ELVIS ELAHIE
Those of us who would have listened to the sentiments expressed by a teacher of Naparima College a few days ago, would have been shocked and become very concerned at what was issued from the lips of a supposedly learned individual as regards homosexuals and atheists, and the depth of violence she would have adopted to annihilate the atheist and his parents.
This outburst, I am sure, was fuelled by a value position which insists that to be gay or atheist is wrong or "sinful." And is indeed a position held by many whose approach to scripture is shaped by literalism and fanaticism coupled with a lack of knowledge, information and insight.
Thus the brief statement of the Chairman of the Presbyterian Secondary Schools Board of Education, is full of contradiction as it portrays only a softer version of bigotry. In the Newsday article of March 16, titled Deal with Miss, he indicated that he listened to the recording and in his opinion the only objection is coarse language. This further illustrates the absence of an appropriate ethical standard even among academics.
With this kind of authority being arrived at, based on an uninformed understanding of a scriptural text written at a time when there may not have been appreciation for diversity and certainly none for science, such pronouncements could very well represent a denial of reality. And it serves as a reminder that religion, except for a few sophisticated theologians and traditions, is a human construct that has not really evolved.
The scenario at Naparima College inevitably poses the question therefore, can one religion or religion as a whole provide objective moral values by which to live in peace in community? The religious exclusivist with his\her absolutist position will answer "yes" but in reality might be offering a moral landscape that can only be relevant to a few. Is there, therefore, a solution or a way forward as we pursue options and possibilities to arrive at a more all-embracing approach to creating what can be a universally accepted objective moral value practice? Perhaps there is.
After grappling with this question, having been a "religious leader" for almost three decades, I am of the opinion at this time that there should be no faith-based religious education in our government-funded schools even if that funding is in part. There should be, however, religion studies where the major religions of the world and the religions of the Caribbean in particular are taught. This should be done from both a sociological (study of networks, organisations and institutions) and a historical (events of the past that can be verified by evidence from outside a faith community) perspective.
Here students at both the primary and secondary school level will begin to see that religion, no matter which one it is, is a human construct and something most of them if not all, may have in common. This approach to religion will not be one that instils or installs belief or seeks to indoctrinate but one that will provide knowledge about the religion of the other. This can be of benefit for both the student and his\her religion. It could produce a critical thought process allowing faith to be shaped by reason. But issues of belief, and indoctrination should be engaged at the level of church, temple, and mosque (or in whichever establishment religions may house their beliefs). And families should exercise the freedom to practise and promote their religious traditions at home. Not in the schools.
What then should the education system consider for its pursuit of "proper values" which ought to include, justice and equal human rights for all? While we consider this question toward the ideal response, the most appropriate entry point at this time in our nation is to introduce in our schools' curriculum, moral philosophy as a meaningful replacement for faith-based religious education which so often includes a fanatical religious outlook.
Studies in moral philosophy seek to identify right and wrong behaviour. It involves more than the emotions of the individual and begins to focus on issues of universal truths. It includes normative ethics which aims at establishing moral standards that regulate right and wrong behaviour and embraces the application of what ought to be in relation to controversial issues in our society. We may all agree that some of the basic social issues including capital punishment, abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality have not, up to this time, been addressed at any appreciable level.
This shift will have significant implications at various levels in our endeavours in education. The qualifications for teaching in our primary and secondary schools therefore will need include, studies in the introduction to both Religions of the World, and Philosophy. And at the level of the classroom, every student should be exposed to these subject areas as a compulsory requirement within the schools' syllabus. In addition the political will to make these adjustments must be displayed as the above suggestions may be seen as provocation by some religious entities. But what would we prefer? Schools that produce the religious intolerant or upright moral\ethical citizens?