Introduction
One of the urgent problems caused by globalization and migration is the coexistence of different cultures, traditions, and religions. Conflicts between the right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression of religion have become a severe stumbling block for adherents of different socio-cultural ways of life. In this regard, education on religious issues and the transfer of knowledge about religion in the secular education system mainly acquire a unique role.
At the same time, controversy regarding the need for sex education in schools is on the education agenda. A small number of parents and some church members oppose any form of school-based sex education, believing that it should be provided either at home (where it fits into the context of family values) or in institutions operating under the auspices of the church. Thus, in the UK, parents still have tension about the development of religious schools and the teaching of sex education in secondary schools.
Basic Concepts of Sex Education
In today’s world, sex education lessons in schools are becoming increasingly important. Modern psychoanalysts, psychologists, and sexologists say that sexuality does not appear when the genital apparatus is already formed. It begins to develop not only at the physiological level but also at the psychological level from the very birth of the child.
However, the low awareness of parents about the stages of psychosexual development of children and the destruction of programs on the ethics and psychology of family life in schools have led to substantial distortions in modern society (Leung et al., 2019). Sexuality is reduced to a purely sexual act without a normal upbringing of sexual identity, which includes emotional, behavioral, bodily, and cognitive components (Leung et al., 2019). They are necessary for the acceptance of gender identity and an assessment of masculinity and femininity concepts.
Children’s Rights
The rights of children and parents may be affected by school sex education. How sex education is taught in school can significantly impact a child’s personal life. In addition, this has a resonance in the family itself, as it can significantly affect the style of education. However, children are not only objects of parental and state education; from the beginning and with age, they become more and more protected.
The right to comprehensive sexuality education derives from several protected rights, such as the right to a life free from violence and discrimination, the right to the highest attainable standard of mental and physical health, the right to receive and impart information, and the right to quality and inclusive education, including education in the field of human rights. Comprehensive sex education is an essential part of completing a quality education. Thus, it should be provided for by law, mandatory, and introduced into the education system from the elementary grades. Curricula and teaching methods should be adapted to children’s different stages of development and consider their developing abilities.
Parents’ Rights
Opponents of sex education often advocate the right of parents to opt out of compulsory sex education on behalf of their children. Parents still have the right to request that their child be removed from the RSE secondary school sex education program, which, unless there are exceptional circumstances, must be granted three semesters before their child turns 16 (Introduction to Requirements, 2021). For now, if a child wishes to receive sex education on their own, rather than being withdrawn, the school must make arrangements for this to happen one of three terms before the child turns 16, the age at which consent to sex is allowed.
Principals will automatically grant a request to exclude a student from any sex education provided in elementary schools other than as part of the science curriculum. If a student is exempted from sex education, the school is responsible for ensuring that the student receives a properly targeted education during the withdrawal period. There is no right to refuse relationship education or health education. Schools must consult with parents when developing and reviewing their Attitude Education and RSE policies, which will inform schools about decisions about when and how to cover specific content (Relationships Education, 2020). Effective participation gives parents space and time to contribute, ask questions, share concerns, and the school to decide what to do next.
Citizenship and Social Responsibility
Citizenship is a moral position expressed in the sense of duty and responsibility of a person to the civic community to which he/she belongs, in readiness to defend and protect one’s rights and interests from encroachment. Thus, it entails the social responsibility at the heart of sex education. Social responsibility refers to the objective need to be held accountable for violating social norms (Melanie, 2022). It expresses the nature of the individual’s relationship with society, the state, the collective, other social groups, and formations – with all the people around.
The concept of citizenship encompasses the status accorded to members of society based on the skills and abilities traditionally associated with adulthood. Moreover, this is explicitly acknowledged in relation to the range of rights that adults have (James, 2010). If citizenship is understood legally, then it is a legal membership in the state, thanks to which a person acquires a legitimate status.
In today’s society, minority groups can very often only have the formal citizenship of the country in which they live but cannot fully participate in the life of this society. Often, a person can lose citizenship due to an intolerant society, because of which he will be forced to move. The general trend in education in the UK over the past decade has been to tighten curricula and behavioral structures in schools so that students are exposed to more and more hidden knowledge. It will help prevent discrimination against minorities and strengthen the observance of human rights and their relationship with citizenship.
