Posts by silentraven6

So, I guess you felt the need to step in and give the kid a full-blown life lesson through some heavy-handed criticism, since their teacher clearly wasn't going to do it.

nimblelynx7 said:How on earth can people this clueless and uneducated manage to organize an army meant to fight a war across an entire country? Seriously, how do they even know where to send troops if they can't read a basic map? Are they trying to hit Vietnam or the North, and then accidentally stumble into Canada instead?

Alright, take a breath now.

What kind of nation can actually exist in a state of perpetual warfare while constantly swallowing all that terrorism propaganda?

They're just foolish.

And why?

It comes down to education.

Who benefits from that?

A handful of highly intelligent, malicious individuals who rake in massive amounts of money and power through war.

Why don't Americans know where Syria, Korea, Mexico City, Canada, or Iraq are located...?

Because it’s much easier to manipulate a population when they don't know better—convincing them that everyone else is living in filth, that they're all terrorists, or that they're just uneducated, backwards people...

What’s the point of all this?

It makes it easier to rule and stack up cash by gambling with human lives.

War is the most profitable industry there is.

Do I really need to draw you a map?

nimblelynx7 said:That isn't an issue here in the States; we’re smart enough to actually run a government, unlike those clueless Americans. But that's beside the point.

The real question is how on earth can such ignorant, uneducated Americans run the entire world, while people as brilliant and highly educated as us can't even manage our own backyard?

One word: WAR!

Let's just say their entire historical timeline looks a lot like ours did back with Rojs ☕

Go live in the States and then get back to me on how that works out for you.

I'm not even going to bother commenting on these mindless questions being spun by parents; it's not the first or last time you see parents trying to paint a picture that doesn't reflect reality. It's like kids just doing whatever they want regardless of what's expected of them.

Like someone already said, reading the map is the core of everything!

ruggedcrane20 said:Am I the only one who feels weirded out and annoyed at the same time hearing my neighbors having sex? It happens several times a week.

It’s just awkward because I live with my elderly parents.🤦

Look, whenever you start feeling embarrassed, just remind yourself how lucky you are that you don't live directly above or below me. It happens even more often at my place, and yeah, okay, it’s definitely louder (though we try to be somewhat considerate when people are working; we aren't trying to traumatize the kids).

frozenrider15 said:She’s been playing for a year now, and honestly, she’s killing it—she can actually read sheet music. We haven't given much thought to enrolling her in a formal music academy. Right now, it’s strictly a hobby; we aren't looking to sign her up for the whole conservatory grind. It isn't exactly practical to have her juggling two different schools at once, so our plan was to let her stick with the recorder for maybe one more year, just while the spark is still there. She has an incredible instructor from her current lessons, but the hourly rate has absolutely skyrocketed lately.

Honestly, I have to play devil's advocate here and lobby for the music lessons, sorry!

If a kid is truly making progress and actually enjoying themselves, starting music lessons isn't nearly as much of a burden as people make it out to be. Plus, the flute is such a beautiful, useful instrument; it builds lung capacity and does wonders for both physical health and mental focus.

The "overload" usually starts around kindergarten, but kids who pick things up easily tend to handle it without any issues, and the benefits are endless.

If the issue is the instrument itself, I'm happy to let you borrow my transverse flute. I feel bad seeing it just sitting there since I don't have the time to play, so as long as someone takes care of it, go for it. No charge, nothing—I just need to take it in for servicing anyway, which I was already planning to do.

As for a tutor, I can ask some friends from the Juilliard School for me. Just send me a message letting me know if you have any specific preferences—like a certain neighborhood, whether you want someone to come to your house, or if you'd rather travel to them...

frozenrider15 said:This isn't about a music conservatory, but perhaps someone here has some insight:

Has anyone dealt with flute sub-classes (recorder lessons, specifically) at the Waldorf School of New York in Brooklyn?

My main question is whether they allow enrollment for kids who aren't actually students there—is the course open to children from other schools? Also, if anyone happens to know the tuition costs 😉.
My little girl isn't a total novice, but her current lessons have become a massive drain on our wallet given how few hours of instruction we actually get. We’re looking for a better alternative.

People usually only stick with the recorder for a year or so in exceptional cases (correct me if I'm wrong, but I think she's been playing longer than that). It might be worth asking about enrolling her in a grade level at a local music school or even switching to the transverse flute if she's really catching the bug.

Sam Kim12 said:Fine, then what’s the distinction between not going to work and just starting the washing machine? — the machine washes while you earn your bread.☕

As for there being normal priests—yes, they exist, but unfortunately, they are becoming increasingly rare.

