Religion classes in school - Megathread

Taylor Swift 👍 I am pleased that my thoughts were clearly understood.

It’s just one of those things, Tanita—even when there are actually enough kids in a school to justify having a dedicated religion class, they often don't bother setting it up. Instead, they just toss everyone together into two or three mixed groups... mostly because it helps the teachers hit their required hourly quotas more easily. I've definitely seen that happen firsthand back home.

Jacob Lopez2 said:Go back and actually read my posts, because you are clearly reading them with total misunderstanding and attacking the wrong person. I expect an apology in your next post, because I was the one who explicitly wrote that parents should STOP enrolling their children in religious education, whereas some other woman on this forum argued they enroll them just to protect them from being mocked by kids for not going...
So, you've targeted the wrong person in the lowest way possible. You're spitting on someone who thinks exactly like you do. What will you do to those who don't think at all? You've gone way too far.

It was already too late, and neither of us were being particularly clear. My bad.

You’re totally missing the mark here, and honestly, you’re just bashing your colleagues without actually bringing any real facts to the table.

Look, schools—which, let's be real, you should know a thing or two about—would absolutely love to, but they just can't manage to put together a single class of 15 kids who aren't opting out of religion classes. Why? Because parents are constantly shifting the goalposts, prioritizing random stuff over everything else, like demanding their kid stays in a specific classroom just because they had a certain colored crayon in preschool, or insisting on one specific teacher instead of another, or obsessing over which language elective the kid takes... you get the idea, it goes on forever.
Anyone who thinks I'm exaggerating is more than welcome to go check the reality at their own local school district.😉

By the way, besides the fact that having one new class of kids skipping religion wouldn't even touch the religious instructor's schedule, how on earth is it possible that with so many of these kids scattered across different grades, a student isn't just left sitting alone in the library or wandering the hallways all day?

Chloe Roberts2 said:It was already too late, and neither of us were being particularly clear. My bad.

Apology accepted.

Look, it really just comes down to how the school decides to set its priorities. Do they want classes split strictly by religious vs. non-religious tracks, or are they trying to play nice with what parents want—like which teacher gets their kid or who ends up in which classroom? (Back when I was in high school, those kinds of requests and preferences weren't even on the radar, honestly.)
How is it that high schools can just breeze through setting up these religion-vs-ethics tracks without any drama?

I don't really want to go digging through old threads, but I remember someone posting about this exact issue—they had a kid in a class where maybe five or six students didn't attend the religious studies sessions. It was the same deal in two other sections too, yet somehow, those kids weren't pulled into a separate non-religious group.
The thing is, if you create a non-religious track like that, the instructor loses two hours of teaching time. Think about it—if they have religious studies in the first three grades, that’s six hours a week, but if they move to two grades, it drops to four. If you have one non-religious section per grade across all eight grades, that’s 16 hours gone. You'd end up with an instructor only hitting a third of their required weekly workload. So, honestly, I truly believe the reason they aren't forming separate non-religious classes is simply to protect the teacher's full schedule.

Sarah Hall53 said:Look, it really just comes down to how the school decides to set its priorities. Do they want classes split strictly by religious vs. non-religious tracks, or are they trying to play nice with what parents want—like which teacher gets their kid or who ends up in which classroom? (Back when I was in high school, those kinds of requests and preferences weren't even on the radar, honestly.)
How is it that high schools can just breeze through setting up these religion-vs-ethics tracks without any drama?

I don't really want to go digging through old threads, but I remember someone posting about this exact issue—they had a kid in a class where maybe five or six students didn't attend the religious studies sessions. It was the same deal in two other sections too, yet somehow, those kids weren't pulled into a separate non-religious group.
The thing is, if you create a non-religious track like that, the instructor loses two hours of teaching time. Think about it—if they have religious studies in the first three grades, that’s six hours a week, but if they move to two grades, it drops to four. If you have one non-religious section per grade across all eight grades, that’s 16 hours gone. You'd end up with an instructor only hitting a third of their required weekly workload. So, honestly, I truly believe the reason they aren't forming separate non-religious classes is simply to protect the teacher's full schedule.

