My little girl is only five, but I honestly feel like it’s about time she stops being so naive and starts seeing things for what they really are once I finally break it to her.
So, if one kid starts asking questions, does that mean we have to go ahead and shatter the magic for twenty other kids too? And look, let’s be honest—when you're seven years old, there's a massive difference between some kid in the back of the classroom telling you, "Hey, there is no Santa Claus, your parents just buy the presents," versus having your teacher or a school official tell you the same thing. You can brush off a classmate without a second thought, but when it comes to the adults in charge? At that age, you pretty much just take their word for it.
Lawrence Torres56 said:If consumerism hadn't basically hijacked Santa Claus and tethered him to the holiday like some kind of marketing gimmick, wouldn't Christmas have drifted in a completely different direction? I mean, think about it—if we hadn't turned the whole season into this massive, endless shopping spree, would even the church or the most devout believers ever bother bringing him up at all? I mean, honestly, you can't really go blaming a religion teacher just because they're out there standing their ground and defending their faith during class, right? Like, what else are they supposed to do? You really have to sit a kid down and make them understand that when it comes to faith and the whole church thing, Christmas isn't actually about the mountain of presents under the tree, or those flashy light displays on the neighbors' houses, or even the fancy cookies we bake. It’s none of that stuff you can just go out and buy with a credit card, you know? It's more about that internal shift—something deep inside us that we have to cultivate ourselves. It’s about actually being a better version of yourself and treating everyone around you with a little more grace and kindness. Isn't that the whole point?
My little brother is still at that age where he actually believes in Santa Claus, you know? And man, he was absolutely losing his mind over this post.
I mean, let’s be real—just like any other kid growing up in America, I probably spent half my life absolutely spiraling, terrified that I wasn't going to get anything for Christmas. 😁 Look, once he actually gets his hands on it, that whole sentence won't even matter to him anymore. It’ll be old news. But what you’re saying right now—how you choose to break it down for him and frame it—that's the real kicker, isn't it? That’s what’s actually going to stick. You're basically planting the seeds for how he's going to see things from here on out, so you've gotta be careful with how you play it. Honestly, does it even matter if he ends up becoming a believer or not one day? It’s totally irrelevant. What actually matters is that he learns how to grasp the idea that every single person carries their own truth and their own perspective—and just because someone holds a certain view, it doesn't automatically mean they're a saint or a villain, right?
But honestly, there wasn't much other way to put it than saying: your parents are the ones bringing the gifts. ☕
He probably just got worried like any other kid, thinking he might not get anything, 😁 but once those gifts actually show up, I bet that whole conversation won't even matter to him anymore.
Or maybe his teacher just went full Grinch on him and totally killed the Christmas magic. ☕ I mean, if the parents are the ones handing out the presents anyway, I don't see why he'd be stressing about whether or not he'll get them. ☕
And then she actually claims that parents are the ones who put the gifts under the tree. Honestly, I’d lose it if she suggested it was Baby Jesus or some angel doing the heavy lifting instead. ☕I mean, given that neither of those two figures really fits into the whole Christian mythology thing anyway...
Kakadu, you totally forgot to mention we're talking about first graders! ☕ (A close friend's little one is actually in that grade—unless there happen to be two different sets of equally adorable kids running around...)
