# Hooray For Quebec (requiring religious schools to teach evolution) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 24, 2006, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705 "2006-10-24T14:30:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/81 "2006-10-26T00:20:45Z")
Haven’t read through every response to the thread (probably a mistake), but I’ll briefly echo what another poster said upthread…if this happened in America, I’d be outraged. That it happened in Canada…well, its their problem to deal with. If the good folks in Quebec think its a good idea, then more power too them. Personally I think they have put themselves on a slippery slope…and one I don’t they (or many in this thread) even see. Yeah, I think that schools should teach Evolution too. Yeah, I think that Creationism (ID, whatever) is stupid too. But I think its a VERY bad idea for the government to mandate this for private schools. It sets a bad precidence. I wonder if people in this thread who think its such a good idea would sing the same tune if the gubberment decided someday to forbid private schools from teaching something that THEY think is important. You see, whenever the government gets the power to do something you like, that means that, sometime down the road, ANOTHER government, one that perhaps doesn’t see eye to eye with you, could potentially have that same power to do something you DON’T like so much. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/82 "2006-10-26T00:45:31Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > You see, whenever the government gets the power to do something you like, that means that, sometime down the road, ANOTHER government, one that perhaps doesn’t see eye to eye with you, could potentially have that same power to do something you DON’T like so much. Not necessarily. It depends partly on the constitutionality of what the government is trying to do. E.g., a state government can forbid the teaching of Creationism as science in public schools, but that doesn’t mean that “sometime down the road” the same government could then **require** the teaching of Creationism as science in public schools. One of those positions is constitutional, and the other is not. > [@xtisme](#): > > But I think its a VERY bad idea for the government to mandate this for private schools. It sets a bad precidence. If schools wish to be accredited by a governmental accrediting body—and apparently in Quebec, according to **severus** , attendance at an accredited school is mandatory up to the age of 16—then they have to teach to the standards that the accrediting body sets. We don’t have similar mandatory universal accreditation standards in US education, so the situation isn’t really comparable. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/83 "2006-10-26T00:56:33Z")
[QUOTE=Pazu] Well, first of all, we were talking about what gets taught in schools, not by parents. Parents can teach their kids whatever they want. Presumably, though, if a society has collectively decided that education is important enough to set up a public school system, there should be some sort of societal standards for educational goals. [/QUOTE] In public schools, yes. In private schools, no. A parent’s right to choose what the child learns in a private school is no different from their right to choose what they teach him at home. > [@](#): > > What would constitute a “legitimate religious objection” anyway? How would you distinguish it from an “illegitimate” one? What about a non-religious objection? I think a parent should be able to define that. > [@](#): > > That’s exactly the problem! Do you think that allowing people to “opt out” is actually going to improve this situation? Of course not. What I’m saying is that people generally only remember stuff from high school if they have a particular interest in it, which I think doesn’t apply to evolution for most people. > [@](#): > > Look at the link thoughtfully provided by **crowmanyclouds**. Mel and Norma Gabler, in the quoted text, show zero evidence of understanding evolutionary theory, yet they wield tremendous influence in how national curricula are designed. This goes far beyond what Mel and Norma want to teach their own spawn. > > Granted, perpetuating this level of ignorance can only help their own cause… I will when I get a chance, but if they are not influencing what is being taught in the PUBLIC schools, then I can’t get too excited about it. > [@](#): > > Again, a statement that could be applied to lots of subjects, so why bother with school at all? Good question. Unfortunately, I think most of what people are taught in school is utterly wasted. > [@](#): > > I have no idea where this bizarre leap of logic came from, but **miss elizabeth** explained my position very nicely, so I don’t feel the need to elaborate. Well, you said: > [@](#): > > If the creationists wanted to run off and form their own little enclave along similar lines, and remove themselves from mainstream society, I wouldn’t care what they taught each other either. Please explain how what I said grossly misrepresents this statement? ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/84 "2006-10-26T00:59:05Z")