Liberalism
Social responsibility is based on the social nature of human behavior, characterized by the desire for freedom. Liberal ideology is based on the fact that a person should be free to determine their destiny (MacMullen, 2015). The most crucial idea of liberalism, from which the concept and practice of the rule of law follow, is the social contract. Accordingly, laws are made with the consent of society for the benefit and protection of social norms (Jose, 2015). Sexual education helps to educate a socially responsible society that understands its role in the contract for the protection of humanity.
Within the framework of negative freedom in the understanding of classical liberalism, a person can act without fear of forcible coercion or extraneous influence. The restriction of this kind of freedom occurs through the intervention of outsiders in an individual’s life (Fargues, 2020). For example, in this concept, the state that supports negative freedom tries to interfere minimally in the lives of its citizens. The rejection of sex education, in this case, is justified by the fact that the government relies on the awareness of its citizens.
On the other hand, introducing compulsory sex education in schools will only raise the awareness of adolescents and future adults. In modern realities, there is still a part of hostile liberalism in the legal system, including an individual’s choice in favor of or against sex education. That is reflected in the ability of a teenager who has reached the age of 16 to independently decide whether to attend sex education classes or not (Introduction to Requirements, 2021). In this case, the state performs a role that monitors the prevention of violence and chaos but, at the same time, does not prevent people from living within their capabilities, including social ones.
The state of a “positively free” person has a higher degree of intervention in the individual’s life, in contrast to the negative concept, and thereby increases the citizen’s freedom. Compulsory sex education, in this case, acts as a tool for equalizing the opportunities of all citizens, including sexual minorities, and the rights and security of women. Positive freedom in liberalism is based on a utopian idea of the development of human potential, which is the same for everyone and can be realized thanks to the common goals of the human community (Fargues, 2020).
However, the current desire of society to contribute to changing the world for the better can only be fueled by the state. For example, mandatory sex education will teach adolescents socially acceptable and safe interactions. Moreover, it will help develop tolerance in society, as it will impact not only the generation that already exists in a diverse society but also future generations. However, positive freedom in liberalism is seen as something that can threaten human freedom.
Democracy
Proponents of democratic government argue that sex education productively directs the sexual energy of young people to the intellectual development of civic responsibility. Sex education is being rethought as a technology of democratic governance or a method of introducing self-discipline into politics. In addition, the perception of sexuality is changing in modern society, which is associated with the spread and constant development of the Internet, which makes everything more accessible.
Thus, the introduction of sex education in schools reflects society’s readiness for change. In addition, as noted earlier, the school does not play the main role in the education process; the interaction of parents, teachers, psychologists, and other specialists is essential. That is a complex process that demonstrates a new stage in the development of a tolerant, responsible, and healthier society. Each of the concepts described above intersects and completes each other, creating a general picture of the impact of introducing sex education in schools.
Problems in Understanding the Concept of Sex Education
The problems of sex education associated with the methodological equipment of this process, with the lack of adaptation of research material, are not isolated. Considerable anxiety and concern of teachers and parents are caused by the mass production and incompetent use of literature on the processes of conception and childbirth, the release and admission of which is not controlled by competent organizations (Sex Education Forum, 2022). Many of these books addressed to children do not meet the requirements for children’s literature and do not consider the level of development of perception when using drawings.
In addition, when adapting the text to the perception of schoolchildren, one should adhere to specific ethical standards. All this happens because teachers and psychologists do not participate in preparing such books for publication; only doctors, sexologists, and artists. Incompetent use of such literature can lead to children misinterpreting a number of facts and developing an incorrect, unhealthy attitude towards such intimate information.
Finally, programs and manuals on sexual education, as well as on ideology, which include this section as an integral part, are mostly heterogeneous in the nature of the material included (Sex Education Forum, 2022). They are practically not amenable to generalization and systematization. At the same time, the lack of competent and ethical sex education in most families and schools leads to the currently observed high percentage of unprotected sexual intercourse among adolescents, unwanted pregnancies of schoolgirls, venereal diseases, and more.