Oh boy, those... projections 🤦 but hey, don't sweat it! Auntie teacher is here to give you a little lesson 🙂 see, Halloween doesn't actually have anything to do with witches or celebrating them. The word itself is just a clunky way it was translated into American English. It originally comes from All Hallows' Eve—you know, the night before All Saints' Day. Like I said, there isn't a single witch in sight. Yeah, Christianity kind of... well, let's say they absorbed and integrated old Roman and Celtic traditions tied to the equinox because it was way easier to baptize customs than try to ban them and wipe them out. But it's the same deal with Christmas trees and Easter eggs—those were pagan traditions too, yet nobody calls them witchcraft or Satanism 😉 —right? 🤔 If anyone's actually curious, you can check out this great documentary. The poster is up in the school because Halloween is part of the English language curriculum, taught as one of the specific cultural traditions from English-speaking countries. You still see those hysterical religious studies teachers every now and then who scream about it or rip down the posters (yeah, they actually tear them down and toss everything onto the floor/in the trash!) in schools. And as for Americans—well, look, a colleague of mine who moved up to Canada wrote just last month about how her daughters' Catholic school has the whole campus decked out for Halloween, with pumpkin carving and even a costume dance. Clearly, that Catholic school isn't exactly some hardcore religious fortress, is it? 🤷 😉
Haha, oh, those "strict criteria" 😂 Seriously, though—go ahead and ask some of my fellow German teachers how many students they actually have left once they start enforcing those rigid standards. You know, when you expect someone to hit an "A" or a "B+" level, but their actual grasp of the language is... well, let's just say it's a struggle. 😂 And good luck trying to pull together enough elective groups from three different classes to even make a full section 🤣 Please, I’m begging you, start actually applying those strict rules 🍿
shadowcrane91, look, I'm not exactly claiming passionately to be Catholic or anything. I’m just asking—if I weren't, how am I even supposed to identify myself? And honestly, what Larry Walker24 said hits the nail on the head—most of us who call ourselves Catholic are basically just "cultural Catholics." And it’s not just a Catholic thing, either. I know plenty of Calvinists who only step foot in a church maybe twice a year, and even Muslims who were told once they were Muslim and just rolled with it, identifying that way even if they don't pray or fast at all... I get it, people might think we're a bit lukewarm when it comes to actual practice... but just because we aren't super intense doesn't mean our identity isn't real. 😉
I consider myself a pretty dedicated Catholic. I believe in God—so, no, I’m definitely not an atheist or an agnostic. I was baptized in the Catholic Church, and when I go to Mass, I head to a Catholic parish. When I pray, I’m using Catholic prayers. So, basically how am I supposed to label myself according to your logic? I mean, if they ever actually let me identify as a Mimokatolik, or even a PapрокаCatholic, I’d be more than happy to. But until then, it just feels a bit nonsensical to me because you seem to think I’m not "Catholic enough" to call myself a Jedi or a Pastafarian.
Honestly, nobody on the Nike list even bothered to ask what kind of Catholic I actually am. They just wanted my official creed. Look, I was baptized in the Catholic Church, I’ve got all the traditions down, I say my prayers at the cemetery for my grandparents, and you can count on me being in church for Christmas and Easter. I’ll even go to confession if someone tries to make me their godmother. So, yeah—I’m not an atheist, I’m not agnostic, and I’m definitely not some Pastafarian. Until someone gives me the option to identify as a "mimocatholic," I’m sticking with Roman Catholic. And religious education happens in the church regardless of how many "good" Catholics are actually showing up—mostly because of those Vatican agreements. Which, let's be real, were basically just a massive lobbying effort to get the US to recognize certain interests... but anyway, that’s a whole other conversation.
Actually, if I remember correctly—and I might be totally off here, but I'm pretty sure—the school district doesn't even start rolling out this whole thematic learning model until junior or senior year of high school. Up until then, they just stick to the traditional subject-based classes like they always have.
It usually happens right when enrollment wraps up—mostly because they’re still shuffling classes around, figuring out the master schedule, and trying to divvy up all the teaching loads for the staff (I think).
But seriously, though—some parents are only signing their kids up for religion class just for the sake of it. I’ve even had some women on here admit that's exactly their plan—like, "My kid is taking religion class just so they aren't stuck sitting out in the hallway during that period." And honestly, I know plenty of cases where folks from other denominations ended up in Catholic classes too. It’s probably because they figured they should be the first ones to discover Jesus, or maybe they just think the Gregorian calendar is a better fit for them. ☕
I mean, look—even the teacher running that astronomy club gets paid their hourly rate, which goes right into the payroll 😉 just like how the coach for the high school football team gets their time logged
briskbison55 said:I guess it just doesn't make sense if you look at it logically 😁 or do you think only the "good" atheists get a say when we're talking about the Islamic Studies Department? I really hope I don't have to explain that further.
