Health education and religious freedom

There is an ongoing debate in the Polish public sphere about a new, currently optional subject called "Health Education." Its creators announce that it is intended to introduce an "anthropological change" into school education. Among other things, this change involves a departure from the perspective known from the existing subject "Family Life Education."

The concept of the program assumes that it will be holistic in nature, i.e., it will integrate the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual aspects of a child's development. However, the program makes no reference to the spiritual sphere, including religious worldviews. In this way, the subject completely ignores the religious identity of the student, which has a significant impact on the mental and emotional sphere of the child.

Importantly, the health education curriculum for primary schools does not use the word "religion" even once, not even in the context of religious freedom, which clearly shows that there is no room in it to discuss differences in approaches to many health issues resulting, among other things, from the religious worldview of the child and their parents. In contrast, in the curriculum for secondary schools, references to religious issues are only found in the context of discrimination and, notably, sexual health, especially miscarriage and abortion. In this case, however, the aim is to draw attention to their "ethical determinants," i.e., the positions of various philosophical, religious, and worldview currents.

In the new approach, the concept of marriage practically no longer appears, and marital relationships are equated with other forms of relationships—collegial, friendly, or partnership—suggesting that there is no difference between them. Relationships are divided only into "formal" and "informal." This also applies to the understanding of human beings, their sexuality, and its forms of expression.

The ethical criteria proposed in "Health Education" do not refer to ethical or religious traditions, but to the liberal principle of voluntariness in determining moral norms. According to many commentators, this constitutes an aggressive form of indoctrination of young people – conducted under the guise of classes on health and sexuality, and in isolation from the beliefs of parents. Meanwhile, in the Polish education system, schools are supposed to support parents in the upbringing process, not replace them¹ .

However, the way in which supporters of the introduction of this subject refer to religion as the motivation for parents to withdraw their children from classes en masse requires special attention. Instead of engaging in a substantive discussion with arguments—e.g., those of the Polish Episcopate—concerning anthropological and ethical issues, religion is presented as an obstacle to concern for health, proper nutrition, and knowledge about sexuality. The Catholic Church is accused of bad intentions and a lack of will to fight pathologies, which is supposed to justify the marginalization of religion in the public sphere. This type of deliberate polarization builds a narrative that religion is an irrational and ideological choice, while it is "Health Education" – according to its authors – that is supposed to be the new anthropological framework.

The Ministry of Education did not respond to the letter from the Polish Episcopal Conference, which presented arguments pointing to the controversial manner in which the subject was introduced, its content, the omission of the voice of the Churches, and the abbreviated public consultation² . The very fact that bishops are speaking out on this issue is already being criticized as inappropriate political interference , often accompanied by offensive terms directed at clergy ("gentlemen bishops").

In public statements, the Minister of Education refers to religion as "superstition" and "superstition" ³. This raises questions about the awareness of those responsible for the ministry in the area of religious freedom. Regardless of the aggressive policy of imposing new anthropological visions, combined with limiting religious education in Polish schools, it is worth taking a closer look at the vision of religious freedom that is being promoted in this way. According to this vision, religious motivation has no right to be expressed publicly, is ridiculed, and the consideration of the religious dimension in the process of educating and building a child's identity is marginalized, despite the legal provisions contained in the Polish Constitution guaranteeing precisely such education and axiology (Article 53).

The discussion surrounding the new subject is thus another example of the weakening of concern for religious freedom in Poland – for respect for religious beliefs and for the rights of parents to raise their children in accordance with their own convictions. Instead of respect and dialogue, the ministry responds to parents' decisions with attacks, ridiculing their views and suggesting that they are harming their children.

Meanwhile, religious freedom, closely linked to freedom of conscience, is a fundamental human right and the foundation of democracy and other freedoms. This was recently demonstrated (once again) by the US Supreme Court in its June 27 ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor⁴ concerning the inclusion of books addressing LGBTQ issues in the English language curriculum in Montgomery County elementary schools in Maryland to make education more inclusive. The so-called "storybooks" featured characters and themes related to sexual orientation and gender identity. The complaining parents demanded the option to exclude their children from participating in this program, citing their religious freedom and parental rights. The parents did not question the inclusion of the books in the curriculum; they simply wanted to retain control over how and when their children would be exposed to content that, in their view, conflicted with their religious obligation to raise their children in the spirit of their faith on issues of gender, marriage, and sexuality. The Supreme Court, which accepted the case by a 6-3 majority, ruled that parents have a constitutional right to exclude their children from a curriculum that conflicts with their religious beliefs. In considering the case, the Court applied a principle it developed in 1972 in Wisconsin v. Yoder⁵ . According to this principle, state policies violate the right of parents to freely practice their religion if they "significantly interfere with the religious development" of children by placing them in environments that are "hostile" to their religious beliefs and exert "pressure to conform" to different views. The ruling emphasized that public education is a public good that cannot be made conditional on the waiver of religious freedom rights. Is the Polish Ministry of National Education so blinded by attempts to ideologically standardize students that it is willing to restrict the fundamental rights of parents? The jurisprudence of American courts consistently shows that the right to religious freedom of students and parents must be protected and taken into account in the education process—not ridiculed or marginalized. History has repeatedly shown that the loss of freedom begins with the loss of religious freedom. It is worth remembering this.

The Religious Freedom Laboratory Team