Look, if you've got three first-grade classes where one group is learning Spanish and the other two are doing French, you're stuck: you either have to create an entirely new class—which keeps the teacher's hours intact—or you have to hope parents are cool with their kid learning a different language than their peers, which, let's be real, most of them aren't.
On the flip side, if you take those three first-grade classes, you'd only hit that fifteen-student threshold for a non-religious track if every single kid was studying the exact same language.

At our local elementary school here in the States, we always have four first-grade classes—one doing Spanish and three doing English—and not once, despite what the enrollment paperwork promises, has the school actually formed a separate non-religious track just because they hit fifteen students. It just doesn't happen. But oh yeah, that doesn't stop the parents from throwing a fit, claiming they signed their kid up for religious ed so they shouldn't have to sit in the hallway, or being totally disrespectful to the religion teacher and the kids who actually participate. I mean, what does that tell you about the whole situation?

Sarah Hall53 said:It’s just one of those things, Tanita—even when there are actually enough kids in a school to justify having a dedicated religion class, they often don't bother setting it up. Instead, they just toss everyone together into two or three mixed groups... mostly because it helps the teachers hit their required hourly quotas more easily. I've definitely seen that happen firsthand back home.

I couldn't agree more. Especially when every grade level follows the exact same schedule and everyone stays for after-school care—there aren't really any logistical hurdles or difficult choices to make regarding grouping. They just make sure that under no circumstances does a religion teacher end up losing their required hours. I can almost picture the enrollment period now: parents being told the school will "do its best" to group all the non-religious students together just to prevent gaps in the master schedule. Honestly, imagine the sheer "delight" and the reaction from some of the 🤣

And those arguments about why kids "aren't in the library" are just brilliant. It’s common knowledge that our local school libraries are open Friday and Saturday from 8 AM straight through until 7 PM, every single day. They are available whenever a student isn't stuck in a religious studies class. 😵

https://www.nytimes.com/news/egoists-and-atheism-debate-science-536396

"Some folks turn to atheism because they think it’s just great to play God—to decide for themselves what counts as right or wrong. If you put your own EGO at the center of the universe, you're an egoist.

Let's be honest, egoists are pretty unpleasant people; we've all met one. And logically, they tend to be atheists, because there's simply no room in their worldview for anyone—or anything—that's bigger, smarter, more beautiful, or more worthy of respect than they are. This is actually a quote from a religious studies textbook that's been blowing up social media lately, sparking massive debates."

Is God an EGOIST? I mean, if there's nothing above God, and He's the only one, the greatest, the most beautiful, the smartest...

Who does God believe in?

Is God an atheist?

And that's the state of religious education in our public schools these days..

The question feels a bit misplaced, considering God doesn't exist.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "eL2." Could you clarify that for me? I want to make sure I'm following along correctly before I respond. [Username] says:
I’ve been sitting here thinking about this lately, and honestly, it feels like we need to have a serious conversation about how we view the universe. It’s easy to get caught up in our own little bubbles—our jobs, our errands, our daily stresses—but when you step back, there's this overwhelming sense that we might be looking at everything through a very narrow lens. There’s this idea floating around that people tend to view the cosmos as if it were built specifically for us. We look at the stars and see patterns, or we look at the vastness of space and try to find ourselves in it. It’s almost as if we assume God the egoist designed the entire mechanics of existence just to serve as a backdrop for the human drama. It’s a bit much, isn't it? To think that all this complexity—the physics, the expanding galaxies, the sheer scale of it—is somehow centered on our tiny corner of the map. I know I’m probably being a bit too deep for a random thought, and I can already hear myself sounding like a philosopher in a coffee shop, but I truly believe we need more humility. Science keeps showing us how small we actually are. Every time we peel back a layer of understanding, the universe gets bigger and we get smaller. Instead of acting like the protagonists of a cosmic epic, maybe we should just accept that we’re observers in a much larger, much more indifferent system. It’s not about being cynical; it’s about being realistic. There’s a certain kind of peace in realizing that the world doesn't revolve around us. It takes the pressure off, in a way. We don't have to carry the weight of the universe on our shoulders because, frankly, we aren't even close to holding it.

