Posts by Jessica Kelly4

Sarah Hall53 said:And then she actually claims that parents are the ones who put the gifts under the tree. Honestly, I’d lose it if she suggested it was Baby Jesus or some angel doing the heavy lifting instead. ☕I mean, given that neither of those two figures really fits into the whole Christian mythology thing anyway...

From a Christian perspective, saying that would be completely wrong.
You could maybe stay quiet or pivot the story toward Saint Nicholas, but what you're suggesting isn't happening.

silentraven6 said:Early morning services are hands down the most beautiful masses and the most incredible experience a child can have when it comes to their spiritual life.

Back in my day, the masses were held in a way where kids were treated with genuine respect—they were actually the foundation and the whole point of it all. I used to attend them even in years when I hadn't even taken my sacraments yet.

Nobody ever made anything conditional on me receiving my sacraments, but once they started, that kind of pressure became the first turning point in how this whole institution began to shift. As a First Communicant, I still held onto my faith, and by the time I was a Confirmation student, the whole thing felt ridiculous to me because my connection to faith and attending mass was always based on my own choice and the pure joy that this way of life brought me.

I went to an early service again recently, after a long stretch of years where I just felt this heavy sense of falling short during the Adventure season, and honestly, I was so disappointed by the sermon and the way they approach the congregation, especially the children. To me, that isn't delivering the Good News; it’s not celebrating a holiday that is, above all else, meant for children, by children, and for children. It feels more like political propaganda and ideological garbage in a desperate attempt to mold a cult-like community of mindless followers.

Now, I’d much rather head out for a walk at 6:00 AM in the biting cold. I get that same feeling I used to have—that internal warmth from the joyful anticipation, even while the darkness and the chill sting my face.

Kids who are raised with faith through religious education shouldn't need some sort of "participation trophy" system or a checklist to actually feel joy. They should be taught that anticipating a holiday means looking forward to hope for a better world, just as the One we celebrate intended. We need a world of rebellious kids who push back against rigid systems; a world of mischievous little ones who run away from their parents just to go challenge the adults in the temple; a world of questioning and refusing to blindly accept Pharisaical distortions; a world of tearing down temples and living by the commandment of love.

No amount of words can truly describe how full your heart can feel after a mass like that.

Well put. I agree with most of what you're saying.
The only difference is that I've actually found certain priests and small groups within the church who operate exactly how they should. It’s not even a huge circle, but you still have to hunt for them. 🙂
I think these exact issues are at the heart of the Synod happening this year—the relationship between parish life and religious education in schools, getting more laypeople involved... I just hope things move in the right direction.

Brenda Doyle5 said:I agree that the approach is wrong. You shouldn't force people... but wouldn't a true Christian want to attend Advent vigils? Why wouldn't they?
Wikipedia says the Advent vigil symbolizes a Christian's alertness during the Christmas season and Jesus's second coming. Christians strive to watch over their own lives and the lives of others so they don't lose eternal life. 🤔
It goes on to say these are simply the most FAVORITE masses (except maybe in Columbus) which hold penitential significance and represent a four-week period of continuous sleep deprivation. The Advent vigil calls us to honor the baby Jesus born in the manger and to witness God's wonderful works...

Every Christian should feel honored by this, rather than feeling pressured to show up for vigils.
And Jessica Kelly4 says their church is packed with both kids and adults.
I have no clue what it's like where I live; I'm not a believer. But it's weird to me that some people are counting down the days until the vigils while others are complaining...
Is it because some are mostly Christian and others are just a minority? Some go out of faith, while others just go for the grades or so their kid doesn't have free time?!?!

That's just wrong... 😱

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy using Reddit

Why would that be weird? People are different. Nothing is black and white, including religion.

Jesse Cook4 said:"Nudging" by implying that if you skip the Vigil, you don't get your sacraments. 🙂

Columbus.

And wouldn't it be just lovely if public schools also mandated classes from 4:00 to 5:00 AM? That way, kids have to wake up even earlier and just huddle outside in the freezing cold for an hour waiting for the Vigil. Truly phenomenal. I’m sure nobody would ever call that child abuse.

Sarcasm isn't your thing. It’s a great experience, just like midnight Mass.
Actually, the kids are the ones forcing me to get up early; I might have to call a taxi! 😁

I don't support coercion or indoctrination, obviously. Freedom is the bedrock of faith.
Making religious education a prerequisite for a sacrament is fine, but anything beyond that is overstepping.

