silentraven6 said:Let’s get back to the main point here. We aren't going to sit around debating abortion all day. Everyone needs to realize that a person of faith follows their own set of principles, but those principles don't suddenly apply to everyone else just because they aren't part of that same faith.
Look, you’re free as an American to teach your kids whatever values you want and preach your beliefs at church socials. But you aren't free to force some hypothetical moral code on someone else when we're talking about fundamental worldviews.
If we actually want to teach our kids about tolerance, we have to start by protecting the rights of those who are in the minority.
Yeah, we’re talking about religious education in a combined thread, so if abortion comes up because someone brought it up based on old debates, I don't see the issue with me addressing it from a theological standpoint.
Anyway, let's move on.
Catholicism or any other faith isn't "imposed"—parents choose it. Kids don't have to go.
Discussing these topics or religious doctrines isn't the same thing as forcing your worldview or maxims on people.
It's just that this kind of content isn't exactly popular, so people try to label it as preaching or imposing.
If someone is actually interested in religious studies—both the facts and the relationships involved—they can always get an answer.
wanderingbadger44 said:Sure, I maintain that religion class just isn't in the same category as science or art, so trying to weigh them on the same scale feels a bit misplaced. Beyond the issues we've already touched on, what else is bothering you? 😁
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)
wanderingbadger44 said:They learn just enough to ensure that even after twelve years of Sunday school and claiming to be devout believers, they still feel the need to push for abortion bans, simply because the moral compass they developed in those classrooms isn't quite strong enough to guide them without the government stepping in to enforce it, right? 🙂
If they truly internalized those teachings and lived out their faith authentically, there wouldn't even be a need to debate abortion laws in the first place. It’s like saying you need a sign to tell you not to walk off a cliff when you can already see the drop; if eighty-four percent of people were actually living by those values, the legal necessity for such restrictions would essentially vanish.
So basically, it's pretty depressing that women who call themselves believers would consciously choose to end an embryo's life. And yeah, that's a mortal sin.
Nobody's arguing that. The Church does everything it can to help those women mend their relationship with God and their community, especially now with the focus on reconciliation through confession.
Religious education won't ever back down from Jesus's ideals, regardless of how much people stumble morally. Bottom line: in terms of the command "not to kill," abortion is a heavy sin for the woman, but also for the guy pushing her toward it.
Rachel Jones8 said:🤣 Yeah, sure, if it’s inconvenient, then suddenly we don't have to.
@MajaMama ...it happens all the time on these threads. Maybe a believer could actually understand this from their own perspective. But when it doesn't work out, it just doesn't work out... stubbornly, blindly... there's just no sense of altruism or loving your neighbor here (at least, not from what I can see).
@wanderingbadger44 Alright, alright... You've hit the nail on the head... why bother with the law if they won't follow it themselves?🙂 And why defend others who clearly feel differently and should be allowed to make their own choices based on their own values? Where does that urge even come from?
wanderingbadger44 said:There’s something genuinely intimidating about you, though I suspect you don't find that unsettling—if anything, you probably find it quite empowering, almost like a soldier marching under their colors...
It seems like you’ve run out of ground to stand on, so you’ve resorted to calling me funny while trying to sidestep the fact that I actually met you on your own terms by using your favorite logic: legality.
You argue that religious studies gets special treatment in schools simply because it’s baked into the law.
By that same logic, abortion is a woman's right just because it’s codified in the statutes.
Well, look at that—it turns out we aren't nearly as committed to the rule of law as we claimed to be. ☕
I'm not questioning if abortion is legal—I already pointed out it’s been legal since '78.
I'm talking about the philosophical and moral side of things, which is my lane, just like everyone else has theirs. Legality isn't the issue, even if laws can change.
Comparing religious classes to abortion is a reach. You can't compare the two when one involves the end of an embryo's life, making the moral weight totally different.
They actually dive deep into all these moral dilemmas in religion class, so don't hold your breath thinking those kids won't learn anything... Keep dreaming.......
We don't even need to talk about the law. We could just look at how many kids actually sign up for religion classes as an elective.
Calling it "social pressure" feels pretty out of touch, especially nowadays.
And talking about being "forced" into religious sacraments? Please. Today's youth are actually pretty conservative. They're basically the ones preaching faith back to their parents and older generations.
