Posts by Susan James

brightheron64 said:Well, it looks like things are finally starting to shift...

So, the school year just kicked off, and in my daughter's third-grade class, we have a whole new group of non-believers emerging—there are seven of them now out of nineteen students total. And honestly, they seemed to be having quite the blast out on the playground during second period today...

I can't help but wonder, though, if we'll see that number climb to twelve or so in a few years; maybe then religious studies might actually become the first or last period on the schedule
...🎉

To be honest, what really bugs me is the schedule itself—how they only give one hour to art and music, but two full hours to religious studies.

jadetinker85 said:Exactly. I actually posted that on that specific thread because someone had deleted my previous post about the book earlier that day, and I was just looking for another way to share it.
Broadly speaking, I feel this book is really important and useful, so I wanted to make sure as many parents as possible heard about it.
We live in a world where even many adults haven't really developed those cognitive areas that the techniques in this book aim to build in children. 😛

From what I can see, your first mention of this book was over on the pregnancy and newborn care

(I don't see if it was merged, but if you started the thread yourself, you probably realize we can't keep it there—you really need to be more specific in your opening post about what you want to discuss.)

Two days later, you were posting in the thread about raising kids without yelling, which ties in perfectly, and it’s great that you pointed parents toward the book (which truly is fantastic).
Now that you've brought it up again, I've moved it over to parenting literature, where you're invited to share your experiences, offer advice, and give examples that have actually helped you. If a constructive discussion starts growing with plenty of replies, we can always spin it off into its own dedicated thread.
But as it stands right now, I don't think we need a separate one.

All discussions regarding Daniel Siegel's book have been moved over here

Joseph Bailey41 said:

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "eL2." Could you clarify that for me? I want to make sure I'm following along correctly before I respond. [Username] says:
I’ve been sitting here thinking about this lately, and honestly, it feels like we need to have a serious conversation about how we view the universe. It’s easy to get caught up in our own little bubbles—our jobs, our errands, our daily stresses—but when you step back, there's this overwhelming sense that we might be looking at everything through a very narrow lens. There’s this idea floating around that people tend to view the cosmos as if it were built specifically for us. We look at the stars and see patterns, or we look at the vastness of space and try to find ourselves in it. It’s almost as if we assume God the egoist designed the entire mechanics of existence just to serve as a backdrop for the human drama. It’s a bit much, isn't it? To think that all this complexity—the physics, the expanding galaxies, the sheer scale of it—is somehow centered on our tiny corner of the map. I know I’m probably being a bit too deep for a random thought, and I can already hear myself sounding like a philosopher in a coffee shop, but I truly believe we need more humility. Science keeps showing us how small we actually are. Every time we peel back a layer of understanding, the universe gets bigger and we get smaller. Instead of acting like the protagonists of a cosmic epic, maybe we should just accept that we’re observers in a much larger, much more indifferent system. It’s not about being cynical; it’s about being realistic. There’s a certain kind of peace in realizing that the world doesn't revolve around us. It takes the pressure off, in a way. We don't have to carry the weight of the universe on our shoulders because, frankly, we aren't even close to holding it.

I think some people turn to atheism simply because they enjoy the feeling of being their own moral compass. There’s a certain ego in wanting to play God—deciding for yourself what counts as right and wrong without having to answer to any higher authority. Anyone who thinks their own ego is the center of the universe is just God the egoist..

Let’s be honest: egoists can be pretty unpleasant to deal with. We’ve all been there, stuck in a room with someone who thinks they're the center of the universe. To me, it almost feels like egoists are naturally atheists. It just makes sense—their worldview is so narrow that there simply isn't any room in it for anyone greater, smarter, more beautiful, or even more deserving of respect than themselves.It’s actually a Quote taken straight from a religious studies textbook, and it's been blowing up on social media lately, sparking a ton of heated debates.

Is God the egoist? I’ve been sitting here thinking about it lately. When you look at the scale of everything, there isn't anyone above Him. He stands entirely alone—the singular, greatest, most beautiful, and smartest being in existence. It makes you wonder if that level of absolute supremacy carries a certain kind of divine selfishness.

Who does God believe in?

Is God an atheist?

So, let's talk about religious education in our public elementary schools.

