Ethics - IQ2 Debate

[OzAtheist]

Intelligence 2 is holding another one of their excellent debates, this one's titled
Special Ethics Education should be allowed for children not attending scripture classes
Details:

When: 17 November 2010, be seated by 6:45pm
Where: City Recital Hall Angel Place, 2 Angel Place, Sydney - map
Price: Just $32 a ticket

Check the site for further information (http://www.iq2oz.com/events/event-details/2010-series-sydney/17-november.php)

Could prove to be a lively and interesting debate

[ABridgeTooFar]

Nice, do they film their debates?

Theists are going to get destroyed on this one.

[cyclist]

Nice, do they film their debates?

Theists are going to get destroyed on this one.

Unfortunately, a debate is carried by the side that is able to argue the best.

This is one reason why a lot of atheists refuse to debate the creationists.

Even so, this looks like an interesting debate, I might consider attending.

James

[RealityRules]

Nice, do they film their debates?


I think they have been live on the Sydney Morning herald site, and probably other Fairfax sites such as the Age.

[TimB]

I got tickets - should be interesting.

[ABridgeTooFar]

Thanks RealityRules! I'll keep an eye out then.

[66 vegie]

I got tickets - should be interesting.


Hi TimB.

Just got my tickets yesterday...maybe we can meet up.??

[TimB]

@ 66 vegie.

For sure - will send you a PM

[TimB]

Well surprise surprise the majority of people at the debate support the proposal of having ethics classes.

The against team Robert Haddad, Jimbo Wallace and Rt Rev Dr Glenn Davies did the usual special pleading. "Oh but the kids in SRE will miss out on ethics, we love the idea of ethic we do we really do but what about the poor kids in SRE who will miss out". Funny how their view has changed from "you can't teach ethics without reference to god/holy book" to "all kids should study ethics".

The kids in SRE will only miss out if the SRE providors choose not to incorporate any of the ethics course material or don't bring in any ethical discussions based in their own faith traditions - so it seems that according to the Anglican and Catholic churches, you can't mix ethics and religion. Now there's a surprise!!

Some other face palm moments;
- Robert Haddard has a problem with a structured ethics course being taught by well meaning volunteers with only 2 days training. I wonder if he also has a problem with kids in SRE being taught by well meaning volunteers who are free to impart their personal interpretation of their faith in a completely unregulated manner? Probably not.
- Putting kids in an ethics class will isolate them from the views of others. OK so segregating children by their parents belief is good but putting kids of "all/any faith" and "no faith" backgrounds in a room together to discuss ethical issues where they all get to contribute their ideas and hear the ideas of others is bad. OOOOOKAAAYYYYYYY.
- According to Jimbo Wallace, the ethics course will mean the "moral compass" of children won't point true north. Whatever than means. And as one of the questioners afterwards stated "well the moral compass of some priests who spend their whole life studying religion and theology doesn't point true north either".

The For team presented their case with much more clarity than the AGAINST - but maybe I was biased.

And my closing statement; What right does the Anglican and Catholic churches have to say what should be made available to children in non-SRE classes????? AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH

@ 66 Vegie: It was nice to finally meet you last night!!

[RealityRules]

.
Haddad has a piece in this mornings Fairfax press (that is open for comment - early comments say just remove SRE, hehe)

www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/ethics-should-be-a-course-for-all-pupils (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/ethics-should-be-a-course-for-all-pupils-20101117-17xjb.html?comments=18#comments)


There is also a report in the smh (+/- other Fairfax press), also open for comment

www.smh.com.au/national/education/most-back-study-of-ethics-as-an-alternative-to-religion-believe-it-or-not (http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/most-back-study-of-ethics-as-an-alternative-to-religion-believe-it-or-not-20101118-17xtj.html)

[66 vegie]

Well surprise surprise the majority of people at the debate support the proposal of having ethics classes.

The against team Robert Haddad, Jimbo Wallace and Rt Rev Dr Glenn Davies did the usual special pleading. "Oh but the kids in SRE will miss out on ethics, we love the idea of ethic we do we really do but what about the poor kids in SRE who will miss out". Funny how their view has changed from "you can't teach ethics without reference to god/holy book" to "all kids should study ethics".

The kids in SRE will only miss out if the SRE providors choose not to incorporate any of the ethics course material or don't bring in any ethical discussions based in their own faith traditions - so it seems that according to the Anglican and Catholic churches, you can't mix ethics and religion. Now there's a surprise!!

Some other face palm moments;
- Robert Haddard has a problem with a structured ethics course being taught by well meaning volunteers with only 2 days training. I wonder if he also has a problem with kids in SRE being taught by well meaning volunteers who are free to impart their personal interpretation of their faith in a completely unregulated manner? Probably not.
- Putting kids in an ethics class will isolate them from the views of others. OK so segregating children by their parents belief is good but putting kids of "all/any faith" and "no faith" backgrounds in a room together to discuss ethical issues where they all get to contribute their ideas and hear the ideas of others is bad. OOOOOKAAAYYYYYYY.
- According to Jimbo Wallace, the ethics course will mean the "moral compass" of children won't point true north. Whatever than means. And as one of the questioners afterwards stated "well the moral compass of some priests who spend their whole life studying religion and theology doesn't point true north either".

The For team presented their case with much more clarity than the AGAINST - but maybe I was biased.

And my closing statement; What right does the Anglican and Catholic churches have to say what should be made available to children in non-SRE classes????? AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH

@ 66 Vegie: It was nice to finally meet you last night!!

Hi TimB.

What can I say...you've summed everything up beautifully. It was good to meet you to...next time I hope we can have more time for a longer chat and whine about all the wrong's of religion.;)