[QUOTE=xtisme] Haven’t read through every response to the thread (probably a mistake), but I’ll briefly echo what another poster said upthread…if this happened in America, I’d be outraged. That it happened in Canada…well, its their problem to deal with. If the good folks in Quebec think its a good idea, then more power too them. Personally I think they have put themselves on a slippery slope…and one I don’t they (or many in this thread) even see. Yeah, I think that schools should teach Evolution too. Yeah, I think that Creationism (ID, whatever) is stupid too. But I think its a VERY bad idea for the government to mandate this for private schools. It sets a bad precidence. I wonder if people in this thread who think its such a good idea would sing the same tune if the gubberment decided someday to forbid private schools from teaching something that THEY think is important. You see, whenever the government gets the power to do something you like, that means that, sometime down the road, ANOTHER government, one that perhaps doesn’t see eye to eye with you, could potentially have that same power to do something you DON’T like so much. -XT [/QUOTE] That is exactly how I feel about this. Do I have my own opinions about the wisdom of teaching creationism instead of evolution? Of course. I don’t get the insistence on creationism at all. But…I just don’t think it’s the place of the government to decide. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/85 "2006-10-26T00:59:36Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] I will when I get a chance, but if they are not influencing what is being taught in the PUBLIC schools, then I can’t get too excited about it. [/QUOTE] Why not? Your position is that the parents should decide what a child learns. Even if they only influence what’s being taught in private schools, they are still influencing what children other than their own are being taught. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/86 "2006-10-26T01:13:24Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] Why not? Your position is that the parents should decide what a child learns. Even if they only influence what’s being taught in private schools, they are still influencing what children other than their own are being taught. [/QUOTE] With the assumption that parents choose private schools with the knowledge of what the curriculum is. If they don’t like it, they don’t need to send their kids there. The beauty of private schooling, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/87 "2006-10-26T01:39:55Z")
[QUOTE=xtisme] Haven’t read through every response to the thread (probably a mistake) […] Personally I think they have put themselves on a slippery slope…and one I don’t they (or many in this thread) even see. [/QUOTE] Of course you do, Yank. Do read post #44 (my second post in the thread). 😉 According to **Loopydude** , anyway, it’s a nice summary of one particular cultural difference between Quebec and the US that’s in play here. (Thanks Loopydude!) You might also want to read post #34, my first in this thread, where I explain that the law wasn’t actually changed here, only enforced. Also, I note that what most people have picked on (including the _National Post_ journalist whose article is linked in the OP) is the fact that this decision by the ministry of Education means that children will have to be taught the theory of evolution. I want to take the time to note that many of these unrecognized schools in Quebec did not only not teach evolution, in some cases they didn’t teach a large part of what many would consider essential knowledge. That cult in Joliette is extremely closed to the outside world; I don’t know what they teach their kids in school but I’m quite sure it isn’t the official curriculum minus evolution. Whether knowing evolution is necessary to understand biology and to be a well-rounded citizen is an interesting topic for debate, but this particular situation goes further than that. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/88 "2006-10-26T01:42:40Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] With the assumption that parents choose private schools with the knowledge of what the curriculum is. If they don’t like it, they don’t need to send their kids there. The beauty of private schooling, IMO. [/QUOTE] Hmm. Could you not say then that if evolution (or any other subject) was made compulsory in all schools, that parents can still choose whether or not to send their kids to those schools? ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/89 "2006-10-26T01:56:36Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] Hmm. Could you not say then that if evolution (or any other subject) was made compulsory in all schools, that parents can still choose whether or not to send their kids to those schools? [/QUOTE] No, because not every parent is equipped to educate their children at home. Why should a parent’s ONLY option be to teach the child at home? Isn’t the point of private schools to give people a choice in education? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/90 "2006-10-26T02:01:15Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] No, because not every parent is equipped to educate their children at home. Why should a parent’s ONLY option be to teach the child at home? Isn’t the point of private schools to give people a choice in education? [/QUOTE] I thought the point of private schools was to give people who can afford it a better level of teaching than public schools, but that may just be my UK-centric bias. That wouldn’t be their only option, anyway - they’d be able to send their kids to a public school. And if you mean (as I believe you do) that they shouldn’t have only one option of schooling the way they want it, that’s exactly what the current system provides - only particular private schools will teach the child in the way they want. Since, as you say, most parents aren’t equipped to home-school their kids, they actually have only one option _now_. ---