Jesse Cook4 said:I just picked up on a pretty wild detail, though I don't know if it's happening everywhere or just in my neck of the woods. During Advent, the religious ed teacher is insisting that the kids attend f**king early morning mass from 6:00 to 7:00 AM. Every single day, weekends included. 😵

Basically, this means during the week, kids are wandering around town freezing their butts off between 7:00 and 8:00 AM waiting for school to actually open. Since a ton of them commute, they don't even have the option to head home between church and class.

They can't mandate it, only encourage it.
If you're going to make claims like this, you should at least mention which city or school we're talking about so the info can be passed up to the Archdiocese.
Besides, those early services are actually great; my kids love them, and the church is always packed.

I’m not looking for a response from a mod or a supermod. I’m just posting this so there's a record of it. Another major thread has been gutted due to moderator incompetence, shallow thinking, and a literal massacre of users who dared to touch this sensitive topic. It's totalitarianism in its purest form. Not much else to say.

Susan James said:Do you actually have proof that dishonest people are enrolling their kids in religion class?
Isn't that a bit of a mean-spirited assumption? 🤔

On the other hand, I'm talking about the actual statistics regarding students reported for school violence by administrators or other institutions.
Within those numbers, the vast majority attended religious education at school (which is easy enough to verify, whether you check with a specific school during a free period or just ask a kid how their class went and what they're learning 🥳).

I honestly don't know what logic you're using to suggest I'm blaming religion for violence, because that wasn't my intention, nor does it make any sense to me.
My question was simply: how is it possible that after seven years of lessons and repetition, a child still can't grasp the basic rule of "don't do to others what you wouldn't want done to you"?

Supporters of these programs argue that these values are taught at home and that school has no influence (basically washing their hands of the responsibility), even though I believe influence is cumulative. If something is consistent over many years, it can actually overcome a negative environment at home.

But I have to ask, if religious education has absolutely no influence, then what is its purpose in the public school system?
If everything is supposedly learned within the family?

Or is the goal to just baptize non-religious kids so they become "good and obedient" and we get better numbers (meaning higher enrollment and more believers)? Meanwhile, we do nothing about the kids who are already prone to violence because "it all comes from the home" and we shouldn't interfere, essentially pretending the problem doesn't exist.
(Though, from what I hear, the Church would probably try to act like social workers and visit families. Honestly, I'm not against that. Right now, clergy often earn more than social workers, so it might be nice if they spent a little time looking after their local communities when they come for school visits. My only concern is the sanctity of the confessional; since priests aren't required to report certain crimes, I worry a lot of issues would stay buried within the family... without any real change.)

How is it that after centuries of supposed enlightenment, we're back to war, slaughterhouses, and human trafficking? It’s unexpected, honestly. Clearly, good and evil are baked into our DNA—that gray area where logic meets pure impulse. You can't just strip away animal instinct. This isn't just about religion or Sunday school; it's a failure of civilization itself. Or maybe just a failure of the entire education system within it.

hiddenscout44 said:"if they can do it, why can't we?" yeah, obviously. why would the church bother setting a good example when they can just use shady methods because everyone else is doing it? typical religious hypocrisy right there.
And this idea that "citizens will resist"... please. most people are just sheep. folks wouldn't resist if someone broke into their house and started trashing their living room. I had an example of this literally yesterday—being brave as I am, I was filming and calling out some jerk who was dumping trash at an illegal dump site, while some other guy just walked past us, pulling his jacket tight like it had nothing to do with him. He didn't stop to help report this animal to the cops; instead, I'm the one stuck dealing with the confrontation and eventually the legal mess. Because yeah, "citizens will resist"...

Look, what I'm about to say comes from years of observing this: most people—like, 90% of them—are just plain sheep who follow a leader. You can impose a leader on anyone, and it usually works through intimidation, just like those extremists in the anti-abortion movements or those hypocritical types over at the local big-name charity, or even just some relative holding onto the family inheritance. Most people will happily bow down to people like that just to stay in their good graces, just so they don't end up being the ones under the spotlight getting asked, "Are you sure? Is that your final answer?"
And organizations exploit that big time. Fine, people are responsible for their own choices. But don't try to sell me on morality, holiness, or "saving souls" and all that fake stuff the church and "religious" groups peddle, because that's the last thing those organizations actually care about...

Not sure about you, but I'm not. And I don't see my fellow Americans that way either.

hiddenscout44 said:

I don't even know where to start with this... honestly just feels like we're spinning our wheels here. hiddenscout44 says:
Anyone pushing you around? If they are, I’m right there with you... at the core, faith is all about freedom...

