Religion classes in school - Megathread

It’s not even private, just your run-of-the-mill local school... :-) Back in first grade, they actually introduced computer science classes just to scrap them by second grade because the teacher's schedule was totally slammed. Now that they're in fourth grade, they're offering it again, but it's treated like some exclusive ExxonMobil corporate program—only a tiny handful of kids can actually get in.

Jason Ortiz5 said:I actually had computer science as an elective back in 1st grade, so please don't lecture me on what I do or don't know.
The church's stance on human sexuality is also pretty offensive.

Look, any computer science class you actually paid tuition for definitely wasn't an elective... and trust me, I know exactly what I'm talking about.😉

Wait, what exactly did I end up paying for? :zbunjena:

Jason Ortiz5 said:It’s not even private, just your run-of-the-mill local school... :-) Back in first grade, they actually introduced computer science classes just to scrap them by second grade because the teacher's schedule was totally slammed. Now that they're in fourth grade, they're offering it again, but it's treated like some exclusive ExxonMobil corporate program—only a tiny handful of kids can actually get in.

Thanks
I honestly hadn't heard about that specific option before, though I suppose such things are possible. To have computer science available prior to fifth grade at all is quite impressive—kudos to that teacher. In my children's school, however, the curriculum is strictly limited to 😢(

Don't get your hopes up too high. Honestly, I've got this nagging feeling it was just a little stunt to make the new principal look good and check a box on her schedule. It reminds me of back when we had that fancy French language program at the local elementary school—it vanished without a trace right after first grade ended. From second grade on, things just went completely off the rails, and the kids hardly get offered anything worthwhile anymore. :-(

It’s honestly quite funny how the people who never step foot in a church—and don't even bother enrolling their kids in religious education—seem to be the loudest voices complaining about it online. 😕
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it’s a bit strange to see such intense interest in something they’ve explicitly chosen to opt out of. Still, to each their own; we live in a free country after all. 🙂
Regarding the concerns about supervision during those free periods, neither the Church nor the families enrolled in religious classes have any control over that. If you have complaints about supervision, the Church isn't the authority to contact.
I’d suggest looking at this link if you want the full picture, specifically sections 1.1, 1.4, and 13. You'll find answers to most questions there regarding those attending religious studies. As for the supervision issue during free hours, like I said, please direct those inquiries to the school district instead. 😉

Alexander Ortiz3 said:It’s honestly quite funny how the people who never step foot in a church—and don't even bother enrolling their kids in religious education—seem to be the loudest voices complaining about it online. 😕
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it’s a bit strange to see such intense interest in something they’ve explicitly chosen to opt out of. Still, to each their own; we live in a free country after all. 🙂
Regarding the concerns about supervision during those free periods, neither the Church nor the families enrolled in religious classes have any control over that. If you have complaints about supervision, the Church isn't the authority to contact.
I’d suggest looking at this link if you want the full picture, specifically sections 1.1, 1.4, and 13. You'll find answers to most questions there regarding those attending religious studies. As for the supervision issue during free hours, like I said, please direct those inquiries to the school district instead. 😉

Is there actually any proof for that...?

PS, I’m getting some serious "mathematical epiphany" vibes here—kind of like those wild theories you hear on late-night cable news.🍿
Or is it just a tall tale?

Michelle Nelson4 said:Is there actually any proof for that...?

PS, I’m getting some serious "mathematical epiphany" vibes here—kind of like those wild theories you hear on late-night cable news.🍿
Or is it just a tall tale?

I went through the last two or three pages of posts, looking specifically for anyone who mentioned they haven't enrolled their kids in religious education classes or simply don't plan to. My impression is that those people make up the bulk of this specific thread, even though in reality, they're probably a small minority when you look at actual behavior. Maybe my math is off... 😁
If someone tells me they aren't sending their child to religious ed, I take them at their word; I'm not going out looking for proof.

Alexander Ortiz3 said:It’s honestly quite funny how the people who never step foot in a church—and don't even bother enrolling their kids in religious education—seem to be the loudest voices complaining about it online. 😕
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it’s a bit strange to see such intense interest in something they’ve explicitly chosen to opt out of. Still, to each their own; we live in a free country after all. 🙂
Regarding the concerns about supervision during those free periods, neither the Church nor the families enrolled in religious classes have any control over that. If you have complaints about supervision, the Church isn't the authority to contact.
I’d suggest looking at this link if you want the full picture, specifically sections 1.1, 1.4, and 13. You'll find answers to most questions there regarding those attending religious studies. As for the supervision issue during free hours, like I said, please direct those inquiries to the school district instead. 😉

It’s funny how you’re linking to things that actually prove your point wrong. If you look at what’s linked, it’s crystal clear that religious education is an elective subject with a special status, and according to that agreement, it MUST take place during regular school hours. It MUST.

Then you bring up Section 13, which states that all issues arising from this are negotiated between The Cabinet and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

And then you wrap it up by saying people should just talk to the school about their problems. 🤦

The school didn't sign these Vatican agreements. They were imposed by the state and the Church. To be perfectly precise, the Church imposed them on the state.

