[ad_1]
This week, a request 100 personalities against the obligation of Discipline of Education for citizenshipamong them, Cardinal D. Manuel Clemente, Patriarch of Lisbon, D. António Moiteiro, Bishop of Aveiro, former President Cavaco Silva and former Prime Minister Pedro Passos Coelho.
The initiative sparked outrage, and two petitions to support mandatory discipline quickly arrived: one with more than 500 subscribers, with the name “Citizenship and development: citizenship is not an option“, and the manifest”In defense of education for citizenship“. A National Federation of Teachers It unanimously approved a note that defends the continuation of discipline in the 2nd and 3rd cycles of compulsory schooling for all students.
Ricardo Araújo Pereira (RAP) responded with the following argument: “People who come here to Portugal – Muslims, Gypsies – come here and they have to respect our rules and our values. If someone, because of their religion, believes that they can, in Portugal, treat women like sweet women in Saudi Arabia, We do not allow it, because there is something else here. If someone, due to their traditions, thinks that their child should leave school at fourteen, we do not allow it, because there is compulsory schooling. And therefore, our rules are these are the who are here in this discipline, and when I say “ours”, they are not from the current government, they are ours! “. The comedian recalls that it was under the tutelage of Nuno Crato, Minister of Education of the Passos Coelho Government, that the guidelines for the Citizenship Education course were drawn up, and maintains that, although the course was optional at that time, the government recognized “a nuclear importance” in these matters.
RAP also analyzes some of the arguments presented by two of the undersigned signatories: those of Professor Braga da Cruz, and those of the socialist deputy Sérgio Sousa PintoTo conclude that he does not understand very well what are the real motivations that can justify conscientious objection in relation to the discipline. Braga da Cruz will have said: “I presume that none of the undersigned subscribers is against Education for Citizenship, nor is they against the existence of a Chair of Education for Citizenship.” Sérgio Sousa Pinto, for his part, defended that “We want to educate young people and students of public schools for freedom, democratic values, tolerance and mutual respect, pluralism. We do not want a chair for that.” – Both statements show that “not all subscribers agree with the same” – concludes.
But RAP also emphasizes that Braga da Cruz maintains that the problem with the discipline of Education for Citizenship is that “the program aims to eliminate prejudices and stereotypes around the gender issue.” – I would say that it is not bad, there it is, by the rules of the country where we are. The country in which we are respecting human rights, the values of democracy, freedom, defends the idea that people should not be discriminated against because of gender, color, sexual orientation, and therefore “eliminate prejudices and stereotypes. With Regarding the gender issue, “it seems fine to me” – argues RAP, later recalling that these concepts were already present in the PSD program guidelines for the discipline in 2012.
Ricardo Araújo Pereira then cites the arguments of Sérgio Sousa Pinto, who said: “Discipline is neither bad nor good, it is totally useless (…) Is someone going to fail because they don’t know how to separate the garbage?” – RAP does not understand the need to invoke conscientious objection to a discipline “that is neither bad nor good and useless”.
For João Miguel Tavares, discipline must be mandatory, precisely because the door cannot be opened to the possibility that parents can impose their preferences in schools, even defending that “The school also has a duty to teach children values that go against the values of their parents and those values that are later not competitive. It is not bad for a child in school to hear other things.“.
Pedro Mexia also defended that the discipline should be curricular, as long as it is guaranteed that there are no “biases” in matters that do not meet the general consensus in Portuguese society: “The curriculum that is taught in the school must correspond to constitutional values : democracy, human rights, rights, freedoms and guarantees, as well as scientific consensus, this is part of what the public school should teach and there should be no conscientious objection. of conscience “, and therefore,”Subjects should be taught in such a way that students understand that there are questions that are indisputable, and that there are others where there are divergent opinions, and that these discrepancies are explained, I don’t see any problem ”- concludes Pedro Mexía.
The full shadow government broadcast, to see or listens, always in tsf.pt.
[ad_2]