**Author:** ![Valteron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f17d59/32.png) [@Valteron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Valteron)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/91 "2006-10-26T02:59:56Z")
I am a Quebec taxpayer, and I say bravo! I was overjoyed when the school systems went secular, and I say, if someone wants to pay to start a private religious school, they still have to follow the SCIENCE cirriculum set by the province. Look, if a religious group wanted to teach children that 2+2=5 because there is a passage in their holy book that says that, would we allow them to change math teaching to tell kids that? Or to take a more concrete example, would we allow a Muslim school to teach in Science class that shooting stars are drts that Allah shoots at demons, because it says that in the Koran? Or to teach that the Sun goes around the Earth because there are passages in the Bible that say so? Let’s just make one thing perfectly clear. The BIG BIGBIG lie of ID/Creationists is their attempt to make us believe that Evolution and their absurd, religious-based nonsense are somehow competing theories, running neck-and-neck, each backed by equally impressive numbers of scientists armed with equally impressive evidence, each equally deserving of respect and both worthy of being taught in schools as reasonable alternatives. The simple fact is that about 99.99% of biologists, zoologists and scientists in general agree with the basic FACT of evolution. Evolution is THE accepted scientific theory to explain speciation among living things. That, by the way is ALL it does. It has not a bloody word to say about whether the universe was created, always existed or whatever. When will the Fundies understand this? ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/92 "2006-10-26T13:06:39Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] I thought the point of private schools was to give people who can afford it a better level of teaching than public schools, but that may just be my UK-centric bias. [/QUOTE] That is certainly true in a lot of cases, but it’s just another reason to want choice in schools. Here, a lot of people send kids to religiously-based schools, not just for a better education, but also to get religious and values education, and also sometimes for better discipline. > [@](#): > > That wouldn’t be their only option, anyway - they’d be able to send their kids to a public school. And if you mean (as I believe you do) that they shouldn’t have only one option of schooling the way they want it, that’s exactly what the current system provides - only particular private schools will teach the child in the way they want. Since, as you say, most parents aren’t equipped to home-school their kids, they actually have only one option _now_. Well, everyone HAS the option to home-school…some may not desire that option for whatever reason. And their other option is private vs. public. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/93 "2006-10-26T13:53:19Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] That is certainly true in a lot of cases, but it’s just another reason to want choice in schools. Here, a lot of people send kids to religiously-based schools, not just for a better education, but also to get religious and values education, and also sometimes for better discipline. [/quote] We do have religious schools here too (I almost went to a Catholic sixth form) but in general if you say “private schools” to a person from the UK it brings up the image of posh rich kids. So yeah, there are different reasons for wanting to send kids to a private school. > [@](#): > > Well, everyone HAS the option to home-school…some may not desire that option for whatever reason. And their other option is private vs. public. Right. So, to be fair, if private schools were forced to a certain form of education, parents would still have another choice. It would just mean _undesirable_ choices both way, unless they want to home-school their kids anyway. I guess it all boils down to me thinking that the right to teach kids in whatever way parents wish is a lesser right than the one to make sure kids have a minimum standard of education, and to not strongly affect their life by forcing them to take remedial classes if they want to go into any kind of career in science. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/94 "2006-10-26T16:45:45Z")
[QUOTE=Kimstu] Good lord, was that **all** the science education you had in high school? I had a year of general/earth science as a freshman, a year of biology as a sophomore, a year of chemistry as a junior, and a year of physics as a senior (all between 1979 and 1981). I can’t remember if the last course was elective, but I know I had to take at least three full years of science courses. Are students these days really being fobbed off with one measly required year of “general science”? Furthermore, I don’t see how anybody can argue that evolution isn’t applicable to the real world, even for non-scientists. Evolution is how living creatures survive, or fail to survive, changes to their environments. This holds true for everything from mutating viruses to mass extinctions caused by climate change. Anybody who’s ever uttered or read a phrase like “antibiotic-resistant bacteria” or “mutant viruses” is dealing with evolution. [/QUOTE] No, that was just the only time in High School I dealt with biology. Every student was required to take the Grade 10 “general” science course. Then you had to have two more science credits to graduate. My other two credits came from Chemistry and Physics courses I took in 11th grade, and I took a fourth science credit in the form of Chem 2 senior year. I could have taken a focused biology course, or anatomy 1 or 2 I believe, if I had been interested. I was personally more interested in Chemistry and Physics. Also, I’m not one of the “students these days” I graduated before you did ;). I never argued _understanding evolution wasn’t part of being a well-educated person_ but just because you read about “antibiotic-resistant bacteria” or “mutant viruses” doesn’t mean you are “dealing” with evolution. You aren’t dealing with either of those unless you are in the medical or biological field, you’re just reading about them in a news article or science journal. That doesn’t mean it’s something your practically applying in your day-to-day life. ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2006, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/95 "2006-10-26T21:33:35Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] Why? What is the societal interest. Demonstrate to me that having a subsection of children who don’t properly understand a specific area of biology is a bad thing. If the reason societies have organized education is for societal gain, explain to me how parents refusing to teach something which will _never have any practical or societal use for the vast majority of people_ is a big enough deal to interfere. Yeah, this stuff is important to persons who are going to receive many types of _college_ education, especially those in the hard sciences and doubly so those in any field of biology. But Jimmy who wants to become a carpenter or Johnny who wants to become an airplane pilot can go through the entire span of his natural life and never need to understand evolution whatsoever. [/QUOTE] Someday Jimmy and Johnny are going to be given the opportunity to vote. As in, they’re going to choose the people who decide how to fund government research, and what research to fund, and whom to appoint to government research agencies, and what science-related policies to pursue. And that’s why I want Jimmy and Johnny to at least be _somewhat_ informed about the basics of science. These days, basic scientific knowledge is a necessary pre-requisite to informed political discussion. “Having a subsection of children who don’t understand a specific area of biology” leads to an ill-informed electorate; _that’s_ the societal interest. ---
**Author:** ![Pazu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pazu/32/15522_2.png) [@Pazu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pazu)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/96 "2006-10-27T00:25:23Z")
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena] In public schools, yes. In private schools, no. A parent’s right to choose what the child learns in a private school is no different from their right to choose what they teach him at home. [/quote] Well, only to a degree, as was mentioned by **Revenant** upthread. There’s no particular guarantee that any random private school curriculum will satisfy the parents, either. > [@](#): > > I think a parent should be able to define that. In any and all cases? Really? If a parent believes that girls don’t need to know how to read, that’s okay? > [@](#): > > Of course not. What I’m saying is that people generally only remember stuff from high school if they have a particular interest in it, which I think doesn’t apply to evolution for most people. That may be true, but I think that the better the foundation, the easier it will be to grasp related concepts in the future, regardless of how well they remember the specifics of what they were taught. It’s a lot easier to refamiliarize yourself with something you knew once, than to have to learn it _de novo_. > [@](#): > > I will when I get a chance, but if they are not influencing what is being taught in the PUBLIC schools, then I can’t get too excited about it. It’s really worth looking at the link; if nothing else, it’s an example of how proud ignorance can affect _many_ others. > [@](#): > > Good question. Unfortunately, I think most of what people are taught in school is utterly wasted. That may be so, but at the very least there’s the hope that every so often, someone’s inspired by what they learned to study deeper and make some kind of contribution to the field. Remove the “wasted” material and that hope fades. > [@](#): > > Please explain how what I said grossly misrepresents this statement? It’s a conditional statement, not a recommendation. You’ll note that nowhere have I stated a preferred course of action, only explained one of the conditions under which creationists’ control of school curricula wouldn’t bother me. I could just as easily say “If a cometary impact was going to vaporize the Earth in two years’ time, I wouldn’t care what they taught each other either”; that doesn’t mean I’m advocating Oort-induced apocalypse. Clear? ---
**Author:** ![Pazu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pazu/32/15522_2.png) [@Pazu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pazu)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705/97 "2006-10-27T00:28:01Z")
[QUOTE=Orbifold] Someday Jimmy and Johnny are going to be given the opportunity to vote. As in, they’re going to choose the people who decide how to fund government research, and what research to fund, and whom to appoint to government research agencies, and what science-related policies to pursue. And that’s why I want Jimmy and Johnny to at least be _somewhat_ informed about the basics of science. These days, basic scientific knowledge is a necessary pre-requisite to informed political discussion. “Having a subsection of children who don’t understand a specific area of biology” leads to an ill-informed electorate; _that’s_ the societal interest. [/QUOTE] Exactly. And it lessens the chances of silliness like the whole Dover, PA school board mess, which wasted everybody’s time. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hooray-for-quebec-requiring-religious-schools-to-teach-evolution/377705.md?page=4)