Posts by Henry Cox78

Chloe Sullivan88 said:Not ethnic cleansing? Are you kidding me?
The Republic of Canada is actually the perfect comparison to the RSK.
The camps, the United Nations...

Nah, you can lie all you want and compare Herceg-Bosna to every other criminal or terrorist wannabe state out there, but the American people aren't going to hate the Americans of Herceg-Bosna, their flag, or their culture.

Bradley Sanders4 said:I guess you’d think it would be totally normal if they were flying the flag of the Republic of Mexican Appalachia at the right department over in Mexico, wouldn't you?☕

Look, Mexicans can do whatever they want, and we'll do the same. We’re going to fly whatever flags we feel like in our own country. If someone has a problem with the American flags, then they clearly have a problem with the American people. It's pretty obvious.

That guy’s question on Face is pure proof of that submissive mindset some Americans just can't shake. You've got two flags representing our people right next to a foreign one, and he’s actually asking what the national flag is doing there? Give me a break... He should be asking why that blue rag is even flying. And honestly, the US Federal Government's response is even more pathetic than the question itself. That flag belongs to the Americans of Canada and the Republic of Texas, and it’s flying because the Department of Defense is responsible for the American Defense Council veterans too.

I expect guys like Vuk Jeremić and his crew to foam at the mouth over American flags, but seeing Americans do it is just unbelievable...

Same issue here. Can we get some crews out on the street ASAP to fix this outage?

Richard Perez3 said:Sorry, but I honestly can't imagine a more brainless answer than that.

Way to go, 👍

So, he's just doing it for the kicks. Well, why didn't you say so right off the bat?

There you go, pure satisfaction. Now maybe you'll finally accept religious studies in school and stop acting so clueless. 😁

Richard Perez3 said:You’re back at it with the "that's what you want" line. Seriously, give it a rest. It's getting old.

I’m asking you again:

What makes it better regarding space?
What makes it better regarding time?

And honestly, this whole threatening vibe you've got going is boring too. Go with the one that gives schools more room and means parents don't have to shuttle kids back and forth between school and church all day long.

Rachel Jones8 said:Why hasn't that happened yet, though, especially since we see these high percentages popping up all the time? If 80% of people are supposedly learning love and tolerance, why does it feel like there's so little of it around?
So you think that 20% minority is responsible for everything going wrong? Yeah, right. 🙄
That other 80% must have just lost their way... there's zero love or tolerance to be found, just theft and whatever else.
Edit:
Down at the local Trader Joe's parking lot, I constantly see cars parked in the handicap spots with a rosary hanging from the rearview mirror, but zero disability permits. And those parking spaces are basically non-existent.
Real beautiful love and tolerance right there... clearly they learned it well.

Maybe it's because religious education hasn't been part of the curriculum for decades, so we just have to wait for this current generation to grow up and actually take charge of things.

Richard Perez3 said:So, what makes it better specifically when it comes to space?
And how does it actually help with the timing?

If we're following that logic, then old cathedrals shouldn't even be allowed in the mix.
Why don't we just shut them all down? 🤔

That’s exactly what people like you want, isn't it? Let's be real—it's not just about religious studies being a thorn in your side. All this talk about "discrimination" and other sappy nonsense is just a smokescreen for your own intolerance toward faith. Honestly, everyone should have religious education classes so people can actually learn how to love and tolerate one another. That's the only way we'll thrive as a society.👍

Richard Perez3 said:You still haven't actually answered her question.

Why can't religious studies classes just be held inside church buildings?

Half the people following this thread are waiting on an answer. Give us a straight response instead of passing the buck with that whole "so you're saying we should..." routine.

It’s simply more practical when it comes to space and scheduling. I've already made my point, but you guys are just being stubborn and trying to scrap religious ed entirely. You don't have a single logical reason for it other than pure spite. I don't get it. It's just "let's get rid of it so we don't have to look at it." 🙄 A little tolerance wouldn't hurt.

