Posts by Patrick Harris5

Chris Edwards4 said:Ten or fifteen years ago? People experience all sorts of things these days—in education and life in general—so I suppose we aren't really setting rules based on exceptions anymore, just trying to move past the bad stuff, maybe.
In our local schools, religious ed is basically just kids doing homework—mostly coloring, really—and everyone gets an A with almost zero effort. There’s no real discussion about whether they actually attend mass, let alone any connection between their grades and showing up for Holy Mass.
I'm not sure where we stand with the Church on this—whether a priest expects them to actually participate in school religion classes—though I assume he does, and it’s only natural to expect regular attendance at church. I don't know for certain, but it would seem reasonable to me that if my child wants sacraments, or if I want them to receive them, then I should also understand the need to attend religious education. In fact, it seems right that if we are pursuing the sacraments, we should actually want to learn more about it—and alongside the family, religious ed should be the best place for that, at least in theory.

Look, if it's considered "desirable" to have this religious upbringing, then why shouldn't religious education happen at the church instead of a public school? If certain families value this kind of education, shouldn't it take place in the proper setting—the church—rather than a classroom? Doesn't that make sense?

Someone who truly cares will find the way, the time, the place, and the money to ensure they and their family live by the standards and traditions of the Catholic Church.

Everything else is just one big sham. It's harassment for adults and, even worse, for kids, all just to benefit a Church institution that profits way too much from it while completely ignoring our actual needs.

Chris Edwards4 said:Well, you might be looking at it wrong; in my district, religious studies is either the very first thing in the morning or the last thing before dismissal, and most kids just go along with it. Still, some parents find something to gripe about—whether it's the textbooks or the fact that religious studies is even offered at school. I heard one mom say she didn't want her kid singled out from the group—like, if everyone else is going, her kid should go too. Honestly, it's hard to wrap my head around the logic regarding these classes... there's always some reason why certain kids are "forced" to attend, even when parents claim they don't agree with any of it. Meanwhile, nobody bats an eye if half the kids go to soccer practice and the others sign up for different extracurriculars 🤔🤔

I mean, you pretty much answered your own question there... So many parents sign their kids up for these classes simply because they're scared! They're terrified for their kids, terrified for themselves, terrified of what the future holds. So, they figure it's safer to just stay in the "herd." Like someone once said, "it's warmer in the herd, even if it stinks."

Real change comes from individuals, though. Not from the mindless crowd.

silentraven6 said:You totally misread my political leanings, but honestly, that says more about you and your need to lash out like that. You're just sitting at the opposite pole of this whole farce playing out in the political sphere. For what it's worth, my views lean toward Marxism. And yeah, I believe in God, whether you want to believe it or not.

Regarding the song... reach out to the Department of Education, the publishers, the textbook authors. Write letters, organize forums, take it to the media.

On a forum like this, we just vent.

A few of us here were more than happy to write to publishers back when they released those demonic little dictionaries that weren't properly vetted. Why wouldn't you write to them then over the content?

Anyway, whatever makes you happy. As far as I'm concerned, keep doing your thing—life'll probably go faster and better for you that way..

silentraven6 said:First off, I don't even know how to respond to that. I'm talking about basic, primary literacy.

To be honest, Mark Twain was one of the most significant figures in actually making the nation literate; before the modern era, it was more about informal education, not formal schooling.

The historical landmarks say it all, yet you're just spouting nonsense and showing you have no grasp of your own culture.

And second, "before '45"?

Read what you're writing. Try picking up a newspaper once in a while, or at least check a news site.

Also, that whole idea about Mary being a comrade is just laughable and was debunked ages ago. It’s common knowledge how those women lived after '45; it's no secret they played around with freedom only to end up getting lashed at work by the boss, or having their female colleagues become secretaries. Not everyone was a Sarah or a hope.

The topic here is religious education in schools. We're discussing ways to fight against it, but I don't consider fighting to mean disparaging someone's faith or belittling the very traditions that produced so many good things for the entire European landscape.

Priests were the first ones to start writing in local languages across all of Europe—from Italy through Spain to this part of the world. By resisting the Popes and the dominance of Latin in the liturgy, they developed the first written scripts for native tongues and opened the first schools for the illiterate masses.