And now the Church wants absolutely nothing to do with it—yeah, right. Let the teachers deal with it however they can manage. The Church couldn't care less, and these agreements basically give them a legal hall pass to act like they don't care.

Honestly, you're right from a strictly legal standpoint. But from a moral perspective? It's disgusting.

wanderingbadger44 said:It’s funny how you’re linking to things that actually prove your point wrong. If you look at what’s linked, it’s crystal clear that religious education is an elective subject with a special status, and according to that agreement, it MUST take place during regular school hours. It MUST.

Then you bring up Section 13, which states that all issues arising from this are negotiated between The Cabinet and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

And then you wrap it up by saying people should just talk to the school about their problems. 🤦

The school didn't sign these Vatican agreements. They were imposed by the state and the Church. To be perfectly precise, the Church imposed them on the state.

And now the Church wants absolutely nothing to do with it—yeah, right. Let the teachers deal with it however they can manage. The Church couldn't care less, and these agreements basically give them a legal hall pass to act like they don't care.

Honestly, you're right from a strictly legal standpoint. But from a moral perspective? It's disgusting.

What exactly is "tripping me up" or "disgusting"?
Religious studies isn't the issue here. The issue lies with the people who want absolutely nothing to do with religious education or the Church.
Who exactly is supposed to solve the supervision issue during free periods?
Not to mention, there haven't been any issues regarding free periods in twenty-five years of religious education, but fine...

It’s like two people shaking hands on a deal that screws over a third party, yet that third person isn't supposed to blame both of them—just one. Give me a break. Personally? I’m blaming both of them, no hesitation whatsoever.
Like I’ve mentioned before, The Government is basically a xenophobic swamp; they sign off on this kind of garbage, and the other side involved is just as repulsive.

The real issue affects anyone who, for instance, finds out their child is sitting through a religion class despite not being enrolled in it. Take my first period, for example. To me, any attempt at brainwashing my kid against my wishes is an absolute incident. Trying to perform a blessing without my consent? That’s also an incident—it’s an act of violence against my child and our free will. And so on. This is exactly what I’m fighting against, and why I keep writing about it here in this specific thread. I won't stop until this is resolved in a way that actually makes sense to me. Whether that happens tomorrow, next month, or three years from now doesn't matter. I'll stick with it as long as it takes. And honestly, I'm seeing more and more of us who simply refuse to tolerate this nonsense. 🙂

We really are a messy bunch of people.
It’s honestly wild to me that back in the 90s, when religious education was first being brought in under what was basically a dictatorship disguised as a new democracy, those Vatican treaty clauses were way more flexible.

I didn't attend religion class—probably about a third of my classes—so we’d just sleep through the early periods or head straight home once the more devout kids finished their lessons. I wonder if things are still like that at that school today.

So, it was possible then, but isn't now... and I'm not naive enough to miss the point. It’s typical that this kind of forced religious imposition, the massive inflation of church-run schools, the protests, and all that chaos in the streets usually happens whenever a conservative administration is in power.

I’m pretty sure we’ll get a break from at least half of these aggressive displays once the Republicans take over the government, which I’m guessing will happen symbolically on November 18th.☕

wanderingbadger44 said:It’s funny how you’re linking to things that actually prove your point wrong. If you look at what’s linked, it’s crystal clear that religious education is an elective subject with a special status, and according to that agreement, it MUST take place during regular school hours. It MUST.

Then you bring up Section 13, which states that all issues arising from this are negotiated between The Cabinet and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

And then you wrap it up by saying people should just talk to the school about their problems. 🤦

The school didn't sign these Vatican agreements. They were imposed by the state and the Church. To be perfectly precise, the Church imposed them on the state.

And now the Church wants absolutely nothing to do with it—yeah, right. Let the teachers deal with it however they can manage. The Church couldn't care less, and these agreements basically give them a legal hall pass to act like they don't care.

Honestly, you're right from a strictly legal standpoint. But from a moral perspective? It's disgusting.

Since we're debating morality,
it’s funny how some people here lack any empathy for kids who don't attend religious education classes—kids who end up wandering the halls while their worried parents deal with the fallout—
well, I suppose that's just the inevitable byproduct of religious instruction—or rather, faith-based upbringing. http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...lar-kids-study

If it were just about that, I’d say it's not even a big deal. But then you’ve got the mandatory stuff—all those school ceremonies packed with religious mumbo-jumbo, or school plays that can't seem to happen without some religious spin thrown in (even though they're supposed to be for the kids).
I actually thought it was hilarious when my daughter told me that this one teacher who teaches religion patrols the hallways during recess, threatening any kids running around or joking too much that they won't get their snack. And parents are the ones footing the bill for those snacks, by the way. I told my girl that if that teacher ever tries to corner her for any reason, she should just ignore that total penguin, because Mom will handle it.

Jason Ortiz5 said:If it were just about that, I’d say it's not even a big deal. But then you’ve got the mandatory stuff—all those school ceremonies packed with religious mumbo-jumbo, or school plays that can't seem to happen without some religious spin thrown in (even though they're supposed to be for the kids).
I actually thought it was hilarious when my daughter told me that this one teacher who teaches religion patrols the hallways during recess, threatening any kids running around or joking too much that they won't get their snack. And parents are the ones footing the bill for those snacks, by the way. I told my girl that if that teacher ever tries to corner her for any reason, she should just ignore that total penguin, because Mom will handle it.

