Religion classes in school - Megathread

Nancy Kelly31 said:Which faith? Every faith... Each one belongs to the cultural circle in which a person was born, as that is naturally the most logical and acceptable path for them.

The difficulty with this topic is that the opposing viewpoints are both entirely logical. Finding any sort of consensus becomes quite difficult under those circumstances. ☕

Take this situation with the churches, for example. What kind of lesson would we actually be providing to small children in these massive buildings designed to hold hundreds of people, when twenty of them might get swallowed up by those enormous pews, feeling completely lost in the sheer scale of it all? Without whiteboards or chalk, without televisions or videos, without projectors or laptops, and without even the simple opportunity to cut, color, glue, or sit on the floor... Churches aren't designed as classrooms; they are places for prayer, meant for large congregations gathered at once. You can barely count the number of churches that possess adequate halls for religious education, and even then, they are mostly found in major cities. But life happens everywhere else too.

However, you all know this already. You are merely pretending that you don't. And that isn't the point. Personally, I would find it much more interesting to discuss how we might solve the issue of children not being enrolled in religious studies. But I see there is little appetite for that here. It is a shame... because many minds working together are inevitably wiser. Provided, of course, that those minds are willing to cooperate. As it stands... 🤷

What exactly would be the problem with organizing religious classes in parish halls or in those community centers you find in every small town across America? If the Church doesn't have its own dedicated space, then let it pay rent for social spaces to teach its flock. Let the believers contribute through donations. Let the Church equip itself with all the necessary supplies from the Vatican's golden treasury—I mean, the Church is the wealthiest institution on the planet, yet it uses spaces paid for by every taxpayer through their hard work, and on top of that, tax money is allocated for the training and salaries of catechists. All while collecting church taxes.

Didn't > condemn those types of merchants and rage through the temple like a man possessed?

With that last paragraph, you're hinting at a Pontius Pilate mindset, isn't that a bit hypocritical? Can't we make a collective effort to finally figure out where we belong and what shaped us as believers, without forcing our worldview on others, just as they don't force theirs on us?

In any case, I don't see a solution to this problem other than the methods I've already mentioned. Until there is enough political pressure to finally strip ideological content out of the public school system—much like what happened with Marxism—it should be handled as an extracurricular activity instead. That's how it should function.

Besides, all those resources—the projectors, the floors, the boards—are paid for by every single taxpayer. It's fine if religious groups or institutions use them, just like foreign language schools or sports clubs do, but then the same rules should apply: they'll need to pay rent and cover their own payroll from their own pockets.

rowdypanther12 said:I think we need to be realistic here.
The agreements with the Vatican are already in place; a single school can't just unilaterally cancel them. I won't get into the politics of that, but I hope it's clear to everyone here that I don't support religious education in public schools, nor do I think it belongs in a secular nation.
But
it is what it is, and we should find a practical solution.
Religious ed teachers are paid for those hours, so they’re going to teach the kids who show up, just like an elective German class or an IT instructor would teach the students enrolled in those electives.

The real issue we need to tackle is making sure these electives actually feel optional—meaning there should be other real choices available during that time slot. In the lower grades, having it scheduled during after-school care isn't a fix, whether it's the first or last period.
Every school should offer a genuine alternative so that kids who don't want religious studies have somewhere else to go, rather than just sitting around.
For the older students, it really needs to be scheduled as the first or last period, or perhaps during a different shift entirely.

That would essentially mean violating the Concordat. 😁 That’s the crux of the matter right there. You mentioned earlier yourself that those agreements aren't something you can just tear up. That agreement is incredibly specific and leaves no room for interpretation: religious studies MUST be integrated into the regular school schedule.

There is a way out, of course, but it comes with a price tag. It would require creating an entirely new elective subject specifically for the students who choose not to take religion.

But let's be real—that isn't going to happen for two main reasons. First off, there's no budget for it; we're talking about adding more hours to a child's school day, pulling more funding from the education budget, and hiring a whole new set of instructors to teach this new subject. (And honestly, someone will probably try to "solve" this by cutting teacher salaries and redistributing that money to cover the new staff.)

The second reason is that the Church would absolutely lose its mind because it might lead to even more kids opting out of religious classes altogether.