Regardless of everything, I get why you're angry. Religious ed and institutional garbage makes me furious too, but with this approach, you're just doing the same thing and aren't any different. It's just that classic, bloated, postmodern anti-theist way of operating—a totally outdated stance in this era of tolerance and hipsterism.

You're just making stuff up now. Please, stop throwing around adjectives like "pseudo-agitprop" just to try and make your "facts" sound valid.

At the end of the day, you're the one who brought up literacy and priests in the first place...

And since you mentioned it, Mark Twain himself wasn't a priest. People could debate how certain individuals were educated throughout history, but this forum isn't the place for that.

And historical heritage? Well, the Miami arena is historical heritage too, but it wasn't built to host concerts and summer movies to spread love and tolerance—it was quite the opposite.

So, if you happen to get your "knowledge" and information from trashy tabloids or low-rent news sites, well, I don't read that garbage.

Tolerance is one thing, but forced religiosity where there's no real choice is something else entirely.

Your kid doesn't go to religion class, but then they go to music class and learn a song about letting Jesus into their heart?!

Tolerance?

The real question is: how do we actually fight this and try to change it? If anyone has a constructive suggestion—other than moving to Sweden or something—I'm all ears.

silentraven6 said:I think Summer hit on something important here. We really need to be careful about how we word things. It’s more about saying "we celebrate" rather than just "we celebrate," or better yet, specifying that "Catholics celebrate." Precision matters.

I’d also suggest adding some other major holidays to the list. We have such large Jewish and Muslim communities right here in our state, after all.

But you can't escape it. Seriously, you just can't. You’ll never be able to sidestep religious themes—not when you're diving into literature, and certainly not when looking at social studies or how we interact as a people. It’s baked into the very fabric of our society. We’re talking about the fundamental cultural and civilizational framework that defines us. It's part of our history, our literary heritage, and everything else. It's just... it's built into who we are.

It’s like you just can't escape that whole sacred architectural style. It’s baked in.

It’s pretty obvious that if our clergy actually bothered to get a real education, we wouldn't be dealing with such a massive wave of illiteracy around here. It’s like they just opted out of learning anything useful, and now we’re all paying the price for it.

Just by recognizing that fact, maybe—just maybe—it might actually be worth considering a little more tolerance.

On another note, all these shows featuring blessings and this obsession with displaying all sorts of bodies across the globe—not just here in the States, but everywhere—it honestly feels like it goes against everything Christianity stands for.

Frank, I’m just not on board with that approach. Honestly, I think we need to show them the door and force them out of the classroom entirely. The fewer of us involved in this nonsense, the faster it’ll die out. Let this one go through if they want, but I’m going to be teaching him at home to stand against it. It just doesn't sit right with me, and frankly, it creates this totally distorted image of how many people actually participate—it’s nowhere near reflective of what real-world spirituality looks like. And don't forget, they use those inflated numbers as leverage. That's their whole argument.

If by "clergy" you mean the Communists after 1945, then sure... Otherwise, the Church and literacy? Please. As if...

It’s the same deal with women's rights. Before the mid-40s, women basically only had the right to pump out kids endlessly, slave away in kitchens and fields, and get beaten once in a while.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Mine didn't bother with any of those religious songs in school. Honestly, I’m actually a big fan of theology classes, but these are usually just focused on national holidays anyway. Plus, they don't really push the whole "God created the world" thing in the curriculum.

So, check out this song from a second-grade music textbook here:

[B]A CHILD WAS BORN FOR US[/B]

American Church Hymnal

A child was born for us
Into the manger he was laid
Isus Milena, my God
I give you my heart, for I am yours.

Son of God the Father, and God himself
From heaven down to earth he came to us
Isus Milena, my God
I give you my heart, for I am yours.

A pure Virgin gave him birth,
And nursed him with her milk
Isus Milena, my God
I give you my heart, for I am yours.

The Father named him Jesus,
Sent him to redeem us all
Isus Milena, my God
I give you my heart, for I am yours

Appropriate enough??

rowdypanther12 said:As an atheist and a parent, I don't have any problem with religious holidays being mentioned in other subjects.
To me, discussing Christmas in a classroom setting is just as natural as talking about the change of seasons; it's simply a part of our lives.
However, just as we wouldn't assign homework asking kids what they did during a harvest festival, we shouldn't be assigning tasks asking how they celebrated Easter.
The reality is that not everyone participates in those traditions.
Instead of saying "On December 25th, we celebrate Christmas," it should be phrased as "Christmas is celebrated on December 25th."
Learning holiday carols can be seen as part of general American culture, but studying specific church hymns is a completely different matter.