The teaching and educational mission of the school is not limited to the transfer of knowledge. Rather, the state’s task is to prepare the individual child to become a responsible member of society. Thus, the school’s tasks also lie in the field of education.
The educational mandate of the state is aimed not only at the transfer of knowledge and the education of people’s self-confidence (Sex Education Forum, 2022). It also aims to build responsible citizens who participate equally and responsibly in democratic processes in a pluralistic society. Social competence in dealing with dissidents, residential tolerance, perseverance, and self-affirmation of a faith different from the majority can be practiced more effectively (Almond, 2010). It should contact society, and the various opinions represented in it occur not only episodically but are also part of the regular school day-to-day experience.
Many argue its position against sex education in schools with the following shortcomings: the motive for initiating sexual behavior and spoiled modesty. Adults may think that teens will try to have sex if they receive sex education because they may view sex education as a motivation for sexual awareness (Sanjakdar, 2021). However, from a scientific point of view, numerous studies have shown that comprehensive sex education cannot be sexually erotic if it is age-appropriate and delivered accurately (Sanjakdar, 2021). In this regard, professional intervention in compiling information on sex education is important.
Religion Education in a Plural Society UK
The classical liberal conception of the state’s role is that different lifestyles, beliefs, and value systems are, in principle, of equal value. The state provides mechanisms to protect different positions and refrain from supporting any particular point of view to promote legal equality between the various components of society. It accepts the limitations of its powers so that religious beliefs and minority groups are protected from undue state interference and, where necessary, receive support to ensure equal access to the benefits provided by the state. Today, society in the UK is facing a conflict caused by the debate over teaching religious education in a religious school.
In schools in the UK today, there is debate about whether religious lessons are necessary, given the diversity of modern society. It suggests that in today’s life, the problem of the appropriateness of religious symbols and objects in public places, such as schools, reflects the fundamental problem of people’s ambiguous attitudes toward the role of religion in their daily lives. On the other hand, teaching religion is aimed primarily at acquainting children with the fact that different opinions have the right to exist. Thus, religious education helps to achieve tolerance in society.
A strongly pluralistic state is one in which certain, different, conflicting, and often incompatible positions are tolerated. These differences are recognized and respected, and the discourse between them is built because one may be better than the other in some respect or detail (Tate, 2021). In contrast, the “weak” version reflects the view that all positions are equally valid, and no group can claim to be better in any way than any other (Tate, 2021). Any attempt to do so in such a society is usually seen as serious social solecism at best. In such circumstances, religious manifestations of any kind are only allowed if they remain in the private sphere.
Today, in many European countries, the problem of the presence/absence of religion in schools, the content and forms of such presence, as well as the goals and objectives of the educational process, one way or another connected with religious problems, are being sharply debated. The change in the role of religion in the public space that has taken place in recent years has led to an increasing recognition of the need for dialogue between different religious traditions, which should contribute to the prevention of conflicts and the achievement of peaceful coexistence in a multi-religious society.
Contradictions in Religious Education
Public opinion on the introduction of a religious course was strongly divided. The views of almost all supporters of the new subject are standard and boil down to words about the need to educate the younger generation in moral values, tolerance, mutual understanding, and respect for each other (Toosi & Jamil, 2021). The doubts of the opponents of religious education, first of all, are connected with the concern that the classrooms from an early age will be divided into Orthodox or Muslim groups. It can contribute to the development of tolerant relations between representatives of different cultures and lead to the division of society.
In conditions of strong pluralism, the challenge is always to strike the right balance between the different interests of parents, caregivers, and the state. The Education Act of 1992 established the Education Standards Authority, whose task, among other quality assurance matters, was to ensure that schools adhere to the new centralized curriculum (Education (schools) Act, 1992). In other words, while school education may still be pluralistic, the content of the curriculum and the way it is taught are becoming increasingly restricted by the legislative and inspection regime. That is intended precisely to limit pluralism in education and increase state control over public and private schools. As a result, a positive liberal freedom develops, which threatens to pass into complete control of society by the authorities.