In reality, though, that second reason is actually the first one. ☕

It’s fine within the regular school schedule, maybe just first or last period for the older kids 😁
We really need to organize something meaningful for the exchange students instead of just letting them hang around and get bored

Actually, what I meant was that back when I was in elementary school, we had Latin and Greek as electives—two separate subjects. They were always scheduled during the first or last period.

Nancy Kelly31 said:Which faith? Every faith... Each one belongs to the cultural circle in which a person was born, as that is naturally the most logical and acceptable path for them.

The difficulty with this topic is that the opposing viewpoints are both entirely logical. Finding any sort of consensus becomes quite difficult under those circumstances. ☕

Take this situation with the churches, for example. What kind of lesson would we actually be providing to small children in these massive buildings designed to hold hundreds of people, when twenty of them might get swallowed up by those enormous pews, feeling completely lost in the sheer scale of it all? Without whiteboards or chalk, without televisions or videos, without projectors or laptops, and without even the simple opportunity to cut, color, glue, or sit on the floor... Churches aren't designed as classrooms; they are places for prayer, meant for large congregations gathered at once. You can barely count the number of churches that possess adequate halls for religious education, and even then, they are mostly found in major cities. But life happens everywhere else too.

However, you all know this already. You are merely pretending that you don't. And that isn't the point. Personally, I would find it much more interesting to discuss how we might solve the issue of children not being enrolled in religious studies. But I see there is little appetite for that here. It is a shame... because many minds working together are inevitably wiser. Provided, of course, that those minds are willing to cooperate. As it stands... 🤷

And how exactly would you solve it? Based on the enrollment numbers, it seems like whenever non-religious kids do something constructive during those hours, other parents complain their kids are being left out. On the flip side, why should parents be forced to pay extra for outside activities—like language classes or whatever else—during that time?

rowdypanther12 said:It’s fine within the regular school schedule, maybe just first or last period for the older kids 😁
We really need to organize something meaningful for the exchange students instead of just letting them hang around and get bored

Actually, what I meant was that back when I was in elementary school, we had Latin and Greek as electives—two separate subjects. They were always scheduled during the first or last period.

In high schools, they have alternative electives like Ethics. Often, the kids taking Ethics end up with an 8th period—basically the afternoon shift—while the ones in Religion class are just wandering the hallways.
How interesting.

So, they’ve merged everything even in high schools now? Back in my day, religion classes and ethics were scheduled at different times.
Basically, I’ve already figured out a workaround for my kid if things don't change in the school system soon (which, let's be honest, won't happen in the next two years)—during that free period, I'll just swing by, pick them up, and we'll go grab some ice cream instead.

brighteagle86 said:In high schools, they have alternative electives like Ethics. Often, the kids taking Ethics end up with an 8th period—basically the afternoon shift—while the ones in Religion class are just wandering the hallways.
How interesting.

Well, that's what happens when their leaders fail to secure a Concordat with Francis. It leaves them acting like a lower caste in our quasi-secular little nation... 😁

I’m honestly reading this and just can’t believe my eyes.😳

Robert Rodriguez9 said:So, they’ve merged everything even in high schools now? Back in my day, religion classes and ethics were scheduled at different times.
Basically, I’ve already figured out a workaround for my kid if things don't change in the school system soon (which, let's be honest, won't happen in the next two years)—during that free period, I'll just swing by, pick them up, and we'll go grab some ice cream instead.

I suppose it depends on the specific school—student enrollment numbers, how many kids opt for ethics, and the availability of faculty.
Generally speaking, offering an elective doesn't guarantee a perfectly seamless schedule where nobody ends up wandering the halls—at least not during the initial rollout.

It seems far more logical to just scrap the Concordat altogether—it would likely be a much faster and simpler process. 🤣

If you ask me, the bare minimum should be hiring at least one more librarian for our schools. That way, the library could actually stay open consistently throughout both the morning and afternoon sessions. It would provide a reliable space where students who aren't participating in religious studies can head over to during those periods—which, unfortunately, isn't really an option right now. Of course, we’d also need to invest in some decent desks, chairs, computers, and other essentials to make sure the library is a comfortable and productive place for them to hang out while their peers are in class.
Regarding religious services within the school system—again, my baseline requirement is simple transparency. Everyone needs clear, advance communication about the schedule. Participation should be entirely voluntary for the students, and for the younger kids, there absolutely must be written parental consent. Plus, we have to ensure they have a safe, supervised alternative location to go to (I’m back to suggesting the library again!).