I think some people turn to atheism simply because they enjoy the feeling of being their own moral compass. There’s a certain ego in wanting to play God—deciding for yourself what counts as right and wrong without having to answer to any higher authority. Anyone who thinks their own ego is the center of the universe is just God the egoist..

Let’s be honest: egoists can be pretty unpleasant to deal with. We’ve all been there, stuck in a room with someone who thinks they're the center of the universe. To me, it almost feels like egoists are naturally atheists. It just makes sense—their worldview is so narrow that there simply isn't any room in it for anyone greater, smarter, more beautiful, or even more deserving of respect than themselves.It’s actually a Quote taken straight from a religious studies textbook, and it's been blowing up on social media lately, sparking a ton of heated debates.

Is God the egoist? I’ve been sitting here thinking about it lately. When you look at the scale of everything, there isn't anyone above Him. He stands entirely alone—the singular, greatest, most beautiful, and smartest being in existence. It makes you wonder if that level of absolute supremacy carries a certain kind of divine selfishness.

Who does God believe in?

Is God an atheist?

So, let's talk about religious education in our public elementary schools.

I grew up learning that God created humans in His own image, but also that we’re inherently sinful by nature. Luckily, those lessons happened in Sunday school rather than in my actual classroom—I would have hated having to worry about my GPA over theology. 😬

This excerpt really highlights how much damage the Church can do to families and the community at large. When you have kids being forced to learn and repeat these doctrines at home or among their friends, it’s no surprise that most of them end up becoming atheists.

We all know how kids act. The first chance they get, they’ll look their dad or mom right in the eye and tell them they're just some unpleasant, selfish jerk—simply because that’s what their religious studies textbook told them. Then the physical stuff starts, someone gets slapped, they start calling the Blue Phone, and before you know it, the authorities and various agencies are getting involved. 🤦

I might be overreacting here, but I see this kind of propaganda as a massive threat to how we relate to one another. Categorizing people based on whether they belong to a specific faith or not is just beneath any civilized society.

I really hope those atheists who are planning to enroll their kids in religious education just so they don't have to sit out in the hallway take a moment to actually think about what they're doing.

Joseph Bailey41 said:

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "eL2." Could you clarify that for me? I want to make sure I'm following along correctly before I respond. [Username] says:
I’ve been sitting here thinking about this lately, and honestly, it feels like we need to have a serious conversation about how we view the universe. It’s easy to get caught up in our own little bubbles—our jobs, our errands, our daily stresses—but when you step back, there's this overwhelming sense that we might be looking at everything through a very narrow lens. There’s this idea floating around that people tend to view the cosmos as if it were built specifically for us. We look at the stars and see patterns, or we look at the vastness of space and try to find ourselves in it. It’s almost as if we assume God the egoist designed the entire mechanics of existence just to serve as a backdrop for the human drama. It’s a bit much, isn't it? To think that all this complexity—the physics, the expanding galaxies, the sheer scale of it—is somehow centered on our tiny corner of the map. I know I’m probably being a bit too deep for a random thought, and I can already hear myself sounding like a philosopher in a coffee shop, but I truly believe we need more humility. Science keeps showing us how small we actually are. Every time we peel back a layer of understanding, the universe gets bigger and we get smaller. Instead of acting like the protagonists of a cosmic epic, maybe we should just accept that we’re observers in a much larger, much more indifferent system. It’s not about being cynical; it’s about being realistic. There’s a certain kind of peace in realizing that the world doesn't revolve around us. It takes the pressure off, in a way. We don't have to carry the weight of the universe on our shoulders because, frankly, we aren't even close to holding it.

I think some people turn to atheism simply because they enjoy the feeling of being their own moral compass. There’s a certain ego in wanting to play God—deciding for yourself what counts as right and wrong without having to answer to any higher authority. Anyone who thinks their own ego is the center of the universe is just God the egoist..

Let’s be honest: egoists can be pretty unpleasant to deal with. We’ve all been there, stuck in a room with someone who thinks they're the center of the universe. To me, it almost feels like egoists are naturally atheists. It just makes sense—their worldview is so narrow that there simply isn't any room in it for anyone greater, smarter, more beautiful, or even more deserving of respect than themselves.It’s actually a Quote taken straight from a religious studies textbook, and it's been blowing up on social media lately, sparking a ton of heated debates.

