|
MARK-ALAN WHITTLE RELIGIOUS POLICY IS IN CONTRAVENTION Mountain News, Friday, 19 Mar 2004 Re: Students not impressed with decision on religious group meetings After reading about the plight of the Westmount students, I'm left wondering what part of permanent policy memorandum No. 112 the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board (HWDSB) Trustees can't seem to understand? There is no distinction drawn among the various religions as to what is instructional and what is devotional, or indoctrination. According to this memorandum and the Education Act, the Muslim prayer groups are in direct contravention because praying and listening to sermons are devotional activities and lends itself to Islam, to the exclusion of all other religious denominations. There is no gray area here at all that would allow this to occur or the HWDSB to create policy in this regard. An Imam is not an accredited teacher, therefore they are not allowed to teach religion in the classroom any time during the day, so that would disallow their activities to take place during the instructional time that is in the collective agreement presently in force with the OSSTF. Unless the time used by the Imam is not considered part of the instructional day, he would still have to hold a teaching certificate with the Province and be a member of the OSSTF. Having a teacher / advisor in the room as an observer does not meet the criteria that is required by policy memorandum or the Education Act. The religious policy recently approved by the Committee of the Whole, is in direct contravention of the Education Act by allowing Imams to teach devotional religion, wholly unto themselves, that is not endorsed by the board during instructional hours, nor are Imams licensed to be teachers in the classroom according to Ministry guidelines and the Education Act. The only way that all denominations can be treated fairly is to have a religion course as specified in the policy (PPM 112) that reflects the most popular denominations, or allow all religious groups to meet outside the instructional day under the present public use policy of the board as anyone else using board facilities would need to comply with. Is each and every trustee who supported this usurious religious policy willing to foot the bill for the legal costs to defend it, as it will likely be struck down by the courts? Will the Trustees ever be held to account for their bad decisions? |