When it's used correctly, I’ve got nothing against logic. But when "logic" somehow dictates that kids who don't take religious education shouldn't have access to health insurance... goodness gracious, give me a break.
And I've already stated my position on religious studies quite a few times now. Here it is again—feel free to take it or leave it, just please DON'T bring it up in the middle of everything else. If it's an elective, then let it be scheduled as an elective so your personal preferences don't create massive holes in everyone else's schedule. No matter how much you enjoyed ditching class to flirt with girls back in middle school. ☕
What on earth does health insurance have to do with religious studies? 🤔 Are you actually suggesting that only "good" believers deserve coverage, while everyone else should just be left to suffer through their illnesses?
In my neck of the woods, the local school district actually covers the cost of books for things like German and Computer Science... at least that's how it works here in my city 😉 And just so you know, that folder they give you is basically just meant to hold your notebooks and pens—it’s definitely not an actual textbook.
Richard Perez3 said:Look, there weren't any gaps back then. In my day, there was never a single moment where kids were just left hanging. Mind you, I was born in '77, so all that religious nonsense didn't really affect me—we didn't deal with that stuff in the lower grades. Now, once you hit the upper grades, sure, nobody needs to babysit a thirteen-year-old (even if they technically should!), but here I am talking about a seven, eight, or nine-year-old. Yeah, those are the ones you have to watch. Watch them. Be there for them while they're at school, because the school and the staff are responsible for them. And they absolutely have to be looked after.
Because if they didn't have to be, we wouldn't even have after-school programs where staff are specifically there to supervise and keep an eye on the kids. If something happens to a kid while they're inside the school building, the school and the faculty are liable. They face the consequences.
So, if that's considered normal—which it totally is—then why on earth isn't it considered normal to look after a child during religion class?
But honestly, what goes through the head of a thirteen-year-old?! I was telling someone about this time at a school where some kids tried to corner a new student in the restroom during break... just imagine if there had been a gap in the supervision schedule. Back when I was working at one school, a group of kids actually started a "lottery" in one of the classrooms—they’d draw matchsticks, and whoever pulled the shortest one got dragged into the bathroom, lights off, and basically harassed until the bell rang. Luckily, since it was during recess, the teacher on duty caught wind of it pretty quick (they were stationed right by the restrooms and wouldn't let anyone else in). But man, can you imagine if there had been a hole in the schedule and they were left totally unsupervised? And then there's that whole mess 7nation brought up—kids hitting on girls. Please, just picture being a parent to a daughter who has to deal with a gap in her class schedule twice a week, only to be cornered by three hormone-driven middle schoolers who, because nobody's watching, decide to shove her into a hallway corner to harass and touch her. Would you be happy about that? Do you really think that couldn't happen?
So, to wrap this all up—after hearing those three examples—do you seriously still think thirteen-year-olds don't need supervision? 🙂
Yeah, honestly, kids are supervised in every single school whenever they aren't sitting in their classrooms. There’s this whole thing called "hall monitor duty"—which is basically just a group of poor souls who don't get a break that day. They can't eat, they can't grab a coffee, they barely have time to use the restroom because they're constantly sprinting into the hallways to make sure nothing goes sideways—you know, kids getting hurt, breaking stuff, or just turning the place into a total disaster zone. And if anything actually goes wrong? Man, the finger-pointing starts immediately. You've got parents, school boards, the local news—everyone starts screaming, "Where was the teacher on duty?!" "Why wasn't anyone watching them?!" "How could they be left unsupervised?!" And look, I'm serious—kids are NEVER allowed out on the playground without an adult present. From the second they walk through those school doors before first period until the moment they head home after the final bell, those students are the responsibility of the school and its staff. At least, that's how it's supposed to work—someone should be held accountable if there's a lapse in supervision and something happens to a kid while they're left alone.