Is God the egoist? I’ve been sitting here thinking about it lately. When you look at the scale of everything, there isn't anyone above Him. He stands entirely alone—the singular, greatest, most beautiful, and smartest being in existence. It makes you wonder if that level of absolute supremacy carries a certain kind of divine selfishness.

Who does God believe in?

Is God an atheist?

So, let's talk about religious education in our public elementary schools.

I grew up learning that God created humans in His own image, but also that we’re inherently sinful by nature. Luckily, those lessons happened in Sunday school rather than in my actual classroom—I would have hated having to worry about my GPA over theology. 😬

This excerpt really highlights how much damage the Church can do to families and the community at large. When you have kids being forced to learn and repeat these doctrines at home or among their friends, it’s no surprise that most of them end up becoming atheists.

We all know how kids act. The first chance they get, they’ll look their dad or mom right in the eye and tell them they're just some unpleasant, selfish jerk—simply because that’s what their religious studies textbook told them. Then the physical stuff starts, someone gets slapped, they start calling the Blue Phone, and before you know it, the authorities and various agencies are getting involved. 🤦

I might be overreacting here, but I see this kind of propaganda as a massive threat to how we relate to one another. Categorizing people based on whether they belong to a specific faith or not is just beneath any civilized society.

I really hope those atheists who are planning to enroll their kids in religious education just so they don't have to sit out in the hallway take a moment to actually think about what they're doing.

But honestly, isn't everyone a little bit flawed? What's so weird about that?
My issue is that traditional religious education teaches kids that if they mess up, they can just go to confession and be done with it. But kids who actually think deeply and take responsibility for their actions realize that saying "sorry" isn't enough; you actually have to fix the damage you caused. That's a lesson kids should be learning from the start.
I also see a problem with teaching religion to children before they turn twelve, especially when the lessons are superficial and lack any real-life application (which is a huge issue, considering how many people claim to be religious in the US but don't actually live it out).

Regarding this snippet (which some online commenters pointed out might not even be from an 8th-grade textbook), I think it's actually a valid topic for discussion for 14-year-olds. Kids are observant; they see what's happening around them and are pretty good at spotting who is being selfish.
Especially regarding the topic of Confirmation, which usually happens around that age...

It gets even more complicated during those visits to nursing homes or when they collect donations for vulnerable groups during class. It creates this divide between the kids who are willing to help and those who aren't. And since they aren't being taught empathy outside of those specific moments, they often don't know how to help once they leave the classroom... but that ultimately comes down to the schools.
And the principals.

Joseph Bailey41 said:

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "eL2." Could you clarify that for me? I want to make sure I'm following along correctly before I respond. [Username] says:
I’ve been sitting here thinking about this lately, and honestly, it feels like we need to have a serious conversation about how we view the universe. It’s easy to get caught up in our own little bubbles—our jobs, our errands, our daily stresses—but when you step back, there's this overwhelming sense that we might be looking at everything through a very narrow lens. There’s this idea floating around that people tend to view the cosmos as if it were built specifically for us. We look at the stars and see patterns, or we look at the vastness of space and try to find ourselves in it. It’s almost as if we assume God the egoist designed the entire mechanics of existence just to serve as a backdrop for the human drama. It’s a bit much, isn't it? To think that all this complexity—the physics, the expanding galaxies, the sheer scale of it—is somehow centered on our tiny corner of the map. I know I’m probably being a bit too deep for a random thought, and I can already hear myself sounding like a philosopher in a coffee shop, but I truly believe we need more humility. Science keeps showing us how small we actually are. Every time we peel back a layer of understanding, the universe gets bigger and we get smaller. Instead of acting like the protagonists of a cosmic epic, maybe we should just accept that we’re observers in a much larger, much more indifferent system. It’s not about being cynical; it’s about being realistic. There’s a certain kind of peace in realizing that the world doesn't revolve around us. It takes the pressure off, in a way. We don't have to carry the weight of the universe on our shoulders because, frankly, we aren't even close to holding it.