The latest polls show exactly that. Even across Europe, people are leaning back toward traditional values.
wanderingbadger44 said:It’s like when a whole room goes silent because nobody knows the answer, and then one person finally blurts something out; everyone jumps for joy and accepts it as truth simply because the tension was broken, not because they actually verified the facts.
Sure, there is a legal basis for it.
Hmm, interesting take. But I don't think that logic applies to something like a legally sanctioned abortion, does it? You really are in a league of your own when it comes to that kind of narrow-mindedness.
You're hilarious. 🤣 Too bad it doesn't actually help your point. Bread and circuses.
wanderingbadger44 said:It’s like when a whole room goes silent because nobody knows the answer, and then one person finally blurts something out; everyone jumps for joy and accepts it as truth simply because the tension was broken, not because they actually verified the facts.
Sure, there is a legal basis for it.
Hmm, interesting take. But I don't think that logic applies to something like a legally sanctioned abortion, does it? You really are in a league of your own when it comes to that kind of narrow-mindedness.
In an abortion, you're ending a life—at least according to medical embryology, which states human development starts at conception. Adding religious education for those who want it doesn't result in anyone dying. You can't even compare them in terms of values. Even if we look at both with extreme bias, objectively speaking: abortion involves the death of an embryo by a woman's choice, whereas the Law from '78—which wasn't even decided by a referendum—just exists. It couldn't have been a referendum because we were under a totalitarian regime back then.
Both issues could end up before the Supreme Court.
Atheist groups have spent years trying to challenge the constitutionality of the Vatican Treaty or push for referendums, but nothing moves because they don't have the backing. The liberal administration is on its way out; if they didn't want it to happen, who else could stop them?
Looks like the abortion law will be headed to the Supreme Court soon.
We'll see how things play out. Either way, Nikola Jokić says nobody's touching religious ed. 😁
If you actually want to fight for your values, maybe try learning from the pros.
wanderingbadger44 said:When it comes to religious education in schools, it really boils down to a matter of principle. I can say with total sincerity that kids aren't actually gaining any real substance from these classes. For instance, they were claiming today that the first thing you do on Easter morning is attend Mass—and this was a seventh grader in middle school. 😬 It’s just how they approach all the other topics in the curriculum, too, whether the information is useful or completely off base.
The core issue here is purely one of fairness: it simply isn't right for one subject to be granted such privileged status and special treatment over everything else.
Just because someone messed up doesn't really prove anything. It's an elective, so people don't hold them to the same standard. Personally, I'm way more bothered when kids can't even write a basic essay in English class or struggle with simple math after years of studying the core subjects. Not to mention some teachers who show up to their certification exams and struggle to write a decent essay themselves...😁 And then they're out here logging notes in the digital gradebook...🤣
wanderingbadger44 said:When it comes to religious education in schools, it really boils down to a matter of principle. I can say with total sincerity that kids aren't actually gaining any real substance from these classes. For instance, they were claiming today that the first thing you do on Easter morning is attend Mass—and this was a seventh grader in middle school. 😬 It’s just how they approach all the other topics in the curriculum, too, whether the information is useful or completely off base.
The core issue here is purely one of fairness: it simply isn't right for one subject to be granted such privileged status and special treatment over everything else.
Look, it's legal and it's fine. As long as the majority wants it this way, it stays.
Catholic religious education is back in American public schools after decades away, and it happened through perfectly legal, democratic channels. It wasn't forced on anyone.
Regarding the funding, sure, they could make things more transparent, but look at it this way: As a believer, I’m happy to donate to the Church, while some atheist might rather give their money to "Provo" or whatever group fits their vibe.
My cash definitely isn't going to Provo... or any of those feminist nonprofits...😁
As a believer, I think this is great news. Honestly, tons of parents are still signing their kids up for religion classes. And it’s not just that—we’re seeing more Catholic elementary schools, prestigious Salesian high schools, even preschools popping up everywhere. Plus, the Catholic University of America is already right here.
With the new curriculum reforms, religious education isn't being touched; they aren't forcing those hours into some big shared bucket.
So yeah, religion is thriving. It would only actually die out in schools if parents stopped enrolling their kids.
