Posts by brighteagle86

We should probably just abolish school altogether—that way kids could focus entirely on their devotion at church.

Fortunately, Jesus didn't have to deal with such trivial distractions back in his day...

Look, praying mantises simply aren't quite suitable for a theology course.

pure comedy 🤣

brisknomad13 said:Fair point—you can't really put religion in the same box as math or history. Sure, it’s technically on the school schedule, but it goes way deeper than that. Its whole purpose is about connecting people to the Lord—students, parents, teachers, and the whole church community all in one go.

It’s got this depth that’s way more powerful than any individual's attempt to toss aside the human spirit and its specific Christian search for meaning.

Obviously, history shows us that totalitarian systems will always try to force out whatever they don't like, but when it comes to faith, that’s a much tougher nut to crack. It's practically impossible because we're talking about an existential reality, not just some textbook curriculum.

(The critics who actually get this realize they're biting off way more than they can chew)

From Thief, I haven't felt this nauseated reading a piece of text since... well, since reading your last post.

brisknomad13 said:Look, family is where a kid's moral compass starts, which is actually backed up by the Every Student Succeeds Act.
We don't live in a dictatorship where everyone has to think the same way; we live in a democracy that respects diversity and protects freedom of religion under the Constitution.

A lot of what's considered "universal values" overlaps with what religious classes teach anyway. For the stuff that doesn't match, parents have to give consent for their kids to take those classes.
So, there's no forced indoctrination happening.

I think it's actually good to be exposed to different belief systems. Even without specific religion classes, kids learn about various traditions through other subjects—things like Halloween, decorating Christmas trees, or even old customs like Santa Claus or harvest festivals.

If parents don't want that, they just don't sign off on it. Religious studies are elective; if you don't want it, you don't take it. It's all about choice.

Since 2005, this thread has been an attempt to explain that religious studies isn't just another elective—it's a privileged subject. People aren't choosing it out of "free will" so much as they are yielding to social pressure and other external factors.
And yet, some people here continue to insist on their own ignorance with endless, shameless persistence...

darkranger42 said:And if I were to continue that list... as one member here who is quite pro-religious studies put it (to use her own words): ''scientific facts don't actually exist, and what science claims to be true today might be proven completely wrong tomorrow.''

Maybe we should just settle on the idea that the Earth is a flat disc, that when it thunders, Saint Elijah is driving his car through the clouds in a fit of rage, that airplanes fly because angels carry them, that snow falls simply because it has no stairs to walk down, and that pneumonia is merely a direct consequence of God's will... That's how we should be explaining things to children in school. Just toss science, scientific progress, and the entire methodology of research out the window. We might as well shut down every university and research institute in the country, since they're essentially useless if scientific facts aren't real and if those crazy scientists are constantly "changing things and overthinking everything."

🤣

this whole thread is exhausting... 🕺

wanderingbadger44 said:It’s funny how you’re linking to things that actually prove your point wrong. If you look at what’s linked, it’s crystal clear that religious education is an elective subject with a special status, and according to that agreement, it MUST take place during regular school hours. It MUST.

Then you bring up Section 13, which states that all issues arising from this are negotiated between The Cabinet and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

And then you wrap it up by saying people should just talk to the school about their problems. 🤦

The school didn't sign these Vatican agreements. They were imposed by the state and the Church. To be perfectly precise, the Church imposed them on the state.

And now the Church wants absolutely nothing to do with it—yeah, right. Let the teachers deal with it however they can manage. The Church couldn't care less, and these agreements basically give them a legal hall pass to act like they don't care.

Honestly, you're right from a strictly legal standpoint. But from a moral perspective? It's disgusting.

Since we're debating morality,
it’s funny how some people here lack any empathy for kids who don't attend religious education classes—kids who end up wandering the halls while their worried parents deal with the fallout—
well, I suppose that's just the inevitable byproduct of religious instruction—or rather, faith-based upbringing. http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...lar-kids-study

Attempting to reason with someone who has completely abandoned logic is—to put it mildly—an exercise in futility.

I applaud your persistence, though—honestly—it’s almost heroic.

