Posts by briskbison55

wanderingbadger44 said:But wait, where is all this coming from, considering kids have been sitting through religious studies for twelve years of their schooling over the last quarter-century? Could there actually be some sort of connection there? 😬

edit: I was actually being modest when I said twelve years. I recently found out that even at MIT, they offer Biblical theology as an elective course. 🤦 I imagine you'd find similar things offered at other universities too.

How can there still be so much darkness in society despite having so much religious education? 🕺

Since we're being ridiculous—well, obviously there's going to be plenty of evil until religious studies becomes a mandatory subject through every single stage of schooling. 😁 But honestly, if I started writing about the old American educational system and how the government treated every single counter-revolutionary element... maybe it's better not to go there here.

melloworca6 said:I honestly don't get why I wrote something so nonsensical. If I had been working the opposite shift, and if a mandatory subject could be moved to a two-hour block during an alternate shift, then why couldn't religious studies be done the same way? Or like how kids at my school used to go to PE during the other shift. Anything is possible if you actually want it to happen. 🤷

I have no clue where you live. I’m guessing New York City, so maybe it would be a good idea to step outside the big city bubble once in a while. It isn't the center of the universe. You need to realize there are all kinds of different schools across the USA and all sorts of scheduling combinations. Look, I get it. It makes me sad too that our schools aren't standardized—from the equipment to the organization. In one school, you've got tech that even major corporations would envy, and in another, you can barely keep the heat on in the winter. But that's just how it is. If you think there's only one school where kids are sitting out on the playground or in hallways, relying on whether or not adults feel like watching them, you're wrong. Believe me, it’s happening in more than one place. Back in elementary and high school, religious studies was almost always right in the middle of the schedule. Usually, a school only has one instructor or chaplain teaching it, so unless you start cloning people, it's nearly impossible to organize it as the first or last period for everyone, especially if it meets twice a week.

I'm dying to know if the situation would change if it were a different setup—like if they offered Islamic studies that you didn't want your kid to hear, shoved right into the middle of the day, leaving your child wandering around unsupervised. Would you still be singing the same old songs about "who cares," "let them be independent," and "kids these days are too sensitive"? I bet not. I'm afraid we'd see the exact same movie: petitions being signed, referendums organized, maybe even people praying outside the school gates. 😁

In the US, those kinds of options are already on the table if there's a need for them. And honestly, this whole part about kids wandering off during class still doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I was a kid once, right? We used to have gaps in our schedules all the time, and we'd just go wild—playing football, tag, trying to talk to girls... 😁

Jason Ortiz5 said:And honestly, if you brought them back to life today and gave them a crash course on everything we've figured out since their time, what do you think they'd actually say?

Huh, wise words. I guess if you had said that about Archimedes it would be one thing, but specifically for Newton...

Matthew Young35 said:I can't say I've ever heard any of them weigh in on whether religious education belongs in the public school system.

If you made a list of everything you haven't heard anything about, it would probably shame every book ever written.

Anyway, it seems like everyone is just hyper-fixated on religious education because they're hyper-fixated on the church. Maybe you guys think our society is good enough that kids will just pick up basic ethics and morals on their own, but I don't really have that much faith in a nation that uses more tobacco products than almost anywhere else and sees alcohol consumption rising year after year while health issues are climbing too.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Religious studies in schools just feels off to me. It teaches kids a perspective that isn't based on facts, which basically clashes with everything else they learn in science class. Plus, faith is such a deeply personal thing—it shouldn't really be part of a public school curriculum in a secular country like the US. Not to mention, it leaves huge gaps in the school day and creates this massive opportunity for bullying.

You keep bringing up how 86% of people in America are Catholic. But honestly, if we actually polled the elementary school kids, I bet the percentage of them who believe in Santa Claus would be just as high. Since parents are the ones planting those seeds of belief in both God and Santa, can we use that same logic we're seeing on this thread to introduce Frosty the Snowman into the curriculum too? Or something like that?

I mean, Isaac Newton wouldn't exactly agree with that claim. Neither would Faust Vrančić or Roger Bacon.

Sarah Hall53 said:The way they’ve scheduled this elective—it’s basically a nudge toward secularism since it’s plopped right in the middle of everything else. I mean, look, if they wanted to hold it during late hours or swap the shifts entirely, fine, nobody would complain... but as it stands? It’s just unfair. Anyone who didn't pick this specific class ends up stuck in a terrible spot—spending 45 minutes twice a week just wandering the hallways because there's this massive gap in their schedule. It feels a bit disorganized, honestly.

I mean, I think you might be missing the actual definition of what secular means.

melloworca6 said:What do you mean, "different location"? You can just schedule this at the school during an after-school block, just like any other elective. It could be zero period or right after the regular school day ends.
We used to have electives set up exactly like that. One year, we even had a two-hour technical workshop held after hours, and nobody threw a fit about it—even though that wasn't an "elective."