People who find any kind of religious instruction vulgar are just going to have to deal with it, since they're in the minority. If they ever become the majority, hey, I’ll respect whatever laws society decides to pass.
silentraven6 said:Placing religious education right in the middle of the standard school schedule isn't really respecting the free will of those who don't want their kids wandering the halls while others follow a path imposed by parents who, let's be honest, probably can't even recite the Lord's Prayer.
Since I believe the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child carries more weight than the constitutional freedom of religion—because children's needs should come first—I think we either need to organize religious education as a true elective or strip it back to its core essence.
Free will is a tricky thing. Everyone has it, just like everyone has a backside, and we don't shove our backsides in everyone else's faces; we keep them exactly where they belong—in our underwear, right? We get pretty outraged when someone's backside shows up in the news because that's immoral and ruins a child's sense of privacy and boundaries.
As Wittgenstein said: "The world is independent of my will."
Mid-class breaks are a different story, but my point is that religious education is a parent's choice, which they make on those enrollment forms when their kid starts first grade.
No other student should be stuck waiting around during religion class. Schools need to organize things better so everyone actually gets a decent lesson.
Look, some kid has to celebrate Halloween or dress up for a party, but nobody is forced to pray or sit through a religion class. It’s called freedom of choice.
Same thing here—my kid takes religious studies, but because of that one hour, they're forced to join in on local town traditions outside the school where they just end up getting insulted and blamed for stuff. It's honestly hard to tell where one person's freedom ends and another's begins.
I'm not even going to touch the rest of your post since it's just trashy and out of line.
Chloe Roberts2 said:Honestly, some parents and kids end up pretty miserable because of those mandatory religious studies classes. Your kid isn't actually losing out on anything if we just cut religion from the public school curriculum. As for spiritual or moral growth, that’s really on us as parents; we all have our own paths and don't necessarily share the same values, whereas a school can only hammer home one specific set of beliefs. Plus, being an American isn't tied to what you believe in your heart of hearts.
That sounds great in theory, but when you look at American history, it’s just not happening. Our national identity is baked right into Christianity—that's just a fact (think back through the centuries... the early foundations... etc.). Pretty much all our culture, both the stuff you can touch and the traditions we carry, grew out of that Christian heritage.
Anyone trying to rip those two things apart is biting off way more than they can chew. You can't just erase what's shared by everyone. Neither extreme is the answer. We need to give credit where it's due to both sides and move forward by integrating them in a realistic, balanced way—respecting modern values like pluralism, dialogue, diversity, and mutual respect among all faiths in the US.
Chloe Roberts2 said:Honestly, some parents and kids end up pretty miserable because of those mandatory religious studies classes. Your kid isn't actually losing out on anything if we just cut religion from the public school curriculum. As for spiritual or moral growth, that’s really on us as parents; we all have our own paths and don't necessarily share the same values, whereas a school can only hammer home one specific set of beliefs. Plus, being an American isn't tied to what you believe in your heart of hearts.
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.
Got two kids, and honestly, I’m pretty stoked that religious education is an option in our schools. Under the Every Student Succeeds Act, the whole point of schooling is to foster "moral and spiritual growth based on a child's abilities and inclinations." As a Catholic, I’m just glad I can pick an elective that aligns with the values we actually live by at home. It keeps things consistent.
It’s also great that subjects—including religious ed—touch on national identity and heritage, which is another key goal under Article 4 of the Act.
So yeah, I’m signing up for Catholic religious ed.
Living in a secular country that actually respects constitutional freedom of religion is a win; it means practicing faith is totally public.
I’m not signing my kid up for stuff involving Halloween or drawing pumpkins in art class—since that's basically just some old Celtic ritual—and they won't be doing any pumpkin-themed school projects either. I'll tolerate seeing other customs, though; they learn about them in religion class anyway. Still, I'll make sure my kids know it doesn't line up with Catholic doctrine.
There are plenty of other examples, but I won't nitpick. Even Saint Nicholas didn't get stingy when handing out $167 gifts to school staff, nor did he care who was religious and who wasn't. 😁 He was a legendary bishop from Asia Minor who outlasted every wave of secularism—even the pragmatic kind. The holidays are coming up, and news outlets are already predicting people won't be able to gather much next year. Plus, since the school strikers have already burned through all their energy, there's probably nothing left in their 2015/16 calendar for any more protests.