BTW: all you really need to do is read the Bible, because most sermons from the vast majority of priests barely even touch upon the Bible.

I just love it when my priest stands there at the altar lecturing me about how materialistic everything is, how a true believer shouldn't care about worldly possessions, all while he's sipping from a gold chalice encrusted with rubies.🐔

If you can't see the distinction, I honestly don't know how much clearer I can make it for you.

The point isn't whether someone else is doing a task for you or not; it's about not planning that specific day around chores. You should set that day aside for God's word, your family, and your spirituality.

The world is set up in a way where people have to work on Sunday just to survive—that's just how things are organized—and believers are constantly being reminded that working then doesn't make them sinners.

I am completely with you regarding the sermons. That's exactly why I don't go to church anymore and why I don't identify as Catholic. I nurture my faith in a way that feels right to me, and I have no desire to belong to a community that views attending service as a chore, a mere custom, or just some mindless tradition.

On the other hand, if you aren't going to support the principles of that community, why do you still claim to be part of it? And why do those principles bother you so much?

I just don't get it.

Why enroll your kids in religious education if you aren't doing anything to stop such nonsense? Why call yourselves Catholics if the commandment about not working on Sunday bothers you so much? For heaven's sake, why practice anything just because of pure cultural habit?

Yes, a believer needs to know how to read the Bible. My semi-literate grandfather knew it inside and out; back in the sixties, he actually walked out of a church after calling out a priest for his sermon, both critically and practically.
And now, I have people telling me that in a world where almost everyone is literate and can access information in seconds, I just have to go along with certain cultural traditions and circuses.

That has nothing to do with faith or spirituality. Religious education is a whole different story. But interestingly enough, the most complaints I hear come from the parents whose kids are actually enrolled.

Are you guys out of your minds?

Sam Kim12 said:For instance, I found myself genuinely irritated by how Sunday was defined in a second-grade textbook:

Sunday—the day of Jesus’s resurrection. On this particular day, Christians don't bother with their usual grind; instead, they gather within their local churches to devote themselves to Mass and prayer.

So, let me get this straight—everyone who works on Sunday just to earn a paycheck and put food on the table for their family, simply because they work for an employer who treats Sunday like any other workday, isn't considered Christian?!🙂

That’s not what it means.

In its most basic sense, it means you aren't out digging holes in the yard, doing a massive deep clean, running three loads of laundry, drilling through walls, managing contractors, fixing things around the house... instead, you go to Mass and dedicate time to your family.

The Church has always been against working on Sunday.

It's also something well-known to practical believers. People like that don't make a huge deal out of it, and honestly, during sermons, priests often mention that it isn't a sin to miss Mass if you have to work to survive; rather, you should find a moment of silence to pray when you can. There are decent priests out there, believe it or not.

If someone thinks that doesn't sit right with them, then they don't need to be a practical believer. For those who *are* practical believers, if an opportunity arises where they end up violating the Lord's Day, they confess it and seek absolution.

That is the dogma. I don't get why people act like it's some huge, shocking revelation.

Patrick Harris5 said: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.

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?

Patrick Harris5 said: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.

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.

rowdypanther12 said:I was just going to say that you can't really expect religious education classes to include all different kinds of family structures 🤷

Well, you can, just not within those rigid religious frameworks. The Pope has already made some strides toward tolerance by allowing divorced people the possibility of receiving Communion, though as far as I know, that hasn't fully materialized in practice yet. He’s also spoken about homosexuality, and it feels like he might offer a more conciliatory tone regarding adoption within LGBTQ families.

Of course, some people will hear that and think I'm just talking nonsense because they feel like if he allows anything at all, he's failing. But that's just how institutional religion works—everyone needs to realize that change is slow, difficult, and faces massive resistance, even if it does happen eventually.

Will that mountain of senseless dogmas and outdated stances ever be revised? I don't believe I'll see it happen in my lifetime, but I can choose to opt out of practicing faith that way, and that's exactly what I've done.

In my opinion, anyone with a lick of common sense should do the same if there are ways of practicing faith that feel completely foreign or inappropriate to them—things they just can't reconcile with their own conscience.

The reality is that many believers are calling for change, and more and more people are looking toward liberation theology as a potential path forward.