The issue isn't mentioning holidays in general. The problem is when textbooks push Catholic traditions as if they're the absolute norm in every single subject, even though I specifically opted my child out of the religious studies course.

There’s just way too much religious stuff bleeding into textbooks where it doesn't belong. Honestly, it just feels wrong.

Susan James said:Well, in America, you have both religious holidays and federal observances. I don't know about you, but for me, both types count as days off (and nobody asks me about my personal beliefs when I'm taking them).
Personally, I think it's fine for kids to learn which days are non-working days and why.
I really don't see any harm in it. In fact, if I'm home on one of those days with my kid, I think it would be pretty hypocritical to pretend those days don't exist in our lives.
The real issue is the wording of the questions—like asking "how do you celebrate this day" (which was in last year's textbook for both Christmas and Easter). If a child is expected to answer in class just like everyone else, it leaves things up to the teacher's interpretation. Like, does the kid have the right to say they don't celebrate the resurrection, but they *do* participate by dyeing eggs and eating spring onions?

I always find the school assemblies around those days a bit tricky, too.

If that's the case, then what is the point of Catholic religion class? Because every other textbook—aside from math, PE, and art, which luckily don't really have books yet—is pretty much packed with religious stuff that's presented without any critical thinking at all. And of course, it's mostly, if not exclusively, Catholic topics...

Why are there songs about Jesus in a music textbook?

Why are there several pages on Christmas and Easter in a Democratic Party textbook? It’s the same thing happening in the English language books too, with stories about Saint Nicholas and Santa Claus...

In the USA, we have 14 holidays, where 8 are Catholic and 6 are federal. Why does the Democratic Party only mention 4 (2 religious, 2 federal), while they go into intense detail specifically about Christmas and Easter?

Should I even mention that atheists aren't mentioned in a single textbook? Depending on how you count, atheists are the second or third largest group (sadly totally unorganized) in America, but there isn't a word about them in these books—except maybe in some religion book claiming atheists were responsible for Auschwitz and the Holocaust against Jews...

In my opinion, every subject except for religion class needs to be religiously neutral, or at least have minimal representation in these books. That's why religion class exists! Let people learn about different faiths there, or in churches, but not in general school subjects...

I'm not being narrow-minded or exclusionary. I'm fully aware of the environment we live in, but there's such a thing as going too far...

Susan James said:Is that a quote from the Piedmont group? We don't really have much of a global perspective over here.
I haven't actually had a chance to check out Aneca yet—honestly, I probably won't get around to it until after the weekend.

What’s the debate about?

Well, I guess we can all agree that both Christmas and Easter are religious things...

Everyone has their own reasons for not enrolling their kid in Catholic religion class, sure. But isn't that subject actually there so people—specifically those who consider themselves believers—can get to know their faith better? You know, the processes, the reasons why we celebrate certain things, when they happen, and all that stuff...

If religion class is considered a religious subject, then shouldn't all the other school subjects be non-religious or secular, right?

I’m not being bitter here. We live in the environment we live in. You definitely need to know traditions to some extent, but for what, exactly?

Just a quick thought...

In the second-grade Social Studies textbook where kids learn how the calendar works, there’s this exercise where a student has to circle certain dates. It says: Circle March 22nd for Water Day. Circle December 25th. WHEN DO WE CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS!?

WHEN DO WE CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS!? It's not a choice! Whether you're Muslim, an atheist, or whatever, we all celebrate Christmas...

Or take the section on Holidays and Festivities that explains the difference between a holiday and a feast day. They only list two holidays and two feasts... you don't even have to dig too hard to figure out which ones they are... as if in America we only celebrate those four specific days..

Or look at the Music circle book; it has that song "A child to be born"... it's pretty obvious which child we're talking about...

Or take the American Language Arts textbook; they have these great stories about Saint Nicholas, the Yule log, Santa Claus (!?), Easter baskets, and Christmas fairy tales... it's not just one sentence per story either; there's plenty of it spread over several pages, very detailed...