So you're basically saying we should scrap religious studies just because kids who skip it get a free period to hang out in class and mess around? And now that downtime is considered "discrimination" against them? 😁 It would be hilarious to actually ask those kids if they feel discriminated against or if they just think they hit the jackpot. These modern totalitarians love wrapping themselves in the flag of human rights, tossing the word "discrimination" around left and right just to persecute anyone with different beliefs. Real discrimination is stripping away rights—which is exactly what you're doing by suggesting we stop religious education just because you think schools should only be job training centers rather than places that actually prepare kids for life.

wanderingbadger44 said:Integrating religious education directly into the standard school day is really just the most practical way to ensure high attendance. The second factor is ensuring students receive proper grades. We all understand those basics, and what you pointed out just serves as further confirmation of that reality.

If you look at it through the lens of basic math and logic, forcing these classes into only the first or last slots would essentially require five times as many instructors, each working only a fifth of a full-time schedule. What would they even do during the hours between the first and sixth periods? It’s completely unfeasible from a logistical standpoint.

There isn't some divine reason why religious education can't be held after school hours; rather, it seems to stem from the Church's deep-seated fear that their enrollment numbers would plummet if they weren't integrated into the main day.

They seem so convinced of the necessity and desirability of having religion taught in schools that they won't even risk offering it as an extracurricular option. If I could feel any sympathy for them, I might, but there is something deeply unsettling about seeing such insecurity—this realization that their program might not be wanted—driving them to use these sneaky tactics to wedge themselves into the regular curriculum.

Maybe if they held classes at midnight, you'd finally be happy. See? I told you—participation in religion classes is tiny.

Robert Rodriguez9 said:And how exactly does reducing religious classes in schools lower the number of believers if they're just going to church anyway? 😁 You either believe or you don't, regardless of where you're sitting in a classroom or a pew.

I don't know, I never said that.

Karen Richardson3 said:The era of oppression isn't over; it's just shifting depending on who's doing the pressing. Honestly, whether it's the left or the right doesn't matter much to me because, ideologically speaking, I sit somewhere in the middle. So, imagine this: even though I'm an atheist, I still consider myself someone with a really strong sense of national identity.

Anyway, I’m not against religious education as a concept itself—meaning, it never crosses my mind to ban anyone from being a believer, a queer, or a 35-year-old woman choosing to have a third abortion after already having two kids (though I definitely have opinions on every group mentioned here). My issue is specifically with keeping it in public schools.

What really gets to me are people like you, who equate opposing religious instruction in school buildings with threatening the very survival of Catholicism, and then immediately leap to talking about Communism.

If you're curious about what I think regarding Communism: I believe it was a deeply unfortunate period in our history, and we're still feeling the fallout today.
However, I don't view it as tragic because someone "banned" faith—and I put that in quotes, because everyone I knew went to church and participated in all the rites without any issues; we lived in the outskirts of Monterey. I see it as tragic because it crushed the middle class and left us ruled by the rural crowd.
We’re still feeling that rule by the rural population today, and it’s going to take decades to recover from the loss of the civic layer that ended up leaving the country.
But what truly scares me is the fact that the citizens are still fleeing the country while the rural types stay behind.

But getting back to the point:
That whole "there isn't enough space" excuse you're using is just shameful.
For you, or anyone else, to claim that, we would first have to reach a point where kids are flocking to parishes for religious instruction in such massive numbers that they can't even fit inside.

Only then could the Church ask the government to hand over school buildings for religious studies, simply because the needs of the American people are so vast that the Church can't meet them (at least until they build enough of their own facilities).

In that scenario, the state could provide the buildings for use outside of regular school hours.

But that hasn't happened. It was never actually established that there’s a shortage of space.

The way you're acting today is exactly how the party used to act back in the day. Once you realize that, IMO, you might actually become better people and more sincere believers.