I grew up learning that God created humans in His own image, but also that we’re inherently sinful by nature. Luckily, those lessons happened in Sunday school rather than in my actual classroom—I would have hated having to worry about my GPA over theology. 😬

This excerpt really highlights how much damage the Church can do to families and the community at large. When you have kids being forced to learn and repeat these doctrines at home or among their friends, it’s no surprise that most of them end up becoming atheists.

We all know how kids act. The first chance they get, they’ll look their dad or mom right in the eye and tell them they're just some unpleasant, selfish jerk—simply because that’s what their religious studies textbook told them. Then the physical stuff starts, someone gets slapped, they start calling the Blue Phone, and before you know it, the authorities and various agencies are getting involved. 🤦

I might be overreacting here, but I see this kind of propaganda as a massive threat to how we relate to one another. Categorizing people based on whether they belong to a specific faith or not is just beneath any civilized society.

I really hope those atheists who are planning to enroll their kids in religious education just so they don't have to sit out in the hallway take a moment to actually think about what they're doing.

But honestly, isn't everyone a little bit flawed? What's so weird about that?
My issue is that traditional religious education teaches kids that if they mess up, they can just go to confession and be done with it. But kids who actually think deeply and take responsibility for their actions realize that saying "sorry" isn't enough; you actually have to fix the damage you caused. That's a lesson kids should be learning from the start.
I also see a problem with teaching religion to children before they turn twelve, especially when the lessons are superficial and lack any real-life application (which is a huge issue, considering how many people claim to be religious in the US but don't actually live it out).

Regarding this snippet (which some online commenters pointed out might not even be from an 8th-grade textbook), I think it's actually a valid topic for discussion for 14-year-olds. Kids are observant; they see what's happening around them and are pretty good at spotting who is being selfish.
Especially regarding the topic of Confirmation, which usually happens around that age...

It gets even more complicated during those visits to nursing homes or when they collect donations for vulnerable groups during class. It creates this divide between the kids who are willing to help and those who aren't. And since they aren't being taught empathy outside of those specific moments, they often don't know how to help once they leave the classroom... but that ultimately comes down to the schools.
And the principals.

Equipment, schedules, faculty... it's all great on paper. It’s honestly pretty wild how she seems to have zero clue about the actual hurdles we face with mandatory computer science classes.
I just hope she doesn't get ahead of herself with all those "amazing" promises she's making.

urbantinker8 said:whether you believe it or not—whenever there’s a year where the student count gets a bit overwhelming and they can't really manage it properly (you know, massive class sizes or just an inability to organize after-school care effectively)—they just start handing out deferrals whenever they feel like it.
in neighborhoods like that, I guess the schools stay somewhat "in sync" with the local preschools to get a rough idea of how many toddlers are coming their way, and they use that to adjust things if they absolutely have to.
plus, there's this general trend across the country toward declining birth rates, so maybe they're just hoping these delays won't totally mess up next year's numbers.

it's just the reality of dealing with a handful of older, underfunded schools and all that...
honestly, it doesn't surprise me one bit.🤷

I'm not surprised either, though it definitely makes me angry.
Because, if a school can just delay a child's entry because they don't have the space to house them (meaning instead of expanding classrooms or hiring more teachers, they just tell the kid they aren't "mature" or "ready" enough and dump all the responsibility on the parents 🙄), then it’s no wonder parents feel forced to jump through hoops to make sure their child starts at age eight. Given that context, it feels unfair to judge them for doing what they have to do.

To me, it sends a terrible message from the system. While I doubt this is the norm everywhere, I think it happens way more often than people realize—especially when a kid actually *needs* to start school, but the local district is short on students and is trying to fill seats.

urbantinker8 said:Well, I probably wouldn't go quite that far as to say it's being forced upon parents😁, though I will say it’s definitely (too) easy to get
.
I suppose it's true, really, since everything depends on such a wide range of variables: actual developmental struggles—though, honestly, it seems like nowadays practically everything gets labeled as an attention disorder, fine motor issues, speech delays, and so on🙄, I guess—plus things like where a kid falls on the birth date cutoff, how much pressure there is on a specific local elementary school, and even just which doctor, pediatrician, or specialist you happen to run into... BUT, in the last few years, I feel like parental insistence has become a huge factor too, and experts seem to be pushing back against those requests less and less than they used to
.