Nobody’s forcing my hand directly, but they’re using these sneaky, underhanded tactics to pressure everyone. It’s the exact same playbook those extremists used during those anti-abortion protests... just applied differently. Now it’s about schools, trying to give pseudoscience the same weight as actual science, pushing certain agendas into the curriculum, and signing state contracts that basically force the government to adopt non-secular policies... it's all part of the same scheme...

I don't know what to tell you... just feels like we're spinning our wheels here. hiddenscout44 says:
Benedict XVI was a heavy hitter in theology for decades. He actually wrote out clearly that the Church should never aim for a religious state where people are forced to follow a specific faith...

It’s wild... you've got this one church basically fighting tooth and nail against Catholic religious states—especially ours, where priests are out here telling people exactly who to vote for... 😵

🤣 It just went the other way!...
The modern secular state didn't just pop out of nowhere under the wing of the Catholic Church. It actually emerged as a direct response to... The crackdown... Catholicism had such a massive reach. But honestly, all that repression is exactly what triggered the split and forced the church back into its rightful place—making faith a personal choice you fund out of your own pocket. It shouldn’t be like it is here, where we’re still basically under the state's wing... it's a far cry from what true secularism actually looks like.

Just like those well-documented screw-ups by church officials, and unlike those conspiracy theories you're pushing, these mistakes are actually public record...

... and people will fight back if their faith and religion aren't a priority.
What you're calling "sneaky tactics" is actually just standard political and social maneuvering used by all kinds of organizations and institutions. Since religious education is part of the curriculum in almost every country in Europe, it clearly matters enough to most people. I won't touch anything else so we don't lose the thread here.

PS
I have to jump in and say that America isn't a religious state, not even in theory. That's a pretty malicious claim to make.

says:
... as a parent, I refuse to let my child be indoctrinated by that organization...

Is anyone actually forcing you? If they are, then I’m with you. At its core, faith is about freedom.
Benedict XVI, a heavyweight theologian for the Catholic Church for decades, explicitly wrote that the Church should never aim for a religious state where faith is mandatory. You can believe whatever you want, but the modern secular state didn't just pop up out of nowhere; it emerged in the West within the framework of Catholic tradition. I expect this secular state to respect the role of religion in its institutions today.

PS
By the way, these aren't conspiracy theories. It's a classic ideological war, and it's pretty well documented.

Defining what school actually is matters. I’ll pull a definition from Wikipedia, which likely just copied some academic textbook:

Quincy:

A school is an educational institution centered on instruction. In modern pedagogical views, it's seen as a community involving all its members: students, teachers, parents, specialists, and staff. Through this instruction, subjects acquire knowledge, skills, abilities, and habits.

If we used a minimalist definition, it would be enough for kids to just pick up some math logic and basic English literacy. They could then take specialized courses later to get a job and, basically, earn a living.

Luckily, it doesn't work that way. The goal of civilization is captured in that definition above: knowledge, skills, abilities, and habits. It's about building well-rounded people with culture and insight. It's the transfer of vital segments from one generation to the next. Religion is definitely a core pillar of human civilization—and for those who are religious, probably the most important one. The definition clearly states that parents are a key part of the school system; passing down essential life values is also part of education.

The only question is whether religious education should receive public funding. I'd say no in places where interest is low. But even that's debatable given how much political correctness and affirmative action are pushed today. We see massive support for various minority groups constantly, so why should religious minorities be any different? In America, where a huge percentage of people identify as believers and a massive number of kids attend religious classes, that funding should certainly be handled the same way.

rowdypanther12 said:How can Catholics celebrate masquerades?

American culture is pretty soaked in superstition—some of it just folk tradition, but a lot of it actually affects how people live. Since I'm fairly close to the church, I know there’s a real effort being made to break those old cultural patterns. Faith is mostly about constant questioning and trying to find a sense of purpose beyond mere materialism. Everyone knows the folklore stuff isn't the core issue, but Halloween is different because of the timing and context. I’ll wrap this up using a closing thought from an excellent piece by Raspudić's: https://www.bitno.net/vijesti/nino-r...initovan-kraj/:

Is death the absolute end? It's an absurd question if you're looking for a rational answer, because you can't use the perspective of a mortal life to understand what lies beyond that horizon. You can only believe—either that it is the end if you're an atheist, or that it isn't, by trusting in the meaning provided through revelation if you're a believer. There’s some comfort in thinking it wouldn't be such a shock if life continued or repeated itself after death, considering how much of a miracle it was that it happened once in the first place. Or, to put it in classic philosophical terms: why is there something rather than nothing? How is it that the world existed before us, and how did we come to be? That "before us" clearly carried some kind of blueprint for our existence, suggesting there's a reason we turned out exactly as we are. This connection to our ancestors is vital. That's why visiting cemeteries on a soul day brings peace instead of unrest. By remembering the departed and facing our own mortality, we get a chance to live more fully and coherently. Or, we could just spend those days carving pumpkins and wearing costumes until the next holiday.