And don't even get me started on the mountain of drawings of churches and cathedrals, all with crosses on them, obviously...

There's as much of it as you want. In the second-grade textbooks, it's everywhere—subtle, not subtle, conscious, subconscious, however you want to call it...

The only thing missing is math, oh the mystery! 🙂

So, you don't enroll your kid in religion class, but then you realize the other kids don't really need to go either because a ton of the other textbooks are "louder" than any religion class could ever be...

Around here, only about 5 out of 20 kids are actually signing up for religious education this year. It’s wild. We had two students move away with their families to other states, one kid who went last year but decided to skip it this time, and even a new girl who just joined us isn't attending...

Has any parent actually taken a good look at the second-grade textbooks lately? Like, really scrolled through the content?

For second grade, those books are absolutely slammed with religious themes. Honestly, the Social Studies and Civics textbooks seem to be leading the charge on that front more than anything else..

Jason Ortiz5 said:Nope. ☕

The swamp stinks, but at least it's warm.

I definitely can't bring myself to watch that episode...

http://www.iza-ogledala.com/krdo/

https://www.nytimes.com/news/egoists-and-atheism-debate-science-536396

"Some folks turn to atheism because they think it’s just great to play God—to decide for themselves what counts as right or wrong. If you put your own EGO at the center of the universe, you're an egoist.

Let's be honest, egoists are pretty unpleasant people; we've all met one. And logically, they tend to be atheists, because there's simply no room in their worldview for anyone—or anything—that's bigger, smarter, more beautiful, or more worthy of respect than they are. This is actually a quote from a religious studies textbook that's been blowing up social media lately, sparking massive debates."

Is God an EGOIST? I mean, if there's nothing above God, and He's the only one, the greatest, the most beautiful, the smartest...

Who does God believe in?

Is God an atheist?

And that's the state of religious education in our public schools these days..

I don't know about you guys, but I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how much everything changes once you have kids. It’s like you wake up one day and suddenly your entire world revolves around tiny humans and snack schedules! Does anyone else feel like they lost their old self somewhere between the diaper changes and the endless laundry? I really miss those quiet mornings where I could just sit with a coffee and actually finish a chapter of a book. Now? Now it's just pure chaos. But honestly, even with all the madness, I wouldn't trade it for anything. It's just... life, right? What do you all think? How do you find your balance? kaže:
So, I wanted to get some honest feedback from parents whose kids go to religious education classes. I basically just sat them down and asked what they thought—kind of like how you’d grill someone about their favorite local diner—since I’m speaking from the perspective of a believer whose own kid isn't attending and, frankly, won't be attending. What do you guys think? Is it just me?

Look, let's be real here—there just isn't any money for something like this. That's the bottom line. Plus, even if we had the cash, the scheduling alone makes it a total nightmare. That’s exactly what the City Hall office told me when I asked. How are you supposed to pull something off when the timing is this impossible? It just doesn't add up. So, I was thinking—just a random thought, really—but what if we actually ran a poll? You know, just to see how many people would actually step up and sign a petition for an alternative electoral college system? I mean, imagine if we could get enough kids involved in every single classroom to make some noise about it. Would anyone even do it? Is that even possible? Just a thought! So, they’re taking the funding from religious studies—you know, that class half the kids aren't even going to show up for or will eventually drop anyway—and dumping it into some new elective. Well, I just got an email from a parent that was pure, unadulterated fundamentalist right-wing energy. Seriously! And honestly? I’m 100% certain that if we actually offered a real alternative, at least half of those parents would ditch the religious classes in a heartbeat. ☕

And that right there? That’s exactly what they’re terrified of.

The schedule is already set in stone. They’ve officially factored religious studies into every single grade level, so there's no wiggle room left. Even with all these new changes trying to push past the mandated hours, they aren't even counting the gaps where there aren't enough instructors to teach it. I actually reached out to the City Hall myself—we tried to get an initiative off the ground to fix this, you know? But yeah, the schedule is locked.

Can we get some more specifics on this whole initiative? I’m talking details! How did the communication actually go down? What was the exact proposal on the table? I really want to know about the actual experiences behind the scenes. Like, if you had to do it all over again today, what would you change about the approach? What would be different? Give me the real scoop!

hiddendriver34 said:Personally, I don't think religious studies belongs in the standard school curriculum. But honestly, the sheer amount of prejudice and paranoia surrounding this topic just leaves me speechless.