What do you mean by overcrowding at the school?
Do they have so many kids enrolling that they suggest deferrals for those on the edge of the age cutoff? 😕
So they'll just show up next year when there might be even more applicants? Or did they already defer 14 students last year, so now they need to defer another 14 just to balance the numbers? 😂

A parent who "insists" usually ends up exaggerating the situation, which isn't something you can really verify during a quick 15-minute screening (I sometimes wonder why these assessments aren't longer or more thorough...)
Trying to point them toward a second opinion is mostly a lost cause anyway. By the time a child goes in for an assessment in April or May, by the time they actually get an appointment at a clinic, they're already finishing the first semester or even the whole first grade.
So, yeah, it's a bit of a mess. 🤷
And for what it's worth, preschool opinions still don't seem to carry much weight. Since they're under orders from the School District to clear spots for new enrollments, they often skip over certain issues, meaning kids get enrolled without any deferral. In my opinion, that’s actually a bigger problem than the kids who actually do get their schooling delayed.

Daniel Gomez10 said:I wasn't actually talking about the Socialite's situation; I was reacting to several people here saying how hard it is to get a delay without a massive reason.
In my experience, that hasn't been true at all—they offer delays even when they aren't really needed.
Plus, hearing stories from other parents and seeing certain enrollments here, it seems the same.

They didn't find anything.
They were probably just grasping at straws.
My senior finished first grade without any issues; he had a few grades that weren't straight A's, but he was one of the best behaved kids in class (just super quiet, calm, and listens well).
I'm pretty sure things will be just as smooth with my junior.

How did he finish without any trouble if he ended the year with anything less than a 4.0? 😕
Just one B on a report card sends a message that maybe he should have been deferred, and anything more than that suggests you've set him up for failure. 😬 🐔

Andrew Wright2 said:Need some intel from anyone who’s dealt with school deferrals before.

So, we actually got the extension. My kid is 6.5 right now—he would've started school at 6.10, which is why we pushed for the delay. Even the local elementary school agreed he's just not ready yet. Anyway, I'm wondering if any of you got a call from Child Protective Services asking for a statement? If so, what was that actually about?

I can't help feeling like they're out to get us. But hey, if this is just standard procedure and everyone goes through it, then whatever. It's just that every time I hear "CPS," I have a total panic attack thinking they're gonna come after us or try to take my kids. I know, sounds totally paranoid, but I can't help it. 😢

🍿 🍿 🍿

@Lady, it feels like you might be drifting a little bit from the original topic here.

Andrew Wright2 said:My kid is already enrolled in a standard daycare. Let’s use some common sense here.

Besides, you nosorog actually said yourself—if I recall correctly—that kids shouldn't even start school until they're 8 or 9.

I'm not denying my kid an education; I just pushed school back by one year. That's it.

I'll definitely keep you posted. Just hang tight until Friday.

Actually, you're remembering that wrong.
I've commented on other threads before, and while I personally wouldn't want to send my kid to school at all, that doesn't mean I'd break the law. That's just my way of venting because I'm not a fan of the system. Honestly, I love my own skin too much to risk getting sued for fighting regulations; if I didn't enroll them, I'd just end up having the whole legal system breathing down my neck.🤷

On this specific thread, I've said several times that I support delaying enrollment if the child truly needs it. However, if you have paperwork from the CDC, there should also be a recommendation regarding what the child will be doing during that gap year. A child can't just skip school and do absolutely nothing.

Basically, assuming there's something productive to do with the child—like strengthening certain skills or developing interests—that just wouldn't fit into a standard school schedule.

So, you really have to decide: does your child actually need "that something" to catch up on or learn during this year, or do you just feel like this extra year is a right you're entitled to simply because you're the parent?

As for the people who agree that a delay is necessary, I think any professional would realize that if they don't grant a delay upon a parent's request—especially if that parent shows clear animosity toward the school in front of the child—starting school will be a total nightmare for the kid. Plus, the cooperation between the school and the parents becomes non-existent. (Which, by the way, you admitted to yourself: how much did you reveal during those evaluations? How much did the people making the decisions know about you before your little one even sat down at the desk?) Personally, I'm fine with that being noted in the CDC files. It becomes part of the record if other issues pop up later, whether viewed as a mitigating or aggravating factor... since the measures the agency takes are tiered from light to heavy, everything gets tallied up eventually.

And hey, maybe there really are genuine difficulties they spotted that point toward neglect, in which case talking to the staff might give you some guidance on how to fix things.