Personally, I don't mind the idea of them spending time in the library. In fact, I'd love nothing more than to see our kids develop a genuine passion for books and reading. To me, that is a much better outcome than whatever other alternatives might be offered.😁

I suppose letting people stay in the libraries is okay for now, even if it isn't the perfect long-term fix.

However, I really can't get on board with the blessings.
Seriously, guys—let’s just skip the school celebration before the priest starts spraying everyone with holy water.
The rest of the kids will be at the party while you all just hang out in the library.

Look, if the whole point is supposed to be some sort of religious "blessing," then there really isn't anything else for the kids to be doing during that time.
If they try to mix things up—say, by bundling a blessing for all the students into the end-of-year school assembly—then I’d definitely put that in the "absolutely unacceptable" category. Blessings should be kept entirely separate from general school celebrations and ceremonies.
But honestly, the bare minimum requirement should be getting ADVANCE NOTICE that something like this is even happening. That’s just basic civility, yet from what I hear, many schools still haven't quite mastered that level of communication...

Ultimately, I feel like this whole religious situation in our public schools is an opportunity to finally sit down with my child and clarify our family's stance once and for all. It's about ensuring she knows exactly how to navigate these unwelcome situations moving forward. We need to explain that if everyone else is making the sign of the cross, she doesn't have to join in. If everyone starts praying out loud, she isn't obligated to pray along. And if a priest starts sprinkling holy water around, she should just step aside. Essentially, I want her to be able to clearly and unapologetically demonstrate our beliefs without a shred of shame. In fact, she should own it. 🙂

From what I can tell, most of these feel more like little school assemblies or seasonal events—like stuff for the holidays or harvest festivals...
And then they’ll bring in a priest to address the whole student body.

Anyway, just a side note...
It feels way too much.
http://s30.postimg.org/3tg946t5t/118...50005651_n.jpg

brighteagle86 said:I suppose it depends on the specific school—student enrollment numbers, how many kids opt for ethics, and the availability of faculty.
Generally speaking, offering an elective doesn't guarantee a perfectly seamless schedule where nobody ends up wandering the halls—at least not during the initial rollout.

It seems far more logical to just scrap the Concordat altogether—it would likely be a much faster and simpler process. 🤣

What does the number of kids picking religion have to do with anything? In high school, you have to pick something anyway. Half the class takes religion while the other half takes ethics. The schedule stays the same regardless of student count. Or does it...? 🤔

Michelle Nelson4 said:If you ask me, the bare minimum should be hiring at least one more librarian for our schools. That way, the library could actually stay open consistently throughout both the morning and afternoon sessions. It would provide a reliable space where students who aren't participating in religious studies can head over to during those periods—which, unfortunately, isn't really an option right now. Of course, we’d also need to invest in some decent desks, chairs, computers, and other essentials to make sure the library is a comfortable and productive place for them to hang out while their peers are in class.
Regarding religious services within the school system—again, my baseline requirement is simple transparency. Everyone needs clear, advance communication about the schedule. Participation should be entirely voluntary for the students, and for the younger kids, there absolutely must be written parental consent. Plus, we have to ensure they have a safe, supervised alternative location to go to (I’m back to suggesting the library again!).

Personally, I don't mind the idea of them spending time in the library. In fact, I'd love nothing more than to see our kids develop a genuine passion for books and reading. To me, that is a much better outcome than whatever other alternatives might be offered.😁

It would also be wonderful if someone actually checked to make sure that first or second grader is actually *in* the library, rather than potentially wandering out of the school building and being left unsupervised outside...

Robert Rodriguez9 said:And how exactly would you solve it? Based on the enrollment numbers, it seems like whenever non-religious kids do something constructive during those hours, other parents complain their kids are being left out. On the flip side, why should parents be forced to pay extra for outside activities—like language classes or whatever else—during that time?

Personally, I’d actually be willing to pay for an extra activity during religious studies hour.
I mean, if it's a language class, I think it makes way more sense for a kid to learn a language at 10:00 AM rather than 6:00 PM. That way, school time stays school time, and family time stays family time.

To be honest, I haven't really seen much empathy from parents of religious students toward parents of non-religious students when everyone is buzzing through the hallways, so I don't quite get why I should have to feel bad that their child won't be learning French, Chinese, or Arabic, and will instead be studying >.
Sometimes in life, you just have to set priorities.
And if they chose religious studies, then that was their choice.
You can't have everything, right?