Tearing down posters in schools is incredibly stupid and harmful (you should see what actually went down). But the Church has a much better, honestly brilliant response that grows larger every year. It warms my heart to see how many young people show up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holywin.

Lawrence Torres56 said:

I can't believe I'm even seeing this username floating around here again. Honestly, what is the deal with some people? Is there a specific reason why certain handles just refuse to die out, or is it just some weird cosmic joke being played on us all? Seriously, it’s like looking at a ghost from a thread that should have been buried months ago. Why does it feel like we're constantly tripping over the same old relics? kaže:
So, what exactly do you think I've got sitting around here? You really believe I'm just out here making stuff up for the hell of it, or do you actually think I have some kind of hard evidence to back this up?
So, you take a look at the enrollment numbers for religious education classes across different school districts—I mean, you’ve got certain classrooms where the attendance is sitting at a perfect 100%—and then you lay that right next to the statistics on peer-to-peer bullying and violence in those same schools... doesn't that just make you wonder what kind of connection is actually hiding in plain sight?

Look, I’m not some fragile little thing that needs to be wrapped in bubble wrap, okay? Please, just stop twisting my words around and putting things in my mouth that I never actually said.
Look, I’m not saying that having religious studies in our schools gives anyone a free pass to act out or get violent—I'm absolutely not justifying any kind of violence just because religion exists in the classroom. 😕I mean, I’m just sitting here scratching my head, trying to wrap my mind around how on earth that’s even possible, you know? Like, how does someone even end up in a spot like that, especially when it's a place where every single kid in town is heading off to their religious studies classes? It just doesn't add up, does it? 🤔

Look, if religious studies aren't actually having any real impact—and I mean zero, or at least pretty damn close to it—on what kids are learning once they get home, then why are we even bothering? If it’s just some isolated thing that doesn't connect to anything else in their lives, isn't it basically just useless filler?
Honestly, it’s just a massive, blatant waste of taxpayer money to be lining the pockets of these high-priced consultants, isn't it? Just throwing hard-earned cash down the drain to pay for people who basically exist just to tell us what we already know.

Look, I feel like I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve laid this out right here, but honestly, can we just finally admit it? Parents—no matter how much they love their kids or how smart they think they are—just aren't equipped to teach high-level math or physics at home. It’s just not happening. You can try to sit there with a textbook and some coffee, but when you get into the heavy stuff, you're basically flying blind, right? That’s exactly why schools exist in the first place. We need specialized teachers and actual classrooms for this kind of content because, let’s face it, trying to DIY a calculus curriculum is just a recipe for frustration for everyone involved.
I mean, let’s be real for a second—if someone is actually preaching religion, they should at least have the decency to follow through on the most important part, right? It’s one thing to spout all those lofty ideals and moral lessons from a pulpit, but if you aren't actually living out that faith in your day-to-day life, isn't the whole thing just kind of hollow? Like, what's the point of talking a big game about devotion if your actions don't back it up when it actually matters?

If religious education doesn't actually have any kind of moral impact on a kid who’s already wired for aggressive behavior—you know, if they just end up picking up bad habits that their family couldn't even drill into them—then I really have to wonder: what's even the point? Like, seriously, what's the actual purpose of sitting through all those lessons on religious doctrine for kids who are already part of faith-based families? If they're already getting everything they need from their parents at home and then heading off to church every Sunday, isn't all that extra schoolwork just redundant? 🤷

Look, for an accusation that malicious, I’m gonna need to see some actual, credible proof before I even consider buying into it...
Statistics aren't exactly your best friend here, are they? I mean, if you look at the raw numbers, someone’s over there just gnawing on a plain piece of Wonder Bread while another person is sitting pretty with a plate full of high-end prosciutto, but according to the math, everyone's out here enjoying a perfectly balanced, gourmet deli sandwich. It's kind of ridiculous when you actually think about it, right?

