My suggestion would be to incorporate it into other subject areas, be it history, literature and language. Rather than writing about political debates the debates could be about religion. Persuasive compositions could be about why the student believes this religion or that and they would be graded on the content not the perceived truth. Most people agree that religion is important so irrespective of the time to implement such programs and the time it will take in the curriculum, it’s introduction is worth considering.

The religious institutions will be the resource to which the students could refer for additional information and I do not see why these institutions would have a problem with this (it may be the most young people they see or the most they see so intrigued). As for parents and their possible disapproval of students researching another religion for school, I pose the question, “Do they rather their children go through the motions of religion with disbelief in what they practice or do they prefer for them to be well informed and to choose their religion thereafter as their parents have?”

First off, by the time we decide which religions to teach, the semester done and if we want to really make an impact, the particular religion would have to be taught in depth. A religion per day would not even be enough and then when you finish that venture, the children graduate versed in religion and can’t spell and add. Where will schools find time to teach all religions and if the schools do that, pray tell what would be the role of the religious institutions?

Inclusiveness, I will take to mean for instance, the variation of religions wherein any one religion has their own differing interpretations. This is again the responsibility of the student to establish theirs and their grades would be on merit of their content. The varied belief systems for example Sunday verses Saturday worshipers of the same religion could be addressed in debate form. Determining all variations that exists will have to be subjective but I think there is room in the world for being subjective – to a degree.

Accuracy can be determined by involving as many “stakeholders” so to speak, ministers of the religions, consulting the general population etc. The task would be huge but the reward would be worth it as we build a more perceptive, faithful and tolerant nation.

*Refer to my next comment for additional thoughts.

Eg: Many females use gender as a tool to further their agenda’s suggesting their nurturing, multitasking abilities and ability to stretch a dollar – in what is far too often a single parent home – qualifies them as the best candidates to run a corporation or a country. Similarly, executive positions and political posts are dominated by males because of they are perceived to be less sensitive and more competent than women which is a particularly useful argument when voters consider the world’s crime situation.

Truth be told, in many of the classes I was in throughout the years, the top 10 students were predominantly females which attests to their competence. At the same time, there are many males that are a bit too sensitive (or “touchy” as some say). The problem is perception. Men supposedly aren’t to show emotion so they can’t possibly be too sensitive and men are the leaders in the classroom and the home so they are more than competent… Both are arguably incorrect and so the cycle continues irrespective of the evidence. Men and Women need to collectively and “consistently” decide to abandon these gender roles if equality and individuality are to prevail.

do gender roles need to be enforced? it is observed that gender roles differ and change over space and time. in fact, the example given of pink and blue colours being assigned to a specific gender is an example of a total reversal of gender roles. ”“The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.” – June, 1918. Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/When-Did-Girls-Start-Wearing-Pink.html
gender-specific coloured clothing is a cultural phenomenon of our modern Western society. like the vast majority of cultural gender norms, it is 100% arbitrary.

“I can appreciate the stance their father took because he didn’t think that his son should be interested in purchasing girl games – as the son put it frankly – after all he is a boy.”

as u rightly noted this type of rigid attitude towards gender identity is highly, highly problematic resulting in the many challenges that we’re experiencing in our patriarchal (Western) society that condones violence and aggression in men and restricts educational and economic opportunities for women based on the notion that they should generally be submissive to men. what is the benefit in extending this type of thinking?

“The boy, though young, should already know the difference between wrong and right.”

can it truly be said that we as a society do?

“Do you believe the father’s concern was well founded granted the son said quite frankly that he wanted a girl game? Would you have bought him that game thinking nothing of it or would you have given your son a mini lecture on his wrong idea of what is for a girl and what is for a boy while ensuring that he understand’s – where sexuality is concerned – what is and isn’t off limits.”

to answer your question. no, the father’s concern was not well founded in the slightest. there’s a specturm of gender preferences and behaviours. it is simply not the case of two genders fitting all no matter how much we threaten, cajole or abuse. secondly, yes, i would buy the game thinking nothing of it. the preference is harmless, why should i be bothered? whether or not my son likes pink should have no bearing on my love for him, further it has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not he is a good person. lastly, no, there’s no need for any mini lecture. regarding gender roles, all ideas have the same value imho. and the only thing “off limits” when it comes to sexual behaviour is what is currently on the law books.