in the public interest?

haven't been keeping up with quebec politics much, so I wasn't aware that the province removed catechism from the curriculum as a gesture toward political correctness (or more probably, fiscal responsibility since they would have had to offer dedicated precious state resources to establish and implement curricula for the other principal religions (though non-RC accounts for less than 17% of the population). many surely agree with this move, saying that the state has no business teaching silly things like religion when half the kids in high school can barely spell their own names.
I disagree.
And not just because I think too much focus on the problem areas probably makes performance in those areas worse.
I disagree because it weakens the state and redirects those seeking that kind of instruction to the Church, thereby re-establishing the influence of religious leaders in society, one that the quiet revolution tried so hard to curtail.
This may sound big-brotherish, but I much prefer a well-rounded education, including religious instruction (and regular classes in gym, music and arts), in state-funded (and therefore state-supervised and accountable to the public) setting. That way all students can taste everything and knowingly choose what they want/don't want to pursue (as opposed to getting spewed out of a meatgrinder with a generic vanilla diploma and no personal, social, nor professional orientation).
And the fact that Radio-Canada is showing off how well the Montreal diocese is recruiting those "abandoned" by the curriculum (so they can teach what was deemed not-in-the-public-interest and actually teach things that may quickly become AGAINST the public interest) without balancing the piece with a counterpoint, really tees me off.