I think some people turn to atheism simply because they enjoy the feeling of being their own moral compass. There’s a certain ego in wanting to play God—deciding for yourself what counts as right and wrong without having to answer to any higher authority. Anyone who thinks their own ego is the center of the universe is just God the egoist..

Let’s be honest: egoists can be pretty unpleasant to deal with. We’ve all been there, stuck in a room with someone who thinks they're the center of the universe. To me, it almost feels like egoists are naturally atheists. It just makes sense—their worldview is so narrow that there simply isn't any room in it for anyone greater, smarter, more beautiful, or even more deserving of respect than themselves.It’s actually a Quote taken straight from a religious studies textbook, and it's been blowing up on social media lately, sparking a ton of heated debates.

Is God the egoist? I’ve been sitting here thinking about it lately. When you look at the scale of everything, there isn't anyone above Him. He stands entirely alone—the singular, greatest, most beautiful, and smartest being in existence. It makes you wonder if that level of absolute supremacy carries a certain kind of divine selfishness.

Who does God believe in?

Is God an atheist?

So, let's talk about religious education in our public elementary schools.

I grew up learning that God created humans in His own image, but also that we’re inherently sinful by nature. Luckily, those lessons happened in Sunday school rather than in my actual classroom—I would have hated having to worry about my GPA over theology. 😬

This excerpt really highlights how much damage the Church can do to families and the community at large. When you have kids being forced to learn and repeat these doctrines at home or among their friends, it’s no surprise that most of them end up becoming atheists.

We all know how kids act. The first chance they get, they’ll look their dad or mom right in the eye and tell them they're just some unpleasant, selfish jerk—simply because that’s what their religious studies textbook told them. Then the physical stuff starts, someone gets slapped, they start calling the Blue Phone, and before you know it, the authorities and various agencies are getting involved. 🤦

I might be overreacting here, but I see this kind of propaganda as a massive threat to how we relate to one another. Categorizing people based on whether they belong to a specific faith or not is just beneath any civilized society.

I really hope those atheists who are planning to enroll their kids in religious education just so they don't have to sit out in the hallway take a moment to actually think about what they're doing.

Nope. ☕

The swamp stinks, but at least it's warm.

Susan James said:But honestly, isn't everyone a little bit flawed? What's so weird about that?
My issue is that traditional religious education teaches kids that if they mess up, they can just go to confession and be done with it. But kids who actually think deeply and take responsibility for their actions realize that saying "sorry" isn't enough; you actually have to fix the damage you caused. That's a lesson kids should be learning from the start.
I also see a problem with teaching religion to children before they turn twelve, especially when the lessons are superficial and lack any real-life application (which is a huge issue, considering how many people claim to be religious in the US but don't actually live it out).

Regarding this snippet (which some online commenters pointed out might not even be from an 8th-grade textbook), I think it's actually a valid topic for discussion for 14-year-olds. Kids are observant; they see what's happening around them and are pretty good at spotting who is being selfish.
Especially regarding the topic of Confirmation, which usually happens around that age...

It gets even more complicated during those visits to nursing homes or when they collect donations for vulnerable groups during class. It creates this divide between the kids who are willing to help and those who aren't. And since they aren't being taught empathy outside of those specific moments, they often don't know how to help once they leave the classroom... but that ultimately comes down to the schools.
And the principals.

Look, if you believe we enter this world burdened by original sin rather than as innocent little babies, you're free to believe that, but please don't impose it on children. (I'm speaking generally here, as I'm not sure what your personal stance is.)

Also, I feel that when someone does something wrong, they should apologize to the actual people they hurt, not to some imaginary being. There's no real benefit to that kind of spiritual self-indulgence.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Nope. ☕

The swamp stinks, but at least it's warm.

Man, it’s a sad state of affairs, but someone has to say it.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Nope. ☕

The swamp stinks, but at least it's warm.