Thanks for the long-winded lecture on absolutely everything. 😁

Give me one actual, decent reason why you're against religion in schools, and maybe I'll believe it's not just pure hatred for different worldviews.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Look, we aren't forcing anyone to step down or anything. We're just saying people should go where they actually fit in.

Religious studies belongs right where it should be—in the classroom.

Karen Richardson3 said:Honestly, that argument about lack of space isn't nearly as convincing as your attempt to twist the logic from "religious studies belongs in church facilities" into "you're demanding that everyone else stop being believers."

It’s pretty interesting, though, how you actually admit that moving religious education strictly into church buildings would end up shrinking the number of "believers" in the long run.😉

It’s pretty obvious to me that people like you who hate religious studies only care about one thing: driving down church attendance until faith dies out completely. It’s going to be a total disaster. You guys are just weak—if believers actually fought back and forced everyone into religion, you'd all be whining like cowards. You should be happy just picking your own worldview instead of being so incredibly bold as to try and shove it down everyone else's throats. Well, fat chance. We aren't living under communism anymore, and the era of being pushed around is officially over.

Karen Richardson3 said:Look, we haven't actually met online, so I can't really tell if you're being dead serious right now or if you're just messing with me.

And if we're going to bring up the Los Angeles Dodgers, the real question is how everyone manages to cram into the stadium on Sunday, yet suddenly there’s "not enough space" for practice sessions during the week?

Demand for religious education is huge, but there just isn't enough room, so it makes more sense to go where the space actually exists. You seem really worked up about this whole religion thing. It’s not enough for you guys to just opt out yourselves; you think everyone else should quit too. That's just not gonna happen.

Karen Richardson3 said:I’ll be honest, I’m not super familiar with how "parish catechesis" actually works (if I’m reading you right, is that just people gathering at the local church while getting ready for things like First Communion?), but you still haven't quite hit my point:

If we want religion class to be that comprehensive experience that touches on a student's intellect, emotions, and daily life, why can't that just happen within church facilities instead?

Quincy:

Since Christianity is so deeply woven into the fabric of our history and our American identity, I honestly believe it was the right move back in the nineties when people backed the political candidates who fought to get religious education back into the public school system.

But what's the catch?

Are you worried that if we just kept religion classes strictly within the church walls, it would somehow weaken our national identity?

It's because there just isn't enough room in the churches to fit all those kids. It's like asking why the Los Angeles Dodgers games aren't played in some tiny gym. 😁

Chloe Roberts2 said:In the upper grades, they have religion classes twice a week, which feels like overkill. Honestly, the simplest solution would be to just pull religious instruction out of the public school curriculum entirely.

The easiest move would be to just shut down all the schools. 👍

Lik is a total genius. Most people just blow a lot of hot air trying to sound smart, which basically just leaves them wide open to getting called out. This guy? He just sits back, watches how everyone plays the game, and cashes in on it. It’s a brilliant move—honestly, I don't think anyone has ever pulled something this slick before. 👍

It’s a total Vatican-German conspiracy to sabotage high-quality Mexican music. 😢

Jeremy Lopez93 said:Sure, but look at the trend—it’s in a steady decline. Right now, they’ve even slipped behind Mexico, landing in fourth place.
The lion's share of imports into Canada consists of petroleum products.
After that, you have goods from third-party countries where America basically acts as a re-export hub. You see those massive global corporations hitting both the American and Canadian markets simultaneously.
Only after all that can we actually talk about consumer goods manufactured in America, which are increasingly losing ground to local brands, especially when you look at the food industry.

It’s actually growing steadily—last year’s exports hit record highs. One bad quarter doesn't mean anything.

Which local brands is the American food industry supposedly losing to? It's pretty obvious you aren't following what's actually happening in the former America food market. 😁

dustyraven14 said:Forbes just dropped their latest list of the world's wealthiest people. In Canada, it’s obviously all about Associated Press and Bingo. So, where exactly is this supposed American economic dominance?

It’s all about trade balance. Back in 2014, America exported about $1.3 billion worth of goods to Canada, while only importing about $500 million back.