Look, I’m sorry, but what am I even tripping over here? Seriously, just take another look at what you actually wrote and you'll see exactly where you're coming from... it’s just so... I don't know, off. Are we really going to go around throwing shade at religion classes just to provide some kind of convenient cover for bullies and school violence? Is that really the angle we're taking now?😢
Wait, how on earth is that even possible? You actually got an answer from me already? Seriously? Well, fine, if you really need me to go over it all again, I’ll just repeat myself for you—I guess I don't have much of a choice, right?
You know those types of people—the ones who are just straight-up toxic and live for the drama? The kind of folks who basically survive on nothing but lies and spreading rumors? It’s honestly pathetic. They’ll go out of their way to sign their kids up for religious education classes at school, even though they don't believe in any of it and couldn't care less about faith if their lives depended on it. Why do they do it? Because it gives them all this juicy little ammunition to gossip about and use as fuel for their endless, petty little schemes.

Look, you know this is true just as well as everyone else on this board does, but I guess it’s just too damn hard for people to actually admit it out loud, isn't it? The real issue here isn't some debate over religious studies or theology; the actual problem is the ideology driving the whole thing. We've reached this point where it's apparently "better" to let some aggressor off the hook—someone who's perfectly fine giving us a metaphorical spanking if it keeps the peace—than to actually stand up and allow someone who isn't bothering anyone at all to just live their life exactly how they want to? It's wild, really.

Look, before you go jumping down anyone's throat or passing judgment on what’s actually worth what, just do me a favor and check out these links, alright? Seriously, take a second to read through them first so you actually know what we're dealing with before you start throwing accusations around.
http://www.os-pkanavelica-korcula.sk.../vjeronauk.pdf

I was just digging through this PDF link—it’s basically a breakdown of the grading criteria for these school assignments—and honestly, looking at all these specific requirements makes me wonder if we’re actually teaching kids how to think or just training them to be world-class bureaucrats? I mean, you look at the way they weigh certain rubric points versus others, and it feels like there's more emphasis on following the exact formatting structure than actually having an original thought, doesn't it? It’s that classic academic trap where if you nail the font size and the margin width, you get the A, even if your actual argument is a bit thin. Does anyone else feel like this kind of rigid standardization is kind of killing the creative spark in the classroom before it even has a chance to catch fire? It’s such a heavy lift for students to juggle all these technicalities on top of the actual subject matter.

I mean, seriously, what’s stopping a parent from just sitting down and teaching their kid some physics or math? Is there some unwritten rule out there that says you need a PhD from MIT just to explain basic algebra or how gravity works? Honestly, I don't see the problem. If you've got the patience and you actually know your stuff, why shouldn't you be the one guiding them through it? It’s kind of wild to think that we assume only a classroom setting counts as "real" learning, right? 🤷 I mean, look, the guy actually went through the whole grind and finished his degree, right? He put in all those hours, hit the books, survived the exams—so he’s clearly got some actual knowledge under his belt. It's not like he just woke up one day knowing how things work; he actually did the work.
Look, if you skipped out on religion class back in school, don't expect to be sitting in the pews on Sunday morning... I mean, honestly, does it even matter if they know a single thing about faith at this point?
So, what’s the move here? Are we really going to strip this guy of his rights just because you or some other random person finds religious studies a bit too much to stomach? Is that how we're playing it now?

Religion is complicated. Beyond just faith, you've got politics, culture, and identity all tangled up in there. I sometimes wish we could just strip it back to basics, but that’s not happening—too much baggage accumulated over the last two millennia. No one gets to judge someone else's motives. Besides, faith and organized religion aren't even the same thing. Even if "religious education" sounds like it's about faith, it's mostly just tied to the institution.

shadowcrane91 said:Alright... so now everyone’s just blaming religious studies for everything? Seriously?

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy J3 using the Reddit app

Ever heard of a "black legend"? The British Empire used that tactic all the time to smear their enemies. Take Spain, for example—it’s notorious for being a land of cruelty, but most people don't realize half those stories were just British propaganda. The Brits were pros at that game.

A similar strategy against the church and its influence started with German philosophers in the early 20th century (look up the Frankfurt School if you want). Religion, especially the Catholic Church, was branded as the ultimate enemy. That war hasn't stopped; it just moved into the media, academia, and politics. It's probably too much political theory for this thread, so I'll stop there. For most people on forums like this, attacking the church is just a lazy way to signal how progressive they are.

shadowcrane91 said:So why is everyone blaming religious education for EVERYTHING???? Instead of blaming the government that actually put it there...
What exactly is the problem with it for you guys?