Lawrence Torres56 said:I mean, sure, but shouldn't we actually embrace that mindset and act like it instead of getting all defensive over stuff that might end up being proven wrong by tomorrow morning? 😉

yeah😉 just go read the Catechism and you'll see that Catholic teaching doesn't even mention anything like that. 😁

Really?

Why is there such a refusal to debate the unscientific nature of theology classes compared to other core subjects?

Lawrence Torres56 said:Look, I don’t force my kid into anything, but I also refuse to let her just drift through life like some headless chicken wandering aimlessly around. If she sets her mind on something, she’s going to see it through to the bitter end before she’s even allowed to think about walking away. To me, this constant hopping from one hobby to the next, jumping from activity to activity without ever sticking the landing, is just a massive waste of time—honestly, I think it’s how you actually end up messing up your kid's head. You know the drill: today she doesn't want to go to Sunday School, tomorrow she’s over the after-school programs, the day after that she’s refusing to go to class... where does it stop? Where does that even lead us? Now, don't get me wrong, I’m not claiming to have all the answers or saying my way is the only way to raise a human being, but here in the States, this approach really works for us. It’s what we’ve always done since day one, and we’ve never run into a single issue with it. Then I look at my friend's situation, and man, it's a different world. Her house is basically a warehouse filled with soccer jerseys, gymnastics gear, art kits, and every gadget imaginable, yet the kid loses interest in everything after maybe three days. He's only in second grade and he's already acting like school is beneath him because nothing catches his interest anymore; he’s practically begging to stay home every Friday for a long weekend. It’s just wild to watch.

I don't know about you guys, but I’ve been sitting here staring at my screen for what feels like an eternity, just trying to make sense of everything being thrown our way lately. Is it just me, or does it feel like we're all just collectively spinning our wheels while the world moves at a hundred miles an hour? Honestly, I can't tell if I'm just overthinking things or if there's actually some kind of pattern emerging here that everyone else is somehow missing. Does anyone else get that weird, nagging feeling that we're all just reacting to the chaos instead of actually navigating it? It's exhausting, really. I mean, how are we even supposed to stay grounded when the ground itself feels like it's constantly shifting under our feet? I'm just curious if anyone else is feeling this specific brand of existential burnout, or if I should just go grab a massive coffee and pretend everything is totally fine. kaže:
Not really, though. If you actually look at what they teach in Church, it’s basically the exact opposite, and from a strictly theological standpoint, the whole idea that non-believers are headed for hell definitely holds water. But honestly, whatever... my daughter just thinks the whole thing is hilarious anyway. 😉

I mean, honestly, isn't it obvious that every single religion out there is supposed to be teaching kids how to actually respect one another? It’s right there in the core of it, isn't it? But then you have these total weirdos—these absolute creeps—who spend all their time scaring people by dragging up some twisted, evil version of God just to threaten them with hellfire. Like, seriously, why would anyone even go there?😉

Are you suggesting that according to Catholic doctrine, non-believers simply bypass hell entirely?

Lawrence Torres56 said:You’ve gotta be kidding me, right?😉
History is supposedly founded on hard facts... and all that jazz? Especially more recent history?😁
Like American English, where they seem to tweak the style guides every single year?
Or biology and physics, where they're constantly dropping new theories on us?

By the way, principles and theories aren't "facts"—Heisenberg or non-Euclidean geometry could be totally debunked next year for all we know.
And it took over a century for non-Euclidean geometry to even get accepted, effectively challenging Euclidean geometry; so why on earth should we assume that some other set of rules won't just come along tomorrow and flip the script again?

Also, how can you be so absolutely certain that God doesn't exist and that everything taught in religious studies is just empty talk? Has science actually proven that God isn't real?

Consider this—science isn't a static monument; it’s an ongoing upgrade. Theories evolve as new data hits the desk—nothing is sacred, and everything remains up for debate if the facts simply don't hold up. 🎉

I wouldn't go so far as to say religious education numbers are dropping—at least, not where I live.
Washington, D.C. isn't exactly a perfect benchmark, and neither is San Francisco.