I definitely can't bring myself to watch that episode...

http://www.iza-ogledala.com/krdo/

My mom actually enrolled me back in first grade—not because we’re religious or anything, just so I wouldn't feel left out. But right before fifth grade started, I decided on my own to opt out... and after that, she didn't sign up my two younger brothers either. It wasn't like they were missing out on anything, really—they go to different schools and everything turned out fine.
Now, one of them is starting third grade and actually spoke up himself, saying he’d want to try it for at least a year just to see what it's all about. So, Mom signed him up since it was his choice.

With both of them, our priority at home is teaching them how to think critically first—everything else comes after that.
The youngest is turning eight soon. He isn't in religion class, but he still picks up bits of info just from general knowledge... and I have to tell you, the kid is obsessed with Jesus. Not in a religious way, mind you—to him, Jesus is more like a superhero figure, kind of like Superman or Spider-Man.
Sometimes he'll say, "You know how Spider-Man climbs buildings and Superman flies? Well, Jesus walks on water." 🤣 He has this kids' Bible and loves looking at the pictures of Jesus healing people... he finds it fascinating, like "Jesusman saves the day."

So, there’s this 8th-grade religious textbook called 'Walking with Jesus Christ,' and it’s basically teaching kids—who make up about 86 percent of the student body—that atheists are just people raised without God. The book goes as far as saying that because they lack faith, they're essentially primed to create something as horrific as Holocaust memorial sites (which is wild, considering the people who pushed those ideologies were often claiming to believe in God). According to Global Voices, the book paints atheists as absolutely
unacceptable, labeling them as selfish idiots who need to be phased out by pushing Christian beliefs, or what they call a "civilization of love." Global Voices points out that Holocaust memorial sites were part of a network of concentration camps used by Nazis and fascists during World War II to wipe out populations in Europe, including Jews, Romani, Slavs, political enemies, the LGBT community, and people with disabilities. History shows, per Global Voices, that most members of those regimes openly claimed to belong to religious groups, and some even had the public support of certain priests.

The Center for Civil Courage flagged these sketchy parts of the religious ed textbook on their Facebook page. Since international media started picking it up, they even translated the controversial lessons from these American schools into English. Interestingly, the Center noted that one lesson on atheism was illustrated with Edvard Munch's 'The Scream,' while another used his work 'Anxiety.'

- Look, even though religious ed is technically elective, kids don't really have a choice. Students who don't take the class are stuck waiting around in empty hallways or the school library until the session ends. But honestly, because of massive peer pressure, tons of atheist kids, or kids from Orthodox or Muslim backgrounds, end up taking the classes and joining in on everything, like Christmas plays. That's why the Center for Civil Courage has been demanding educational reforms over and over again, according to Global Voices.

But nope, zero reforms this year either. So, we're just going to keep poisoning new generations of kids with these theories that atheists are godless monsters ready to commit atrocities.

Even though the Center for Civil Courage has repeatedly appealed to the authorities about these messed-up textbooks, the only response came from the Child Ombudsman, who basically said she can't order or forbid anything, and it's not her job to professionally review content, even stuff on the mandatory reading list for middle school.

Both the Department of Education and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops were notified about all this three years ago, but nothing happened. No reforms to the textbooks or the curriculum. Even the new Secretary of Education, Blaženka Divjak, who took over in June 2017, said in a recent interview on August 2nd that religious education isn't even part of the reforms the Department is working on.

manchild, this stuff is unreal 🤦

Well, it looks like things are finally starting to shift...

So, the school year just kicked off, and in my daughter's third-grade class, we have a whole new group of non-believers emerging—there are seven of them now out of nineteen students total. And honestly, they seemed to be having quite the blast out on the playground during second period today...

I can't help but wonder, though, if we'll see that number climb to twelve or so in a few years; maybe then religious studies might actually become the first or last period on the schedule
...🎉

brightheron64 said:Well, it looks like things are finally starting to shift...

So, the school year just kicked off, and in my daughter's third-grade class, we have a whole new group of non-believers emerging—there are seven of them now out of nineteen students total. And honestly, they seemed to be having quite the blast out on the playground during second period today...

I can't help but wonder, though, if we'll see that number climb to twelve or so in a few years; maybe then religious studies might actually become the first or last period on the schedule
...🎉

To be honest, what really bugs me is the schedule itself—how they only give one hour to art and music, but two full hours to religious studies.