I find all this drama over switching to an after-school slot or moving locations pretty funny. I haven’t noticed parents complaining when they have to drive their kids to church for religious ed, yet that’s the only version recognized for sacraments (at least in my parish). So, it’s perfectly fine for a kid to head to church in the afternoon before their First Communion or Confirmation, and it’s fine to show up for early morning mass before school starts—it's practically mandatory if you want to stay in good standing—but suddenly everyone loses it when someone suggests organizing religious ed at the school so it doesn't inconvenience anyone.

Honestly, this is such a hypocritical way to look at faith. If I'm fine with it, that's my business, but I don't care what anyone else thinks. 🙏 And then there's this idiotic excuse about how things were better back in the day because kids were more independent and needed to "toughen up." Frankly, people like this make me embarrassed to call myself a believer, because they immediately lump me in with their crowd.

edit: someone beat me to the punch and posted right as I was typing. 😁

I'm going to ignore the rest because, well, it's following that same pattern of nonsense from previous years where they just leave kids wandering the halls instead of actually looking out for them. And look, regarding the "not my business" comment... I guess it wouldn't be totally wrong to feel that way if the elective wasn't actively messing up someone else's day. My god, just take one school as an example where religion class was placed right in the middle of the school day for some reason, and now they're acting like that's how it's supposed to be! Let's try to be a little serious here, okay? 😁

Larry Walker24 said:Look, even the Nazis took power legally through elections back in '33 because that's what the majority decided at the time.

If it wasn't for Mark, we wouldn't have had same-sex marriage in America, all because "the masses" supposedly spoke up.

Where exactly did this massive group of people decide in '91 that they wanted religious studies in schools? Was there even a national referendum on that? I don't think so.

That's... uh, quite the comparison. So, what, you think religious fundamentalists are out there handing out weapons and inciting hatred too?

Matthew Young35 said:But what about the Satanists?
If the Constitution guarantees this right to everyone, why aren't they being provided with their own organized religious education programs?

The issue here is a misunderstanding of the law. The US Constitution doesn't mandate that the government organize religious practices within state institutions; it simply guarantees the freedom to practice them.

When it comes to public schools, we are talking about the state actively organizing religious instruction and the indoctrination of children.
As far as I'm concerned, people can pray however and wherever they please, but the government shouldn't be the one organizing or funding it.

I mean, what would happen with them?

Robert Rodriguez9 said:Because at the end of the day, this should primarily be a secular nation.

How does an election issue factor into that, though?

Larry Walker24 said:Honestly, if even 5,000 pissed-off parents showed up at the State Capitol protesting religious ed in schools, maybe—just maybe—the government would actually do something. Until then? Total radio silence.

No, they wouldn't, because you still don't seem to get that this is an election matter—it was basically a compromise made for parents who can't just leave work to drive their kids somewhere else.

Robert Rodriguez9 said:I don't remember anyone having any gaps in their elementary school schedule.

I mean, yeah, what kind of gaps? I guess the only real gaps we had were when a teacher called out sick, but even then, a sub would step in or they’d just let us go out to the playground. Honestly, all this talk about "supervising" kids like they're some kind of fragile little things... it feels totally foreign to me.

Larry Walker24 said:but you don't get to lecture anyone else

If the US Constitution says the separation of church and state is a thing, then it's a thing. Religion stays out of public schools, period.

That's just being preachy, and honestly, we have clergy here too.😉

And besides, the Constitution also guarantees everyone the right to practice their own faith, which is why elective religious studies classes exist in schools—so parents who are working don't have to drive their kids somewhere else.

Larry Walker24 said:Nah, according to the last census, it’s more like 86%,

but even if only 10% actually live out the Catholic faith, that’s still plenty. If you want a real test of how many Catholics there actually are, look at church taxes like they have in >. See how fast Americans would bail then.
so stop bragging about "90% of Americans"—you can think whatever you want. They might be Catholic, but they're out partying, drinking, and cheating before marriage...

I'm just saying, it's widely believed that maybe 10% of any society is LGBTQ+, and they have their rights, so why should anyone care if 86% of believers don't have to take their kids to a different building for religious ed if it could just happen right there in school? And honestly, treating premarital sex as this huge sin feels silly—it was probably brought in much later for other reasons, mostly medical, and the church just acted as a marketing tool, I suppose.

Sarah Hall53 said:And besides, setting up a scheduling conflict like that right in the middle of a normal school day... I mean, for the kids who don't opt for religion, maybe someone watches them, or maybe they don't—they just end up hanging out in the hallway staring at nothing for 45 minutes, twice a week.
What a brilliant way to handle it. Truly. It definitely doesn't feel like any kind of subtle pressure being put on parents to force them into choosing religious ed... ☕

poor kids, I guess. does everyone think kids today need someone to hold their hand just to walk to a playground or a gym or anywhere else? I don't recall anyone ever babysitting us while we were stuck in class back in the day.

