Conduct a Keyword Search of this complete site and visit my main index

ISSUES FACING RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN A TECHNOLOGICAL AGE

There is uniformity in each of the articles. The link in the set appears to be the fact that as a community, we have lost the 'soul' of our being. Only the 'physical and monetary' is declared to be important, and this has implications for life issues such as Euthanasia and genetic engineering and how people are treated 'in between' these two practices. The focus is not on the beauty and mystery of the human person (which is absolute and transcends culture) but on the perceived worth of each person (which is subjective). Once we realize this, we also acknowledge the media's conspiracy in promoting these anti-life philosophies. The media is one group, which represents the dominant culture making decisions for those who have no power and therefore no say. As Inform says, 'The rule of the healthy and the strong over the weak'. Of course, all of this received its impetus from the inculcation of Darwin's ideas." The Lab is helping couples fulfill 'one of the most basic fundamental Darwinian laws - preservation of the species" (Adler, 1995.p 73).

We often speak of 'rights' that the word has now lost value. Cooney reminds us in his definition of the word, that it has a strong sense and a weak sense. A right, in its strong sense, remains one for an individual if it doesn't undermine the fundamental rights of another to experience what is universally acknowledged (in true conscience) as rights - life, freedom, peace, safety etc. I appreciate this distinction of rights. Often we operate at the weak one because we judge subjectively, (perhaps using Kohlberg's stage 2/ personal usefulness stage), not from an informed conscience.

Viewing things simply, there appears to be a battle between people holding these two opposing views. We can see a link between all the issue covered in the articles; Euthanasia, abortion, causes of poverty and violence, the media's bias and genetic engineering. They are allowed to exist and do exist because what motivates them is an understanding that a right is determined by an inability to cope with life's challenges (Cowley, 1995.p 75).

The articles raise points, which have many implications for the way we perceive the world and our place in it. The swing away from the intrinsic value of the human to valuing human productivity has rendered as economically rational what used to be sacred - life, death, the person.

Robert Coles' article seems not to relate to the other articles at first, however, the link lies in the mystery of the human person, which cannot be quantified or qualified. The removal of the 'soul' in anthropological studies has also affected psychologists et. al who try to box children into Fowler's stages. I already see students in my classes that operate at Kohlberg's stage 6 when the 'soul' we have lost sight of makes an appearance. When the soul takes over, often ' a leap of moral sensibilities' as Coles calls it, occurs (Coles, 1981.p 73). I agree therefore, that we should allow the Holy Spirit to work in the lives of students. It is for this that I fundamentally disagree with Genetic Engineering for example. Where is the work of The Holy Spirit in all this? The question is not whether or not a clone would have a soul, or whether or not another Hitler could be engineered, or whether or not a son can be saved by cloning another sibling to provide bone marrow. The question is, can we be masters of what will always remain a mystery; the existence of a human in this world and his/her spirituality and purpose. If we believe in God can we usurp His will for us? If we don't believe in God, can something which is acknowledged as mystery (as seen by the whole nurture versus nature debate on development of a human) and which Hollywood itself captures in the form of the power of the human spirit on the cinema screen, be viewed in economic or selfish terms? (The same question can therefore be applied to the other issues in the articles)

We need to reinforce the dignity of each individual in our discipline policy and we need to give students access to experiences, which enhance their value for life, such as community service once again. We also need to expose the media's and other dominant groups' bias and quasi-conspiratorial activities when it comes to life issues. We need to explore the effects of 'ethical relativism' as outlined by the Pope. We need to teach history, which demonstrates the impact of ethical subjectivism, and highlight the hypocrisy of nations, which fly in the face of reason and make their actions appear illogical. As Jean-Francois Mattei states when discussing the United States, " You have the death penalty and keep a newborn alive without a brain. You celebrate a clone and clone him." (Gelman, 1995.p 78)

Teachers should feel content to give students an answer to why the above life issues are ethical questions in the first place. Studying Kohlberg's method in a modified form is an excellent start to highlighting the fact that people face ethical questions and that they do so differently. These questions will inevitably bring the issue of death to a fore and this is an opportunity to bring Jesus closer to the children and help them understand the meaning of His death and the value of life. Then we can apply a study of the fruits of certain decisions, which are claimed to be anti-life. In the words of a famous man, " You will know by their fruits."