I know we're definitely footing the bill; my husband and I contribute quite a bit to both public education and the church. But honestly, it feels cheaper to just pay for my daughter to take a language class than to try and renegotiate a > treaty!
It's something I'd end up paying for anyway, though I'd also be sacrificing my own free time.

If the Church truly believes that the family unit is the most important thing and that parents should spend as much time as possible with their children, then I hope they'll consider my point of view. It's the same way I respect the decision of religious parents who choose not to send their kids to church services outside of school hours, preferring to spend that time with them at home.
Otherwise, I really don't see the logic in opposing having religious studies held in a different shift or at the church itself. 😕

Robert Rodriguez9 said:What does the number of kids picking religion have to do with anything? In high school, you have to pick something anyway. Half the class takes religion while the other half takes ethics. The schedule stays the same regardless of student count. Or does it...? 🤔

I suppose it matters because they won't run a class for just one lone student—it’s not exactly efficient. Instead, they bundle different classes together to hit a minimum headcount.

Susan James said:Personally, I’d actually be willing to pay for an extra activity during religious studies hour.
I mean, if it's a language class, I think it makes way more sense for a kid to learn a language at 10:00 AM rather than 6:00 PM. That way, school time stays school time, and family time stays family time.

To be honest, I haven't really seen much empathy from parents of religious students toward parents of non-religious students when everyone is buzzing through the hallways, so I don't quite get why I should have to feel bad that their child won't be learning French, Chinese, or Arabic, and will instead be studying >.
Sometimes in life, you just have to set priorities.
And if they chose religious studies, then that was their choice.
You can't have everything, right?

I know we're definitely footing the bill; my husband and I contribute quite a bit to both public education and the church. But honestly, it feels cheaper to just pay for my daughter to take a language class than to try and renegotiate a > treaty!
It's something I'd end up paying for anyway, though I'd also be sacrificing my own free time.

If the Church truly believes that the family unit is the most important thing and that parents should spend as much time as possible with their children, then I hope they'll consider my point of view. It's the same way I respect the decision of religious parents who choose not to send their kids to church services outside of school hours, preferring to spend that time with them at home.
Otherwise, I really don't see the logic in opposing having religious studies held in a different shift or at the church itself. 😕

You might be willing, but not everyone is. Some families just don't have the extra cash. Personally, I'm also worried about how my little one will handle public speaking and juggling multiple languages at once.🤷 Once again, we end up with kids being left behind.

wanderingbadger44 said:That would essentially mean violating the Concordat. 😁 That’s the crux of the matter right there. You mentioned earlier yourself that those agreements aren't something you can just tear up. That agreement is incredibly specific and leaves no room for interpretation: religious studies MUST be integrated into the regular school schedule.

There is a way out, of course, but it comes with a price tag. It would require creating an entirely new elective subject specifically for the students who choose not to take religion.

But let's be real—that isn't going to happen for two main reasons. First off, there's no budget for it; we're talking about adding more hours to a child's school day, pulling more funding from the education budget, and hiring a whole new set of instructors to teach this new subject. (And honestly, someone will probably try to "solve" this by cutting teacher salaries and redistributing that money to cover the new staff.)

The second reason is that the Church would absolutely lose its mind because it might lead to even more kids opting out of religious classes altogether.

In reality, though, that second reason is actually the first one. ☕

Exactly, and honestly, it’s not even about trying to brainwash kids or pretend that theology is somehow identical to something like calculus ☕ 😁

In my opinion, the whole thing is pretty straightforward. Even if I don't get into the messy debate over whether religious studies—regardless of the faith involved—should even be an elective (which is kind of a nonsense concept in itself, though you can see why people argue it based on what was said above), there's still this undeniable, basic fact: any elective subject needs to be organized just like any other elective.

If we end up in a situation where kids who don't pick elective computer science are just wandering the hallways because the school can't figure out how to build a functional timetable, then—and only then—can we accept that the same might happen with English or religious studies.

Otherwise, we're looking at pure discrimination against students choosing other electives, right?

When it comes to the kids, what we're actually seeing is negligence and a total lack of care from both the school districts and the government. Since the government is a co-signatory to those Vatican agreements, they have a responsibility to provide a solution for the students who aren't opting into that specific course.
So, really, it's the state, not the Church, that's responsible for this mess.

The Church is basically just taking advantage of the situation since it works perfectly in their favor.