Andrew Wright2 said:So, I got summoned by Social Services because we requested an enrollment delay for school. According to the paperwork, the notice went out to us, Social Services, the local elementary school, the Department of Health, and the county records office.

Basically, my son doesn't have any disabilities or anything. We just asked for the delay because it's our legal right. He did preschool, which is mandatory anyway. He wasn't in daycare before this. Now that the delay was approved, we enrolled him in a part-time regular daycare program. Kid's fully vaccinated—all the standard stuff plus three extra shots that aren't covered. We actually had to pay for one ourselves, about $1167. Since he was born in 2010, the combo shots weren't free back then, plus we had to cover Rotavirus, Prevenar, and chickenpox.

Why the trip to Social Services? Because they need an explanation from the special education teacher at the elementary school. I actually know her—we were neighbors growing up—and she went through this exact same thing when she requested an enrollment delay for her oldest son. Totally normal kid, zero developmental issues. It’s just how it works; the official enrollment delay paperwork doesn't actually list the reason, it just says "approved."

So yeah, I have to go in and swear under oath that my kid doesn't have a disability, because if he did, we'd be eligible for certain assistance and all that...

It's a total circus just because the paperwork doesn't specify why the delay was requested or whether there are any developmental issues or disabilities involved.

Classic government. They have these massive interconnected computer systems and everyone is walking around with giant smartphones, yet instead of making life easier, they just find new ways to overcomplicate everything.

Now I have to drag both kids down to the Social Services office just to sign a statement. His medical records were already on hand, the school nurse checked him, and even the psychologist said he's fine. But nope!

We've got an appointment this Friday at 9 AM.

🤣🍿

That isn't actually a legal right you have. ☕>
In fact, by taking that stance, you're seriously infringing on your child's right to an education!

I don't feel like digging up specific statutes for you, but under US family law, parental custody and care include several key responsibilities—and education is definitely one of them.
Plus, state education laws are pretty clear about when a child is required to be in school and the procedures that need to be followed beforehand.
It's part of a parent's duty.

So, I have to disagree with you there.
But hey, you can try explaining that to the local school board.
Let us know how it goes.

Andrew Wright2 said:Need some intel from anyone who’s dealt with school deferrals before.

So, we actually got the extension. My kid is 6.5 right now—he would've started school at 6.10, which is why we pushed for the delay. Even the local elementary school agreed he's just not ready yet. Anyway, I'm wondering if any of you got a call from Child Protective Services asking for a statement? If so, what was that actually about?

I can't help feeling like they're out to get us. But hey, if this is just standard procedure and everyone goes through it, then whatever. It's just that every time I hear "CPS," I have a total panic attack thinking they're gonna come after us or try to take my kids. I know, sounds totally paranoid, but I can't help it. 😢

If you've been summoned by CPS, it usually means someone filed a report. It doesn't necessarily have to be linked to the enrollment delay, but it's possible the information came up during the processing of the delay request or things just coincided.
Was he attending preschool this year?
Is his vaccination record up to date?
Did your child mention or show something during an interview that required the caseworker to file an official report (which they are legally obligated to do)?

There is usually a reason for it.
But don't worry, they aren't just going to take your children for no reason.🤣

It could also be related to something positive. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure how the rules regarding government assistance work these days since they change so often. Some types of parental care seem to go through Social Security, so if your child has a diagnosed disability or medical condition—which is likely why you got the enrollment delay, and something you might be eligible for benefits for—they might just be calling you regarding those specific services.
Make sure you respond to them as soon as possible.

Lawrence Torres56 said:I don't know about all this, but I certainly am not raising my kid to obsess over fake friendships, nor am I teaching them to feel like they need to hang out with bullies who use blackmail as a social tool. Thank God for small mercies, right?

Plus, I’m driving my kid to school every single day, picking up a bunch of other kids along the way too, and honestly, I have never once heard them discussing religion, let alone judging someone because they didn't show up to Sunday service or aren't religious. There are kids of all different faiths—and even little atheists—in that group.
So, if the kids in your circle *are* actually talking about faith, shouldn't that be even more reason for you parents to sit them down and explain that it doesn't matter if they aren't believers? Why should they feel any shame over it?

Believe it or not, the church isn't the one pulling the strings here; it's pure politics. Honestly, it's not even that hard to explain things clearly to a kid, provided you actually have the willpower to do it.