Only the largest and most popular religions are still widespread, which ultimately contradicts the desire of the state to develop tolerance in society. In addition, children do not enter a religious school of their own free will, which means they do not have the legal right to choose. Most children do not think religion is vital unless they come from deeply religious families. On the other hand, religious commitment can be developed within the family directly, and the child can be sent to a public school. That will contribute to the development of tolerance both in a religious child and other children in their environment.
The rules require faith-based schools to demonstrate sufficient and sustained demand from adherents of a particular faith to justify a school before it can be opened. The effect of a quota system for non-believers would be to deny parents practicing adherents the opportunity to educate their children in a school that could provide religious and moral education based on their religious beliefs. In the House of Commons, they tried to introduce a bill prohibiting parents from exercising this “right” (House of Commons, 2004). It is instead of giving priority to parents of children who adhere to a particular faith. These examples illustrate how, in today’s society, a significant number of legislators prioritize the perception of social engineering over parental rights.
Voice of Children in Religious Education
Article 14 of the United Nations Convention is particularly cited – the right of children to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion – in debates about the appropriateness of religious schools (Universal Declaration, n.d.). It is usually discussed in the context of debates about student autonomy and indoctrination, but there are a number of problems with such positions. Claims regarding indoctrination often come from the idea that religious indoctrination is the main kind that can exist within education. However, schools of all types instill different attitudes and beliefs in students on a daily basis, whether through the official or “hidden” curriculum. The values promoted in schools can never be neutral, and therefore a decision must be made as to whether a given set of values is acceptable and respectful of children’s rights.
The interests of children are not identical – or at least not necessarily or always – identical to the interests of their parents. In addition, there are groups, many of which have strong religious convictions, who regard education designed to promote the development of a child’s independence as something in which neither they nor their children have any interest. Indeed, some religious groups believe that education that goes beyond certain rigidly defined boundaries is definitely anathema.
However, the fact remains that children are interested in becoming autonomous. Article 14 of the UNCRC only emphasizes that each person is an individual and must be accepted (Universal Declaration, n.d.). It represents an unresolved tension between the child’s developing right to freedom of religion and the parent’s right to provide religious guidance. Thus, determining the extent to which this right is respected will depend on specific judgments about the relative balance of a child’s views towards their parents, which will likely change as the child matures and develops.
Because religious schools can choose their religious curriculum, many choose to teach only the religion to which the school belongs. While this leads them to become devout members of the faith, it also means they do not understand other religious perspectives. For some children, this may affect some of their social skills later in life. When they have only ever been told one point of view, they may find it challenging to listen to others when talking about religion. Likewise, they will not develop the ability to politely disagree or back off from other people who have different views.
The goal of a regular religious curriculum is to enable children to understand unfamiliar cultures and understand why some people may behave the way they do. It allows them to understand the importance of diversity and acceptance of other people who may be different. Children who attend religious schools tend to be less culturally aware and less likely to notice and judge discriminatory behavior.
Democracy and Religion
Democracy must be characterized by diversity in educational provision, and this diversity may include:
- religious schools (Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist);
- schools based on a philosophical position (humanism, secularism, atheism);
- schools based on a special pedagogical approach (for example, Rudolf Steiner, Montessori).
Religious schools exist as part of this variety of educational services, and it should be noted that only totalitarian regimes have attempted to suppress the existence of such schools (quote). Whenever totalitarian regimes collapsed, religious schools were re-established as part of the legitimate expression of civil and parental rights in education.
One of the fundamental values of any democratic state, proclaimed at the highest legislative level, is freedom of religion. That implies the right of citizens to profess any religion or not to profess it at all (Fargues, 2020). In addition, as already mentioned, democracy can also be present within the family. Democratic parents listen to the opinions and desires of their children and openly show their support and love for them while reasonable restrictions and rules are established in the family (Fargues, 2020). Thus, forcible or unconscious attraction to any religion can harm not only the child but also the whole society.
In turn, those religions that minimize the free space of the individual, limit options for choice, and ultimately claim perfection and finality, unconditionally regulating the personal and social lives of their followers, on the contrary, prevent the spread and establishment of democratic principles in society. At the same time, not only representatives of political science but also the clergy themselves come to the appropriate conclusions.