Robert Rodriguez9 said:What does the number of kids picking religion have to do with anything? In high school, you have to pick something anyway. Half the class takes religion while the other half takes ethics. The schedule stays the same regardless of student count. Or does it...? 🤔

I suppose it matters because they won't run a class for just one lone student—it’s not exactly efficient. Instead, they bundle different classes together to hit a minimum headcount.

Robert Rodriguez9 said:So, they’ve merged everything even in high schools now? Back in my day, religion classes and ethics were scheduled at different times.
Basically, I’ve already figured out a workaround for my kid if things don't change in the school system soon (which, let's be honest, won't happen in the next two years)—during that free period, I'll just swing by, pick them up, and we'll go grab some ice cream instead.

I suppose it depends on the specific school—student enrollment numbers, how many kids opt for ethics, and the availability of faculty.
Generally speaking, offering an elective doesn't guarantee a perfectly seamless schedule where nobody ends up wandering the halls—at least not during the initial rollout.

It seems far more logical to just scrap the Concordat altogether—it would likely be a much faster and simpler process. 🤣

rowdypanther12 said:It’s fine within the regular school schedule, maybe just first or last period for the older kids 😁
We really need to organize something meaningful for the exchange students instead of just letting them hang around and get bored

Actually, what I meant was that back when I was in elementary school, we had Latin and Greek as electives—two separate subjects. They were always scheduled during the first or last period.

In high schools, they have alternative electives like Ethics. Often, the kids taking Ethics end up with an 8th period—basically the afternoon shift—while the ones in Religion class are just wandering the hallways.
How interesting.

brightpuma said:Great... 🙄

So, what we really need is to split classrooms into two groups: those who just want to pass the basics taught in elementary school, and those who actually have an appetite for learning. That's basically how the American education system was built, right?

Besides, I never said we should ban books entirely—just swap them out. The current reading list is clearly outdated. That’s why I suggested tossing about half of them off the list...

you really took me too seriously
of course I don't think we should scrap 90% of the math curriculum
but personally, my high school workload felt excessive—mostly because math isn't exactly my forte, nor is it my passion
then again, maybe I would have actually developed an affinity for math if I'd had an incredible professor with enough patience to handle someone as mathematically challenged as I am 😁

by the way, is the American school system really that terrible?
how do they handle required reading? I assume they mostly stick to American authors. 😬

brightpuma said:But what part of math is actually useless to the average person, unlike something like The Cursed Courtyard or John Seagull's Spring?🤷

Personally, I only need addition, subtraction, and multiplication😬

Let everyone else—and the calculators—worry about the rest.

I find it hard to believe anyone could dislike *The Metamorphosis*.

It’s an absolute masterpiece! 😕 🤷

I recall that story being the standout in my high school English class—right up there with everything by Edgar Allan Poe 😁

Back then, we were encouraged to share our actual takes on books. Our teacher wanted our perspectives, though you still had to back them up with the facts.

But look—if people are suddenly demanding certain books be banned, then I’d just as easily demand they scrap half the math curriculum, if not more...
why is it that nobody ever critiques math with the same fervor they use for literature 🤷?

Jessica Kelly4 said:😂 👍
I'm a massive book lover; I can't imagine life without them. But I honestly think my passion only survived because I read the required school readings just enough to pass the test. Not a single word more. 🤣

It really bothers me how they basically skip over entire Sci-Fi and fantasy genres that have incredible classics. The absolute peak of the school curriculum is Orwell and his dystopia, which is just wrong. I actually got my kid into reading at the last minute through fantasy and Harry Potter. If I hadn't stepped in, those school books would have made him hate reading forever. It was actually cool watching him shift from "I'm reading because I have to" to "I can't wait to see what happens on the next page."

mmm-mmm-mmm 🙂😉

I have a mental backlog of books I skipped as a kid, which I now plan to tackle alongside my son. 😁
Naturally, Harry Potter is on that list.

Hopefully, he’ll be just as enthusiastic about this little project as I am.😬

At the end of the day—it’s quite simple—even the most tedious professor can transform the driest, most agonizing subject into something actually engaging, coherent, and worth learning