Think about it: what would you actually do if your kid started watching a cartoon about None on TV? Would you yell, "No! Stop!" and frantically cover their eyes to shield them from some supposed biblical horror story? I'm being dead serious here—I’m not trying to be edgy or stir the pot. I had this one friend who grew up in a strictly atheist household, and she had that exact same reaction to anything even remotely religious. We were traveling together through Paris during college, and when we walked up to Notre-Dame, she actually refused to go inside because she "didn't want to step into a church"!😲

Look, no matter how intolerant or closed-minded someone might be, Christian mythology is essentially the bedrock of our culture. How can you expect a child to truly grasp literature or art history if you strip away that foundation with your own biases?

Throughout my life, I’ve made it a point to visit all sorts of churches, temples, and mosques 😁 and, out of genuine curiosity and respect, I’ve picked up a decent understanding of various faiths. I really want my kids to grow up with that same kind of open-mindedness.

When my kids at home watch cartoons with biblical themes, they treat them exactly like they treat munjevit Jurić, Ice Kingdom, or any other fairy tale... Basically, they know it's just a story..

In school, 2+2=4 isn't a fairy tale. Similarly, in Catholic religion classes, they aren't taught that these stories are myths or fables—they're taught they are literal historical facts. And if you don't believe it, you're going to burn in hell!? It's wild. Even though schools teach Greek and Roman mythology, there's always an emphasis that those are just myths and legends... unlike, say, Noah, who supposedly reflooded the entire flat Earth with just a couple of animals..

If schools actually taught about all the world's religions and beliefs—focusing on the good as well as the very bad that faiths have done throughout human history—then maybe we could actually consider letting kids take a class like that..

Brenda Doyle5 said:People have already brought this up before. They claim you can't organize anything else during religious education hours because then the kids in those classes would be discriminated against... or some nonsense like that. ☕

Sent from my iPhone 13 using Reddit

How exactly would they be discriminated against? It’s not like they're being treated unfairly compared to the kids who are just hanging out in the library drawing or playing outside in the fresh air during that time, right?

Kids who basically have a free period—working together with the school—should have the chance to make that time even more productive and meaningful. I honestly don't see any discrimination in that at all.

lonemaker said:To be honest, I don't see any issue with the fact that they were only invited. 🕺 I’m not exactly a fan of religious education in public schools, but I don't see much difference between inviting a kid to sit in on a religion class just to watch a cartoon versus a German teacher asking a student who isn't enrolled to drop by for a session where they're watching a documentary. That’s one thing. But trying to bait them into signing up for next year? That’s a whole different story.

If he was invited politely and nobody forced him to show up at that specific time, he could have just given a polite refusal. I get it—to a little kid, watching cartoons sounds way more appealing than hanging out in a library, but I wouldn't make a huge deal out of this. Nothing illegal happened here. You just need to explain to your child why they aren't attending religious studies and then ask the teacher who invited them to stop sending those invites. It only becomes an issue if she keeps pushing after you've explicitly asked her to stop.

Well, it's pretty hard to watch a German documentary that claims everyone who doesn't speak German is headed straight to hell... When it comes to Catholic religious ed, there's a huge chance that's exactly what happens.

And speaking of German classes, does anyone have experience suggesting to the school or the principal that they organize something else for the kids who skip religious ed? Like, maybe an extra Spanish class or something?

Personally, I'd be willing to pay for that hour or two out of my own pocket. To me, that seems like a much better investment than having kids stuck in the hallway or wandering around the school grounds with the other students who aren't in class.

northerncobra27 said:Given how much conformity we run into in our day-to-day lives across America, I’m not entirely sure why it surprises you to see it surfacing in a topic like this. And really, it isn't strictly about just following the crowd. It’s more complicated than that. You can't simply leave a seven-year-old unsupervised for two hours every week; while you're busy fighting against social conformity, you might have one kid sitting lonely in a hallway and another wandering off somewhere entirely unexpected...

