Author: J. Venkatesan
Publication: The Hindu
Date: August 2, 2002
The Supreme Court did not agree
with the submission of senior counsel, C.S. Vaidyanathan, that moral values
and principles of all religions should not be taught in school.
Responding to the submission of
counsel for the petitioners, social activist Aruna Roy and two others,
the Bench comprising Justice M.B. Shah, Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari and
Justice H.K. Sema observed that the teaching of religion in schools by
itself was not wrong.
When Mr. Vaidyanathan submitted
that religion was being taught in schools in the last 50 years, the Bench
observed that the problem is ``we have forgotten religion for the last
50 years. We have been fighting only for our fundamental rights and no
attention was paid to duties which flowed through moral values. Should
we not start this at some stage?''. Further, the Bench said " that today
the situation is totally polluted. How to get out of the polluted situation?
It is high time that moral values are taught to children at the school
level at the primary age. Unless the basic tenets of each religion is taught,
they can never be able to differentiate between one religion and another
which is essential for bringing about harmony''.
Counsel drew the court's attention
to the fact that emphasis on religion in the new curriculum marked a clear
shift, if not reversal, of the national policy of education (NPE).
The Bench, however, noted that ''the
core tenets of all religions is secularism and no religion teaches violence.
The problem is being caused only by fundamentalists. Some hardcore elements
create disturbances for personal gains, otherwise there would not have
been any violence''.
Earlier, senior counsel for the
National Council of Educational Research and Training,, M.N. Krishnamani
refuted Mr. Vaidyanathan's argument that the curriculum had been given
a "Brahmanical approach." The arguments will continue tomorrow.