Chloe Roberts2 said:Religious education shouldn't even be part of the school curriculum because it’s not about teaching actual facts; instead, it just turns into a platform for discrimination. Plus, these instructors answer to the church rather than the state, and since there isn't a real secular alternative offered in elementary schools, we aren't actually providing proper supervision for the kids.
All of this stems from the fundamental issues with religious classes and those outdated Vatican agreements.

Just pure propaganda and nonsense. It feels like these poor kids are forced to kneel on broken glass while priests kiss them on the forehead. Religion should be a choice, you know? In a democratic society, people get to choose, but the idea that these teachers are somehow above the law is just ridiculous.

Larry Walker24 said:The Constitution literally says church and state are separate, yet they've got religious ed in public schools—it just goes to show that America is a total joke of a country.

Well, if it bothers you that much, maybe just move away? I mean, in a country that is like 90% Catholic, having an elective called religious studies is pretty standard. You're acting way too aggressive, I guess, jumping straight to calling us a failure of a nation.

Free Quark, man. And honestly, IT professionals are actual human beings too. I mean, if you consider someone an IT pro while they still think Windows XP represents the absolute peak of human achievement... well, I don't know. I highly doubt anyone even remembers why he was banned in the first place.

Look, maybe I went a little overboard, okay? Fine. But if someone comes at me, I’m going to give them a taste of their own medicine. I'm not about to just sit there and take it, especially when that guy gets all sulky because I have zero intention of moving away like he so graciously "suggested" 😁

Richard Lewis16 said:Look, I’m just following the board rules here. I was honestly just trying to give you some good advice, but it seems like all you want to do is insult me.
Even here, you went ahead and filed a report.

Go ahead then, keep reporting people. You don't even have a single post where you actually say anything useful or constructive; you just pop up whenever there's a chance to make a snarky comment. I guess you get what you deserve on a forum like this.

Richard Lewis16 said:So, I have a question... since that post was reported a few days ago and there hasn't been any kind of penalty or anything, does that mean it doesn't actually count as an insult? I guess it’s just me wondering, maybe... because it feels like it should be considered an insult, right? Or am I totally off base here?

I mean, I don't know, maybe I'm just overthinking this whole thing, but I feel like we need to be careful about how we look at these numbers. Like, really careful. I was reading through some stuff earlier—it's hard to keep track sometimes, honestly—and it feels like there's this huge gap between what people are actually seeing on the ground and what the big institutions are reporting. It's kind of wild if you think about it. I guess what I'm trying to say is that when you look at the data coming out of places like Washington or even just looking at the trends in major hubs like Chicago or New York, it doesn't always add up to the lived experience. Or maybe it does? I'm not sure. I might be totally off base here. But it feels like there's a disconnect. Anyway, I saw what Richard Lewis16 was saying earlier about the economic shifts, and I sort of see where he's coming from, but I also think we have to consider the broader context. It’s not just one single factor, right? It’s everything hitting at once. It's messy. Everything is just... messy. I don't know. Just my two cents, I guess.

Just so I’m on the same page... I mean, just so I know, you know? So I can actually respond in that same style too. I guess. Maybe.

So, what are you even supposed to say after telling someone to just pack up and move away if they don't like how things are? I mean, wow. Talk about being incredibly thin-skinned. Just... yikes. 😉

Yeah, seriously, if he calls me a Nazi one more time, three quarters won't save his skin—but until then, I guess just put him back out there to entertain the crowd.

It’s not just happening here on this forum, either. Honestly, you see the exact same thing playing out across message boards and news outlets all over Europe. Like, in Germany, they’ll actually scrub posts if someone points out that there were four attacks carried out by Muslims in just seven days right there in Germany—it’s wild. I mean, you aren't even saying anything besides the actual facts, but still, nothing is allowed to be written.

Count me in too.

ideas?

Anthony Jackson2 said:Look, you got a yellow card, I don't get what more you want from this.

Funny. Really funny. It just seems like everyone here is busy defending the guys who actually commit the fouls... I mean, we've seen enough of that kind of stuff throughout American history to know how it goes, and honestly, maybe you all could learn a thing or two about how things actually play out when people act like that.

So, I just got flagged for trolling during the registration process because, well, I was openly making fun of this guy who’s trying to justify hooliganism by blaming some supposed destruction of American heritage—and look, I’m not even saying whether that's actually true or not, but honestly? Just punish the actual maniacs out there who are actively inciting violence and senseless hatred.

I really wish I could see that email, you know? Like, the way we say things here hits different, but when you try to translate it into those American dialects, I feel like you lose a huge chunk of the soul in the process 😁

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:I’ve been hanging out on this Reddit since 2003. If my memory serves me right—and I might be wrong, who knows—during those first seven years, I barely ever got flagged, maybe once at most. But now? It feels like there's a 30% chance I'll get hit with a warning for every single thing I post.

I guess I should just jump in here too... I haven't actually changed my tone or anything, not even a little bit.