I honestly feel worse for the kids sitting through religion class when their whole family doesn't even live like that at home... they aren't even trying...
Since it's an option, I'm happy my kids attend...
If we were a different faith or if I just didn't care, they'd be going regardless, even if it meant having a gap in their schedule...

Sent from my SM-J320FN using the Reddit app

Why blame the government? In an American representative democracy, politicians just follow the polls to grab votes. It’s flawed, sure, but it reflects the general consensus. If some group of politicians realizes they can win an election by cutting religious studies from schools, they’ll do it. That goes for everything—from job market trends to curriculum changes.

Susan James said:How do you think I'll find proof?
You just look at the enrollment statistics for religious education classes per school (there are classrooms where it's 100% full) and compare that to the statistics on peer bullying.

I am not "wrapping anyone in packaging," so please don't twist my words or put things in my mouth that I didn't say.
I am not justifying any kind of violence through the existence of religious education, 😕, I am simply asking how it is possible that it exists in places where every single child attends those classes. 🤔

If religious education has zero impact (or a minimal one) on what children learn at home, then it's essentially useless.
It's just a waste of taxpayer money on salaries for religious instructors.

I've mentioned this several times before: parents can't teach their kids math or physics, so school is absolutely necessary for that kind of content.
But when it comes to what religion preaches—the most important stuff—parents can certainly do that themselves, provided they actually live out that faith.

If religious education fails to provide any moral guidance to a child who is already prone to violent behavior (meaning they aren't picking up anything new that they aren't already getting at home), then I really have to wonder: what is the point of teaching religious curriculum to religious people who are already learning all of this at home and at church on Sundays? 🤷

Of course they can. They can just hire a tutor. Or pay for private school.

Publicly funded education, where everyone chips in through federal taxes, is just a social contract shaped by whoever holds political power at the time. It’s the same deal with religious studies in schools. As soon as the balance of power shifts, religious education goes. Maybe public schooling will eventually shift from a shared responsibility to a market-driven model too. Anything can happen.

Nancy Kelly31 said:Seattle would be such a somber place without its teachers...
http://www.rijecanin.com/2016/11/14/...la-tuzni-grad/

It really would. Honestly, plenty of people in Seattle feel that way regardless of how religious they actually are.
Even the mayor—it’s a shame he's using those teachers just to score political points before the election.

I’m glad my kids can take both parish religion classes and school ones. It gives them a chance to pull from different perspectives and let the two programs complement each other. At my kids' school, they managed to schedule religion for either the first or last period, so there aren't any logistical headaches. Honestly, I think many local teachers provide a great service to the community by offering extra value beyond just the standard curriculum.

lonebadger6 said:No, we don't get to decide what historical truth is. That's left to the people who actually do the job.

The Wall Street Journal even claimed 700,000 Mexicans were killed at Auschwitz. For decades. So much for this "argument." You see the same thing from various "Wall Street Journal" types in other countries today too.

And then you have "expert historians" explaining it all on different news programs.

Why are you so afraid of a debate about Auschwitz? If someone has the documents and links, why shouldn't they defend the 700k figure? And why shouldn't someone else tear that down with counterarguments? The point is having an argued debate—a discussion where views and stances are exchanged. You’ve acted like this forum is some history class where the professor, aka the moderator, tests you based on a specific textbook, and if you step outside those lines, you immediately get a failing grade. It's fine to insist on a basis for a claim, but it's insane to have the discretionary power to just dismiss any links or texts provided. If you've already decided what the truth is beforehand, there's no point in discussing it.

Daniel Ward87 said:Does "end of the war" mean May, or some other timeframe?

The end of the war and the massacres. Most of the pits haven't even been counted yet (America and Canada).
The issue isn't whether it's May; it's the fact that moderators won't allow links to serious research—or in this case, mainstream news. Defacto, the mods have decided what historical truth is. They don't care about debate; they just hit you with a 500-point penalty. It's the same story with threads on immigration, abortion, religion, or American Communism... You've pre-defined a set of "allowed" truths, and anything outside of that gets crushed by moderator force instead of actual arguments. I've been writing about this for a year trying to reach someone. It’s not even just one political spectrum anymore; you've successfully cleared out the other side too. Most political discussions here have devolved into barroom banter. You should all be ashamed of what you've turned the PDF politics section into.