “secular humanism which dismisses any notion of God”. Is there a grain of truth in this? Well, the Secular Party of Australia web site has a page on religion (http://www.secular.org.au/example-pages) stating that “The Secular Party is not anti-religion in the sense that we believe that people should be free to indulge their beliefs, provided they do not infringe the rights of others”. The first two stated objectives of the Humanist Society of NSW (http://www.hsnsw.asn.au/) are to “encourage a rational approach to human problems, to promote the fullest use of science for human welfare, to defend freedom of expression, and provide a constructive alternative to theological and dogmatic creeds” and to “gain and maintain for non-religious people the same rights as are enjoyed by members of religious bodies”. Neither of these dismisses any notion of god. In fact, they state very clearly that they respect the notions of others, and aim to ensure that all people who hold various notions are afforded the same level of respect and consideration.

I understand that Hope Christian radio (103.2FM) has been running advertisements by Youthworks with the same message, that ethics classes are “founded on secular humanism’s core belief that there is no God”, and that “Secular humanism believes it can replace God. That’s what’s behind the teaching of ethics classes being trialed in our state schools”. Although you might think these ads reach just a small number of people, the station boasts a listener audience of 246,000 Sydneysiders every week.

These statements are blatant scare tactics designed to worry people into taking action against something as innocuous as ethics classes for children. They are untruths told by people who are taking advantage of the fact that many people will assume they can be trusted. This is absolutely outrageous.

I used the ‘contact’ link on the www.sreontrial.com.au site to send an email message stating that as a parent who supports the ethics program and welcomes it as an option for my children I would like an explanation of the logic underpinning their statement that the ethics course is not belief-neutral. I had naively hoped for a reply and perhaps an opportunity to give them a pro-ethics parent’s perspective, but have received nothing from them.

The manipulative untrue comments made by some religious groups in attempts to reduce the chance of ethics classes being offered in NSW do not, in my experience, reflect the attitudes of people in the community. For example, when the ethics trial ran at my children’s school, parents there with or without religion did not feel the need to whisper untruths in the playground. They respected each other’s views. These power games are being played by people at the top of some church organizations, and they aim to ensure that children opting out of SRE in the NSW public school system will continue to have no right to learn during that time.

If you object to thought control at the expense of children in the NSW school system, do something. Tell people about the untrue statements being made by church organizations. Write to the newspapers to draw attention to this. Try to speak to the people making the statements. Even if they don’t reply, at least they may start realizing that people are aware of their wrong-doing. Make a noise.