How birth control pills affect breast and uterine cancer development (latest research):
Birth control pills (turns out) are carcinogenic: Shocking evidence from the world's largest study
Oral Contraceptives and Cancer Risk
An institute in Lyon: Dr. Zdenko Herceg, a specialist there specializing in molecular biology and genetics, pointed out that this is the biggest study on the planet, tracking half a million healthy people over 20 years. They used blood, plasma, serum, urine samples, and even froze everything in liquid nitrogen. This led to thousands of papers, including this specific study covering 11,000 women who developed breast tumors in the meantime.
They analyzed what was happening inside their bodies before the tumors showed up. Basically, they looked for genomic and epigenomic signatures that reveal risk factors. In the women who got sick, there was a clear "signature" left by smoking, alcohol, certain diet habits, hormone therapy, and oral contraceptives.
The last two weeks have been a total mess for my family. Mom was diagnosed with breast cancer, and now my brother is in the hospital with suspected lymphoma.
Mom had ductal carcinoma in her left breast 12 years ago. Since they caught it while it was still in situ and only 2mm, she just had surgery—no chemo or radiation needed—and she’s been fine for the last 12 years. Now they found a 5mm spot on her right breast. She had surgery a week ago; the initial histology looked benign, but we're still waiting on the pathology report. We thought we knew what to expect there, but then my 36-year-old brother dropped this bombshell on us.
He’d been coughing for a while, so he went in for an X-ray, and they saw this huge shadow. We were terrified it was lung cancer. 😢 He had a chest CT immediately, and it showed a massive 11x8x6 cm tumor sitting right between his heart and lungs. The doctor thinks it's likely lymphoma, though maybe a thymoma (less likely). He’s in pulmonology now. They ran everything—bronchoscopy, echocardiogram, spirometry—and all his other organs are perfectly healthy. The mass isn't spreading into them; it's just pressing against them, which explains the cough. They did a surgical biopsy two days ago, and the preliminary cytology points toward lymphoma. Now we’re stuck waiting about a week for the results to confirm the specific type. His blood work looks okay; LDH and GGT are fine, just slightly elevated ESR and CRP. Doctors didn't feel any swollen lymph nodes in his neck, armpits, groin, or abdomen—just a few up to 1.5 cm in his chest near the tumor itself.
My brother actually feels pretty good. Aside from the coughing and some itchy skin, he hasn't had many symptoms. He’s staying positive, though. He really believes he'll pull through (we're religious, so that helps), and we've been doing a deep dive into lymphoma info online.
I won't get into the emotional rollercoaster of all this; I'm sure you can imagine how it feels. My brother and I are basically playing caregiver to our parents right now because they're still in complete shock.
Anyway, my brother will be getting treated at the hematology department at Duke University.
I'm holding it together mostly, but the waves of anxiety and fear hit me out of nowhere every so often. Now comes the waiting game...
If anyone has experience with lymphoma or just some advice or thoughts, please let me know.😢 Really hoping it's not T-cell lymphoma...😢
Lisa Morales4, I’ve been spending way more time over on the Politics board lately because it's actually interesting. Honestly, I’ve felt totally fine talking about how faith plays into our political and social lives there.
Nobody’s breathed a word against me, and I haven't dealt with any warnings or penalties for it either.
When it comes to heavy political stuff, it's much better to post on the Politics board than the Religion one. If you do want to talk about it under Religion, you should probably stick to the Vatican II section—you know, "signs of the times," maybe Church Social Teaching or encyclicals... basically, you can still dive into prophecy and God's Word being channeled through people using a biblical lens.
It's a big topic, but if we try to tie it to this current presidential election, it feels pretty small compared to God's actual plan for salvation. The election is just a tiny flash in the pan that wraps up Sunday night.
Lately, society is pushing secularization so hard—call it secularism if you want—just to make it harder to link what's happening in politics to the concept of Truth.
You're free to post about that on the Politics board; you just have to watch your wording.
The real trick is learning how to adjust your vocabulary so you can say exactly what's on your mind—keeping it subtle and symbolic—without backing down even an inch. 🙂