Quote Originally Posted by ThisYouWillDo View Post
Wouldn't it be strange if an American schoolboy discovered one day that his country's founding fathers fled Europe to avoid religious persecution but he had little or no idea about the religions concerned because teaching them was banned?
That's misconstruing the issue. There is no ban in teaching the history of religion. There is no ban against teaching what the various religions believe. The ban is against teaching a single religion, saying that said religion is the only correct religion, and presumably using those teachings to officially (governmentally) determine right and wrong and to mete out punishment... (teaching that) in a public school.

In fact, separation of church and state ensures that everyone in this country is allowed to privately teach their own single religion without interference from the government. Separation of church and state was inspired to avoid such bans. To give freedom of religion.

I don't really see what's wrong with teaching religion with a Christian bias in a Christian country, or an Islamic one in a Moslem country. It seems odd to me to do otherwise - almost to deny the validity of the majority faith, and certainly to undermine it: officially decreed to be of no greater value than other religions that have no place in the country concerned or in its cultural history. I grew up in a nominally Christian country. I learned about Christianity at school. My knowledge and understanding of other religions is coloured by my knowledge of Christian principles and beliefs. I am no better or worse a person for this than if I had received a "neutral" education in this regard.

I rejected God, and therefore Christianity too, and found no other faith offered anything better in its place, so I became an atheist (I don't mind discussing my beliefs here, by the way). But my morality is based upon what I learned in my younger days and I would resent anyone telling me that it is based on a heresy or a fallacy and that it is fundamentally wrong. And what should I have been taught instead?

But don't get me wrong: I'm not saying the subject must be taught with a particular bias. Let me assure you that I am in favour of free thought and self expression. I am therefore against the suppression of ideas, even religious ones.
That's the whole point TY. If you condone publicly teaching the 'majority' religion you condone suppression of the others. You would not be allowed to reject god nor the 'majority' religion, let alone choose another.

What's the majority religion in the USA? Don't say Christianity. Because I'm sure that there would be an uproar of dissent if I insisted on teaching everyones' kids Catholicism. Or Mormanism. Or Nazarene. Or Baptist. Or Southern Baptist. Or made everyone learn Hebrew and get all the boys circumcised so they could be Jews for Jesus.

Should "Citizenship" classes, or studies of the national constitution also be banned? Is it better to teach democracy to students of politics in USA and communism to those in China, and other political ideas afterwards? Or perhaps we must put democracy, communism, fascism and tyranny all on the same footing and let the student choose between them.
You make my point. We should give more effort into showing both the unbiased pros and cons of each governmental form. Because we don't, we promote democracy and teach our children to reject other forms out of hand. THAT is what would happen if we taught a particular religion in public school.