Well, it’s not always about overt bullying. Sure, that happens, but there are so many subtle, everyday comments that can really sting and mess with how kids relate to one another.

I've seen it happen—and heard it from various kids—in so many different ways.
I'm not just talking about what's happening in my own backyard or with my own kids.
I'm talking about kids who feel left out by their peer group simply because they choose to do things differently or don't follow the crowd.
In my experience, this stems from both sides of the aisle: it's the result of how parents act, and also how teachers and religious education instructors behave at school.
Sometimes teachers just wash their hands of it, saying "it doesn't concern us," or you might find yourself wondering if you should enroll your child in religion class just because you see they're unhappy—even when the religious instructors end up encouraging kids to pray for those who aren't part of the faith.
Even with the best intentions, that can actually deepen the divide and make kids feel insecure just because they're different.
That's a real dynamic that plays out in schools. You can try to drill the opposite message home at home all you want, but if your kid walks into school and experiences the complete opposite, they're going to start questioning everything. They'll wonder if they're the ones being unreasonable, or if the people at home and their close friends are actually the ones in the wrong.

Lawrence Torres56 said:I don't know about all this, but I certainly am not raising my kid to obsess over fake friendships, nor am I teaching them to feel like they need to hang out with bullies who use blackmail as a social tool. Thank God for small mercies, right?

Plus, I’m driving my kid to school every single day, picking up a bunch of other kids along the way too, and honestly, I have never once heard them discussing religion, let alone judging someone because they didn't show up to Sunday service or aren't religious. There are kids of all different faiths—and even little atheists—in that group.
So, if the kids in your circle *are* actually talking about faith, shouldn't that be even more reason for you parents to sit them down and explain that it doesn't matter if they aren't believers? Why should they feel any shame over it?

Believe it or not, the church isn't the one pulling the strings here; it's pure politics. Honestly, it's not even that hard to explain things clearly to a kid, provided you actually have the willpower to do it.

If they aren't talking about it on the walk home while you're driving them, you'd assume they aren't talking about it at all.
😕

Oh, they talk. They talk all the time. From blessings over school lunches to Easter and First Communions, they talk about it. But you know when they talk about it most? When grades are being finalized. 🥳
When an 'A' feels worth more just because it's in a religion class 🤣. It sounds silly, but you'd be surprised how common it is.

They count up their straight A's, and suddenly the kid taking the religion course has twelve more A's on their report card than the kid who isn't, making the overall GPA look much better regardless of their other subjects.
And especially when someone thinks their grade in religion carries the same weight as their grade in math or English.

And how that religion grade can boost a GPA.
And yeah, it does boost it, and it does so in a way that feels pretty unfair.

You see it all the time at the border—that 3.4 or 3.5 GPA range where you have a bunch of Cs and Bs mixed with an A, mostly from subjects that aren't exactly life-changing.

Personally, I find this is a great way to show that grades shouldn't be everything. In my view, religious studies shouldn't even be graded, but we live in a reality where those numbers matter immensely for getting into a good high school. It’s why kids end up comparing themselves to one another on this specific subject, whether they are best friends, classmates, or total rivals.

Lawrence Torres56 said:I don't know about all this, but I certainly am not raising my kid to obsess over fake friendships, nor am I teaching them to feel like they need to hang out with bullies who use blackmail as a social tool. Thank God for small mercies, right?

Plus, I’m driving my kid to school every single day, picking up a bunch of other kids along the way too, and honestly, I have never once heard them discussing religion, let alone judging someone because they didn't show up to Sunday service or aren't religious. There are kids of all different faiths—and even little atheists—in that group.
So, if the kids in your circle *are* actually talking about faith, shouldn't that be even more reason for you parents to sit them down and explain that it doesn't matter if they aren't believers? Why should they feel any shame over it?

Believe it or not, the church isn't the one pulling the strings here; it's pure politics. Honestly, it's not even that hard to explain things clearly to a kid, provided you actually have the willpower to do it.

Politics has nothing to do with religious education 😂
but then why do we have agreements between the State and the Vatican? What is that if not politics?
While politics shouldn't influence someone's personal faith, it absolutely plays a role in how religious education is implemented.
It affects everything from how these classes are scheduled within the standard school day to how the instructors are hired.