The existence of minority groups with strong religious beliefs within a liberal democracy tests the state’s adherence to the values of “tolerance,” “open-mindedness,” and “rationality,” especially concerning the type of education it provides or permits. It can be argued that the state must retain control over education content to ensure that the liberal democratic ideal is maintained and that the state itself is coherent. However, education is a valuable activity, and if the fundamental ideals of public schools are defined in such a way that they are acceptable to all, their ideological content will be minimal. They risk becoming nothing more than a general ban on intolerance, violence, and harm to others.
Pluralistic Society
The main challenge remains to perform diversity and tolerance within a pluralistic society. It can be achieved either by developing pluralism in the schools themselves or by introducing general religious courses in ordinary schools. However, this may cause greater dissatisfaction with society, primarily among parents. On the other hand, many religious schools refuse to accept children of faith other than the leading ones in the school. Another issue is that little-known religions do not have the opportunity to develop, and the schools of big religions do not have enough places. Thus, the question arises of the state’s role in striving to create a liberal, democratic, tolerant society.
Conflicts between the right of parents to raise children, the rights of children, and the state’s task of raising children are resolved on the principles of the applicable agreement. The general public has a legitimate interest in resisting the rise of ideologically motivated “parallel societies” and integrating minorities. Integration not only implies that the majority of the population does not exclude minorities; it also demands that they do not withdraw into themselves and do not shut themselves off from dialogue with those who think differently and believe in something else.
For an open, pluralistic society, dialogue with minorities is enriching and helps them feel more secure in society. Practicing this in the sense of living tolerance is an important school task. The presence of a wide range of knowledge and beliefs in the classroom can sustainably contribute to the capacity of all students for tolerance and dialogue, which is a basic requirement of democratic decision-making processes.
Conclusion
Comprehensive education protects children and helps build a safer and more inclusive society. A society of pluralistic democracy tends to have a shared interest in the education of man and the development of tolerance and responsibility towards others. Sex education and religious lessons are part of the general upbringing of a tolerant person.
The problem of sexual education is one of the most relevant in the general context of the main directions of educational work. Unlike religious schools, sex education is necessary for every member of society. Thus, religious education takes place if it takes into account all the features of a pluralistic society and does not harm its democracy. At the same time, the organization of any learning process should be carried out in the aspect of a holistic pedagogical system that does not allow the underestimation of any of its components.
Reference List
Almond, B. (2010) “Education for tolerance: Cultural difference and family values,” Journal of Moral Education, 39(2), pp. 131–143. Web.
Education (schools) act 1992 (1992) Statute Law Database. Web.
Fargues, É. (2020) When states take rights back. London: Routledge.
House of Commons – education and skills – minutes of evidence (2004) Parliament.uk. Web.
Introduction to requirements (2021) GOV.UK. Web.
James, A. (2010) “To be (come) or not to be (come): Understanding children’s citizenship,” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 633(1), pp. 167–179. Web.
Jose, J. (2015) “A liberalism gone wrong? Muscular liberalism and the quest for monocultural difference,” Social Identities, 21(5), pp. 444–458. Web.
Leung, H. et al. (2019) “Development of contextually-relevant sexuality education: Lessons from a comprehensive review of adolescent sexuality education across cultures,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(4), p. 621. Web.
MacMullen, I. (2015) “Civics beyond critics.” Web.
Melanie, K. (ed.) (2022) Handbook of Moral Development. New York: Routledge.
Relationships education, relationships and sex education (RSE) and Health Education (2020) GOV.UK. Web.
Sanjakdar, F. (2021) “Making sense of British Muslim parents’ objections to ‘progressive’ sexuality education,” British Journal of Educational Studies, 70(2), pp. 187–216. Web.
Sex Education Forum (2022) Home. Web.
Tate, J.W. (2021) “Toleration and its possibilities: Relativism, skepticism, and pluralism,” The Palgrave Handbook of Toleration, pp. 1–34. Web.
Toosi, J.F. and Jamil, A.I. (2021) “Multi-religious education from the perspective of Islamic teachings compared to the pluralist model,” Jurnal Akidah & Pemikiran Islam, 23(1), pp. 279–308. Web.
Universal declaration of human rights (n.d.) United Nations. Web.