Now, I’m not a believer myself, but I do understand the significance of Mass within a faith community. That’s why it really gets under my skin when I hear people complaining about having to take their child to Mass. If a child is preparing for First Communion or Confirmation, Sunday Mass should naturally become a part of their life. If attending Mass is such a monumental burden in your household, why on earth are you signing them up for these sacraments in the first place? We should probably take a moment to reflect on our own stances and consider what kind of example we are setting for our children. Any bad influence they encounter in a religious ed class can be corrected later, but the negative lessons they learn from us tend to take much deeper root..

If you're suggesting I should just be a conformist too—just bow my head and do whatever the big church corporation tells me to do—well, it's not happening. Nothing is going to be forced on my kid. They're doing okay for now, along with plenty of other kids, but let's not pretend that makes the situation right.

It’s the exact same thing as if the roles were reversed. Imagine if there was some mandatory hour in the middle of the school day where they taught that God doesn't exist, and suddenly those "other" kids are being pulled away from their classmates... to me, that sounds like an absolute disaster.

When a bunch of fearful adults take this conformist approach, all they're really doing is handing more power to these special interest groups. You know the ones—the groups profiting massively from this, claiming that religious education belongs in public schools. They only look at the numbers to suit their own agenda, painting a picture that everyone is desperate to attend because Americans are such deeply devoted believers! They ignore the fact that many of those people are probably only there so they don't stand out or get labeled. They're just there to question things, or maybe learn something...

Someone who is truly religious—someone who sincerely believes in the Catholic God or any other God—will find enough time outside of school activities to introduce their children to those beliefs and pass on that sense of "unconditional love."

In a country where only about 20% of people who claim to be religious actually show up to church (and even that number is probably inflated), everything else is just pure conformity. It's just avoiding responsibility, both for yourself and for your child.

Just wanted to back up what was already said here.

And get this—Father John had this to say about the whole thing:

""I honestly don't know which parents are complaining; nobody has even approached me. I held a meeting with all the parents involved and handed out a flyer explaining everything. If any of these dissatisfied parents want to reach out, they should come to me directly. No one has contacted me or complained about the cost yet. Tell them to feel free to reach out if they're struggling financially—we'll just give it to them for free so they don't have to worry about paying," says Father John."

It’s pure conformism. Just keep your head down, stay quiet, pay up, and don't ask any questions...

Honestly, looking through all these forum comments, it feels like there’s this massive wave of conformity among Americans when it comes to religious education in schools..

Everyone’s acting like they aren't religious, or they don't step foot in a church, or they're totally against organized religion—but then they still insist their kid takes the religious studies class just so they don't stand out. They don't want the kid left alone in the hallway or teased by classmates for being different, right?

And that just ends up giving more wind to the sails of the church corporation and its special interest groups. It lets them claim that "the numbers don't lie"—that most kids attend because both the children and parents genuinely want them to, which they then use as leverage to argue that religious ed belongs in the public school system..

If every major industry in America collapsed tomorrow, at least we'd still have the local sheep shearing business to fall back on. That much is certain..

Morgan Peterson6 said:I'm just stuck—what should I even do? Should I sign her up or not? I really don't want to, but at the same time, I'm a believer... just a non-practicing Catholic who's pretty critical of the Church. We don't really do anything religious at home besides celebrating Easter and Christmas, mostly just for the sake of tradition.

I'm torn. If I tell her she'll learn about God, she'll definitely say she wants to go... but then how can I teach her if I don't even know what religion class actually entails?
She shows so much interest in God, too—we talk about it sometimes when she asks. I can see she truly wants to learn.
How am I supposed to guide her if I can't even answer her own questions?
If I just tell her "you'll learn about God there," she's going to jump at the chance!

My son doesn't take religion class. I never had any second thoughts about it because I just know that school isn't the place for that. Between his mom and me, he gets plenty of information if he's ever interested in something specific. Plus, he has plenty of friends in his class who aren't enrolled either. From talking to other parents, it seems like most people just sign their kids up for religious education just to fit in with the crowd...

A good friend's daughter takes it, and it's her favorite subject! Why? Because she just gets to sing and draw, while in all her other classes she has to sit still and study, which she hates.

Then there's a colleague's daughter in high school. Her favorite day is when she has IRS prep and religion class scheduled together, because those two hours are basically a total mental break, making the school day fly by.

So, let people draw their own conclusions from those examples. Personally, I think the picture is pretty clear.