Lawrence Torres56 said:Look, we aren't raising kids to live and die by what everyone else thinks; we're raising them to build their own damn perspectives.
And honestly, if a kid ends up traumatized just because someone suggested they skip religious studies class, then the parents really dropped the ball here, don't you think? They ought to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask themselves what they actually did to themselves and their own kid to leave them that vulnerable.

I totally see where you're coming from, but I don't think it's quite that black and white.
When it comes to teenagers, it’s an ongoing process of learning, and it hits its peak during those school years.
The examples kids see around them—no matter how painful they might be—actually serve as valuable lessons. It gives them a chance to realize what's happening and teaches them how to stand up for themselves.

BUT when kids first start elementary school around age seven, everything is new. They're meeting classmates for the first time and just want to fit in so they can make it through the next eight years. In those early stages, it isn't nearly as simple as it sounds.
Plus, you often hear kids in religious classes saying things to their non-religious peers that they don't even fully grasp themselves.

From my many years of working directly with children, I've noticed that the kids in religious classes are actually more likely to tease the ones who aren't, rather than the other way around. Statistically speaking, it makes sense since there are usually more students in those programs.

It is much easier to step in and handle bullying over physical stuff—like weight, glasses, clothing, or even family struggles like a parent struggling with addiction... tangible things you can address. It's much harder to deal with a kid being teased because they'll "go to hell" for skipping religious class, or won't get straight A's because they aren't following certain doctrines (concepts that even the religious kids don't fully understand yet).

And it doesn't even have to be direct teasing. Sometimes, kids will talk about the "Holy Spirit" helping them study, and they'll share that with a friend in a non-religious class—maybe with good intentions, or maybe just out of typical childhood curiosity. Suddenly, that other kid is left wondering what's going to happen to them, even though they have no idea what the Holy Spirit even is.

Do we really need this kind of dynamic for any child at the very beginning of their schooling?

Linda Price5 said:One could easily spend twelve years or more tackling ethics; I fail to see where the issue lies.

Oh boy.
You could technically teach Physics for 12 years too, but usually, it’s just two years of core classes plus maybe a year or two of electives, if you're lucky.
Maybe it’s just my perspective, but I feel like these are topics I can discuss with my kids at home. In my view, families should be the ones having those conversations. High school is where you go for the deep, complex stuff.
Elementary school definitely isn't the place for that—especially not in those first four grades when they are still focusing on learning how to read, write, and mastering basic math skills for life.

Classes like Ethics, Religion, or various alternatives to religious studies often seem like perfect spots for graduates from liberal arts colleges to land jobs, especially when they might struggle to find work elsewhere.

No, I really don't want my tax dollars being funneled into those specific positions (and honestly, the funding for religious education is already way too high).
I want my child to have top-tier language instructors and an IT teacher who actually chose their career because they love tech—not someone who only went into it because the job market would swallow them up otherwise. I want someone who does it out of passion and deserves a great salary.
I want teachers across all subjects to be paid well, rather than seeing endless money spent on lecturers who probably couldn't have succeeded in any other field anyway. Sure, there’s that 5% who study philosophy purely out of love, and they belong teaching in high school. But looking at child development, you have to consider the age when abstract thinking actually starts to kick in.

Lawrence Torres56 said:Look, speaking from experience here, I’ve gotta tell you—it wouldn't actually happen like that.
Parents love to grumble and whisper behind people's backs, sure, but when it comes down to it and they're actually standing in a school meeting having to speak up? You won't get a single quiet moment from them; they'll be shouting from the rooftops.

There are still so many people who feel it’s best for kids to "get their sacraments out of the way" while they're young. They want to be able to have a church wedding later in life, or they just figure, "you never know when you might need it," like if someone asks you to be a godparent.😬
Since religion class is a requirement for school, people aren't going to give up on it just because they'd rather focus on math or a foreign language; they'll just fight to make sure that extra language class happens at a different time instead.

Then you have those parents who are weighing their options—they aren't against it, they just want their kid to explore other things. If the alternative is drama class (which isn't really their kid's thing) or a sport that the child isn't interested in or shouldn't be playing, they're naturally going to pick the religion class where everyone gets an A and they just sing some songs on the clock.