This serves as an excellent illustration of the very point I am trying to make to you all. A believer here simply cannot win, because no matter what action they take, it is deemed incorrect...
Setting aside the THREE ugly, disgusting, and frankly unnecessary insults in the post—which likely no one will even process—I am fascinated by the idea of singling out the teacher who was actually performing her duty! That is to say, had she not been on duty, this highly qualified professional employed within the American school system would have been pelted with stones and criticism. Yet, because she is actively fulfilling her job requirements by being on duty—more stones and criticism... It is truly incredible...
Then there is perhaps the somewhat inappropriate threat she allegedly used to try and capture the children's attention. Threats that obviously weren't carried out, because if they had been, we certainly would have been reading about it extensively in the news... But the mere notion that a child is being intentionally encouraged at home to disregard the instructions of a teacher on duty... To me, that is simply unbelievable. And then, of course, the proponents of religious education will be accused of intolerance. Truly... 🙄

It has been quite some time since I personally decoupled my own faith from the church as a formal institution, yet I still chose to enroll my children in a Catholic preschool. To be fair, their curriculum was simply unparalleled; even though most of the staff were laypeople rather than nuns, the level of care they provided was truly exceptional. There is an undeniable advantage when a private religious institution has access to more resources than your typical state-funded daycare center.
When they reached first grade, I had them sign up for religious studies classes, but since it was taught by a secular teacher, I found the whole concept rather distasteful—specifically the idea that faith should be treated as a graded academic subject within a school setting. Typically, these lessons took place during the first or last period of the day, but now that we have reached third grade, it has become a double dose of instruction, supplemented by mandatory Saturday services for those preparing for First Communion. It strikes me as somewhat absurd that my child spends two hours on religious studies only to get a single hour of art class. Come next year, I plan to withdraw him from the school-based program entirely; he will continue attending the parish sessions, where the atmosphere is much more dignified, the singing is lovely, and they actually seem to teach more through creativity than the school ever did.
I am firmly of the opinion that religious education should be removed from the public school system and returned to the sanctuary of the church, where participation can be voluntary and, quite frankly, without the unnecessary pressure of grades.

Nancy Kelly31 said:This serves as an excellent illustration of the very point I am trying to make to you all. A believer here simply cannot win, because no matter what action they take, it is deemed incorrect...
Setting aside the THREE ugly, disgusting, and frankly unnecessary insults in the post—which likely no one will even process—I am fascinated by the idea of singling out the teacher who was actually performing her duty! That is to say, had she not been on duty, this highly qualified professional employed within the American school system would have been pelted with stones and criticism. Yet, because she is actively fulfilling her job requirements by being on duty—more stones and criticism... It is truly incredible...
Then there is perhaps the somewhat inappropriate threat she allegedly used to try and capture the children's attention. Threats that obviously weren't carried out, because if they had been, we certainly would have been reading about it extensively in the news... But the mere notion that a child is being intentionally encouraged at home to disregard the instructions of a teacher on duty... To me, that is simply unbelievable. And then, of course, the proponents of religious education will be accused of intolerance. Truly... 🙄

Are you really struggling to grasp that there are people who don't want their children supervised by a Catholic nun in public schools?

Whenever I scroll through the comments from people who claim to share my faith, I’m honestly just hit with this wave of sadness and anger. It’s hard to wrap my head around how people like that ended up at the very heart of the church.

I just can't believe they’ll stoop so low as to start whining about some supposed "oppression" of the majority by a minority... It's nothing but mindless demagoguery, pure lies, and total hypocrisy. Honestly, it's Pharisaical behavior.

I genuinely wish you all could discover the most beautiful part of our faith—which is showing mercy to your neighbor. That’s what you should be focusing on learning back at your home parish.

Matthew Young35 said:Are you really struggling to grasp that there are people who don't want their children supervised by a Catholic nun in public schools?

It certainly is... because we aren't talking about some random stranger picked up off the street or a casual visitor from a convent wandering into a classroom. We are discussing an educated woman possessing both theological depth and pedagogical expertise. And yet, we find ourselves rejecting her based on what, exactly? Is it merely her attire? If a secular teacher walked in wearing a nose piercing that I found personally distasteful, I could easily tell my child, "Just ignore everything she says." Or perhaps it is her underlying values? If a teacher openly supports a radical fringe party like the Green Party, and I find their political fantasies utterly repugnant, I could just as easily instruct my child, "Ignore her instructions." 🤷
I find this intense surge of liberalism on one hand, contrasted with such absolute intolerance on the other, to be deeply perplexing... Is it not considered modern and liberal to embrace difference? Or is that supposed tolerance strictly reserved for certain "modern" deviations, such as homosexuals or Buddhists?...

Look, the school nurse isn't an administrator. Period. She shouldn't be patrolling the halls telling kids what to do, let alone trying to play hall monitor and "enforce order."