The socialist-based theological dimension of Christ views Him as the liberator of the oppressed, which aligns perfectly with Francis's legacy in Latin America. He doesn't shy away from speaking publicly on political currents either; he doesn't pretend to be above it all, but rather sees the Church's political engagement as necessary to serve the needs of the little guy. He doesn't focus on morality in the abstract, but rather on workers' rights and protesting the hoarding of wealth by a handful of exploiters and the accumulation of capital by those with blood on their hands. Even the name Francis was chosen intentionally, given that he is a saint tasked with the renewal of the Church. He is an advocate for poverty among the clergy and the idea of holy poverty, which is one of the core pillars of liberation theology. The Pope is a Franciscan, a member of the Order of Friars Minor, a group known for living modestly (and enjoying a good glass of wine 😁).

If he manages to stay around for a few more years, he might make a massive breakthrough. But until then, everyone has to ask themselves where and to whom they are sending their children—what kind of views do these institutions hold regarding family, kids, and life, and is that really what you want for your child?

Tyler Ruiz502 said:There’s this one line in an American sociology textbook—one of those sections on family structures—that basically says, "My father, who is also my mother's husband." Honestly? Total nonsense. It completely ignores reality; at least 30% of families out there don't function that way at all, dammit.

Man, Tyler Ruiz502, look... institutional Catholic religion basically doesn't recognize divorce except in really extreme circumstances. And those aren't just simple irreconcilable differences.

Anyone enrolling their kid should probably be aware of that.

Why people cling to dogmas that life constantly contradicts left and right? That’s the question. It leads to some pretty heavy realizations about the human conscience.

Patrick Harris5 said: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.

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.

George Edwards72 said:Thanks for the heads-up. I’ll sign him up when the third session opens. For now, he can just take guitar as an elective in his core curriculum. Maybe I'll wait until next year so he actually has some foundational skills under his belt.
Isn't the violin significantly more demanding than the guitar? Is the only reason it's so hard to get into the high demand, or what? As a backup, I'm looking at percussion or maybe accordion. He can't make up his mind, but honestly, I'd be happy if he played anything at all.

In most ways, yeah, it's tougher. That's why you see the best results when kids start early. I think they mentioned starting around sixth grade. Around here, most people don't really start until seventh. My brother-in-law actually switched from violin to guitar entirely during high school; he said the transition was smooth and easy enough, especially since he had to take piano anyway for his credits.

You can always teach yourself guitar as an adult. It's just that the instrument is incredibly popular right now.

cosmicsailor63 said:thanks, lady 👍

No worries at all.

George Edwards72 said:Which music school should we pick in downtown New York City? Prvašić wants to learn guitar... And when is the best time to enroll a kid?

On the other hand, looking back at the past, Paul Marc had such wonderful people and wonderful choir members.

Blagoje Bersa is an excellent school too—actually, I studied out in the Midwest, and I had some great experiences with their programs.

Enrollment for music schools usually happens around May, though there’s sometimes a fall session, but that's likely already passed.

I wouldn't personally recommend starting in first grade; it can be a bit much for kids that young. If you aren't aiming for a specialized preschool program, it’s actually pretty smart to wait until third grade to start formal lessons. That way, the two stages finish up together and they can head straight into high school. Then again, for those absolute prodigies, there are other paths—like skipping grades by testing into multiple levels or jumping into a specialized high school while still finishing general studies.

Music preschool is a great option; I didn't go myself, but my friends have nothing but good things to say about it.

Just a heads-up: guitar is incredibly hard to get into because the interest is just so high.

Tyler Davis2 said:Just wanted to give you guys a quick little update on our end... we actually ended up passing on the guitar after all. We decided to go with the violin instead! We’re planning to just borrow an instrument from the music school for now.

Quick question for the group—does anyone happen to know if there's a way to download Rodionov’s "Beginner Violin School" online? Also, does anyone know if there’s an American English version available, or is it mostly just in other languages?
If you happen to know where I can find a digital copy, please shoot me a private message!

If you're okay with a copy, I might be able to track down a Rodionov primer for you. I just need to check if it's even still around. I'm not entirely sure if it's easy to find online. And I think it might be in a different script. But honestly, don't sweat it—we all grew up using books with different scripts; the musical notation is universal, and your teacher will walk you through the rest. It's the etudes that really matter.

Michelle Nelson4 said:I'm curious, what kind of attendance are you seeing in your classrooms lately? In my experience, we had about 6 kids out of 23 missing last year.

We had four. Have you guys sat down for a parent-teacher conference yet? I’m guessing if you did, you might be seeing similar numbers.

It looks like our local school district is switching to block scheduling this year, which means my kid might actually get two or three hours of religion class all at once on certain days. 🎉If those blocks happen to fall on a Friday afternoon, man, that’s going to be a sweet deal!

Speaking of how they schedule these things, I honestly don't get the logic behind this nonsense—giving them two hours for religion but then only one hour each for music and art...