I honestly don't see what the alternative would be for first graders that would satisfy everyone.
Not to mention, how much would that even cost?
And please, let's not suggest "ethics" or some vague general religion course. The actual content could be covered in two years, not twelve, just to keep Catholic religious education in the schools.☕
(It would actually be quite nice if these classes were taught by grad students from a local seminary instead.🥳)

silentraven6 said:These are just my impressions from parents of the kids in religious studies. It was easy enough to shut them down since I’m a believer myself, even though my kid doesn't attend and won't be attending.

The truth is, there's simply no budget for something like this. The school district explains that it's impossible to organize due to the fixed scheduling—everything is set in stone. When I suggested running a poll to see how many people would actually sign a petition for an alternative elective—assuming we could get enough kids in each grade to make it viable, and then redirecting the funding meant for religious studies toward this new option—I got hit with a fundamentalist, right-wing email from one of the parents. Honestly, I am 100% certain that if an alternative were actually provided, at least half the parents would drop the religious studies requirement immediately. ☕

And that is exactly what they are afraid of.

The schedule is rigid. Every single classroom has its allotted time for religious studies carved out. Any new program would be breaking the legally mandated hourly requirements, and the missing hours from non-participants don't count toward anything. I actually called the school district personally; we tried to push for an initiative once before.

Personally, I’m against any kind of alternative.
I really don't want seven-year-olds being split up—some learning about Jesus and faith, while others are busy crushing advanced math and learning that the Earth is round.

I also don't want money (which is already scarce) being wasted on instructors for religion or aides for children who aren't attending those classes.
It drives me crazy when parents complain about their kids having too much homework, or not having enough time to practice reading, or not finishing their writing assignments, or having to memorize poems from religion class, or going to church on Sundays, or heading to speech therapy... basically, saying they have no time to play.🙂

I know it might sound extreme, but I truly believe two hours a week is more than enough time for writing and reading—the absolute essentials at the start of elementary school.
It's the whole reason we send our kids to school in the first place.
As for religion, any parent who is a true believer can teach their own child at home.
On their own.
If they can't, then they have a bit of a problem with their faith.

When you look at it that way, it becomes a question of priorities.
It shows what is actually most important to a parent regarding their child's upbringing.

Since my daughter couldn't sleep in longer anyway (and let's be honest, she probably won't next year either), I taught her to use those two hours for homework, reading, or just things she enjoys.
And keep in mind, my daughter has absolutely no trouble keeping up with her schoolwork.
I can totally respect that someone might prioritize their child praying and being part of the congregation, even if it means extra reading and writing at home, but I find it hard to accept when they turn around and complain about being overwhelmed, getting too many B's, or how "poor the child" is.
Whatever.

Regarding the teaching assistants, I haven't heard it directly from the source, but word on the street is that if a student with an instructional aide skips religion class, the aide isn't paid for that hour (similar to how it works when a kid is out sick).

granitewolf20 said:I missed the two or three messages right before mine.😉

What kind of "consent" are we even talking about here? My kid doesn't start school until the fall, so I'm totally out of the loop on how things work.😁

Honestly, I wouldn't make a huge deal out of it. The little guy isn't traumatized, nothing bad actually happened to him, so what's the big issue?🤷
Just pull the teacher aside once school starts in the fall and let them know you don't want a repeat of this situation.

Well, the goal isn't to upset him,
but rather to have him experience something positive during religion class so he actually asks his parents to sign him up! 😉

It would honestly make much more sense to invite them over for a little get-together to celebrate one of the holidays together🤷
But wait... I assume they already host plenty of school-wide events, right? 🤣
So, what's the point of them dropping by during the short period when the kids are having religion class, unless the teacher or whoever is supervising just needed a quick break from something else? 🤔

Richard Perez3 said:Look, let’s be real—they didn't just "get lost." They were basically invited over.
I honestly have no clue what the standard procedure is for this kind of thing.
See, if the school's policy allows for "guesting" in a class you wouldn't normally take—like an elective you aren't enrolled in—then my complaint is pretty much dead in the water. It’s not really "attending" a class at that point; it's more like dropping in on an elective.
Maybe that's how they handle things like Spanish or Computer Science. I don't know. We're just starting freshman year, so I'm still figuring out how this whole system works.

I'm pretty sure they actually need parental consent before letting kids join a different class.🤷
But honestly, I just got a text saying they're sitting there watching cartoons in Religion class and everyone is getting straight A's! 😂