A Harvard University committee proposed a mandatory religion class as part of a new set of course requirements that breaks sharply from the school's peer institutions. There is an article about this on the Wall Street Journal website (for those who have membership)

For those who do not, here is the link to the lead article on Harvard's student run newspaper website, the Crimson:

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514669

Here is an excerpt from that link:

i think this is an excellent idea - i.e. promoting the study of religion rather than endorsing any religion per se or the endorsement of religion in general is a bold move and more relevant than ever given the current conflicts in the Middle East (judaism / islam / christianity).

i applaud Harvard's efforts to acknowledge the continuing importance of religion / faith in today's world and its impact on society at large. kudos to them for recognizing this, taking a proactive approach instead of hiding behind its Ivory Towers.

I have no problem with this. I wouldn't mind if public schools in general had a theology class so long as it was a historic/sociological study rather than preaching a certain religion.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

It just seems like an interesting core history/philosophy requirement. I see nothing objectionable about it whatsoever. In fact, as an undergrad, I might have taken such a course just for the sake of learning - required or not.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I went through a phase in college in which I bought books about different religions because I wanted to give each one at least a small shot so I could say what I believe/don't believe and mean it. A class would have made things much easier.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

I wonder if the other Ivies will follow suit... the last ones to do this would likely be Brown and Princeton IMO.

Brown - because it has an "open" curriculum (i.e. no "core" requirements aside from the requirements of ones major)

Princeton - because its history with no official religious affiliation (rare among American universities of its age) and its continuing nonsectarian stance.

Well, it would be keeping with its history. Most of the Ivy League schools in this country originally founded to train ministers.

I agree. I think "core" requirements are a good thing. Yes, it means that I have to do math, but it makes all the students at least a little bit rounded.

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

Indeed, I agree and applaud Harvard's bold public step here befitting the leading educational instutition in the USA.

I'll also chime in in support.
Hopefully they'll appoint profs who can teach about religions without promoting/attacking any of them, as well as maintain control of any more extremist elements of the class.

I think this is a great idea as well. Maybe a class about the history of all religions? This should be taught in high school tho as well.

__________________
America’s political correctness is a disease that will bring down our once fine nation.

I've taken many courses in 'comparative religions' from the 'religious studies' faculty and I have no doubt of the ease with which the issue can be taught with generic fairness to each religion. The problem is always the militant students. There are some in every class - their religion is RIGHT and every other one is EVIL or WRONG. Quite tiresome. They always seem to drop out or fail the course by the end.

I have, and it's not required for me to graduate. I am glad I took it. If there were an advanced class offered, I'd take that too.

I agree with you. It should be taught in high schools. But unfortunately, that's just a little too much involvement with religion in a public school for my tastes, even if it is strictly objective. I know that sounds contradictory, but I'd prefer that it be left up to the parents to teach their minor children about religion.