Sam Kim12 said:Where exactly am I supposed to be shocked by the Lenten renunciation?😉
I’m neither surprised nor am I forcing children to give up everything—I don't subscribe to the idea of Godly punishments, because if that were true, then God would be the most unjust being in existence. Faith is a paradigm; you can choose to believe, or you can choose not to—just as you can practice it or simply exist alongside it. 😬

The cost of a trip to Africa isn't an illusion, but by your logic, everyone participating in missions and offering their sacrifices through service must be living in a fantasy world 🙂. — But honestly, it's better not to touch this topic, because if we follow that line of thinking, the price of a single bagel in the States is identical to what a small child in Africa eats in a week—so what now? Should we all just renounce every opportunity we have?

No, it's not that. My eating a bagel can't be compared to sending a donation to a mission in Africa, because my eating a bagel doesn't come with the assumption that I'm performing some great act of righteousness.

Tyler Ruiz502 said:Consequences? What consequences are we even talking about here? What's he actually going to conclude—that it’s all just a waste of time and decide to walk away?

The consequence is the numbing of one's own perception. This post right below is a perfect example of exactly that.

I mean, everything is out there regarding how religious education is taught. The textbook was all over the news, and even international media recently picked up on some of those controversial sections. This forum is practically overflowing with examples of poor instruction, yet somehow, the child wasn't steered toward this by their parents.

Sam Kim12, I don't think you meant any harm to your kid, but I honestly feel like you knew all of this already—you're actually pointing out the discrepancies yourself.

Now that you're in the thick of the school year, you chose this path yourselves; it wasn't forced on you.

And why the shock over the Lenten renunciation? If we are believers, the reason is obvious. There isn't a gray area here. We do it because we are anticipating the Resurrection. We immerse ourselves in these forty days that Christ spent during His hardest moments, celebrating His sacrifice and goodness. We pray just as He did in the Garden of Gethsemane, we fast on the commanded days, and we participate in redeeming the world through good deeds.

Why would that be difficult for a believer?

And as for the textbook... maybe the teacher is just presenting it differently.

Sam Kim12 said:There is truth in what you're saying, BUT—children need to be educated in a way that adapts to them; one needs to know how to make the subject actually engaging.
Religious education in the lower grades should be instructional yet captivating—filled with stories and actual adventure.
The biggest issue today is that these classes are scheduled right in the middle of the school day, effectively forcing children into the choice because they'd otherwise have a free period—though most certainly wouldn't choose the class if given the option.
Some of this falls on the teachers, but from what I hear from parents in other districts, many instructors act as if religious ed is the most vital subject on earth, overwhelming students with useless information that they are then forced to memorize verbatim.

I remember my own religious education as something wonderful; we had an incredible teacher at CHS whom we absolutely adored because of her approach. She kept us so engaged that even after school, we would head down to the local monastery—where we'd sing and learn prayers while crafting various decorations and cards for children in Africa, sent via a mission organized by a nun from that very monastery. And I don't even need to mention how proud we felt being part of that aid, or how much happier and prouder we were when we received their thank-you cards and bracelets in return... now *that* is what I call the right approach. 🙏

I don't want to burst your bubble, but that trip to Africa for an honorable cause costs as much as a month's worth of meals for those kids.

steelskipper52 said:I signed her up myself... not because she asked, but because she insisted on seeing what all the fuss was about. She’s just a freshman, so
there's zero chance she'll be doing this again next year. I'm just hoping she gets over this phase eventually.
I was flipping through the textbook yesterday and it's full of nonsense. Apparently, kids are supposed to give up sweets during Lent now? What kind of logic is that? :-) haha
It's ridiculous. I doubt it'll cause any permanent damage, but then again, that's what happens when you let a freshman make the decisions.

Despite all the ridiculous stuff they include in those textbooks, this part isn't actually stupid.

Lent is something special for believers. Yeah, we give up the little luxuries we usually take for granted. And since sweets are one of the main things kids enjoy, it makes sense to guide a young believer toward some kind of self-discipline.

If someone is a believer, it’s not an issue for them—just like it’s not an issue for them to wake up at 5:00 AM to be at Mass by 6:00.

Anyone who signs their kid up for religious education (confessional style) should already know this, and they should understand the whole concept of sacrifice. My child isn't attending, even though I'm a believer, so there's no obligation to the faith or the church other than respecting everyone else's choice. Besides, my spouse is an atheist.

For those whose kids go, if the parents didn't explain what kind of religious education this is and how deeply it's embedded in the institution of the Church itself, then they should deal with the consequences of their own decisions—and their decisions for others. That's a life lesson in itself.