Religion classes in school - Megathread

Lisa Rivera said:Exactly. Moses wrote down the Ten Commandments in the desert after fleeing ancient Egypt, and we all know that ancient Egypt was little more than a collection of scattered tribes—cannibals with even less law, culture, or self-control than most, much like other early civilizations.
Oops, what kind of "civilizations" am I talking about? I mean savage tribes...

Then the Christian God arrived and enlightened the entire globe through those ten divine commandments 🤔 Fortunately, without them, we would still be living like savages in the Amazon. Or perhaps like those savage, immoral tribes of Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Shintoists, or pagans. And don't get me started on the ancient Greeks and Romans, peoples even more unrefined and wild, whose peak achievement was barely pitching a tent over a branch...
They still haven't grasped the concept of good and evil today; they just fight one another—unlike our God-enlightened world. Not to mention those tribes where, instead of the woman being subordinate to the man in the divine hierarchy as seen in Christianity, she is simply subservient to him.
And then there are the tribes where women hold the power; that's called a matriarchy, and they are the wildest and most godless of them all...

I guess I'll just ignore the black-and-white way I phrased my last post and just offer a warning: the Roman Empire basically slaughtered the entire known world just because they wanted to spread their powerful civilization, which was built entirely on slaves serving a tiny group of 'enlightened' people. And then, I suppose I should also ignore the fact that those Romans and Greeks eventually converted to the faith of the very slaves they used to rule.

briskbison55, you even realize, right, that with the way you're acting—which I assume you think is just being "enlightened" or whatever—you're actually doing the exact opposite of what you intend? Honestly, man, the whole vibe is just counterproductive, at least in this thread.

briskbison55 said:I mean, you really shouldn't go calling on those history buffs too aggressively... because, I don't know, they might just end up explaining how the first schools actually came from the Church. And honestly? They’d probably be right. Without the Church, I guess humanity wouldn't have even made it out of the Middle Ages, or at least not in the way we know it. It's just one of those things, maybe.

I’m saying this for the third time now—look, we shouldn't be being all exclusive here. Not that I want to sound completely brainless or like some total weirdo for how I phrased it, but seriously... if you actually took my last post at face value, you might need to go get your head checked. My whole point was just to mock the idea that parents need to hold their kids' hands every single second instead of just letting them go out and play. That's all it was.

Quinn:

Religious education and the church teaching kids about ethics and morality? I mean, really... what kind of ethics are we actually talking about here? Is it the kind where you just go around discriminating against anyone who doesn't believe exactly what you believe? Or maybe it's that whole thing where you judge someone just because they don't feel the same way you do? It feels a bit off, I guess. Maybe I'm overthinking it, but it seems like it's more about drawing lines in the sand than actually being a good person.

I mean, no matter how much those judgmental types and similar folks keep harping on about it, the church just doesn't teach that stuff. It’s such a massive issue here—you have people running religious education classes whose own kids don't even attend. It’s honestly just this senseless intolerance for no reason at all. I guess... I don't know, it feels like tolerance should really be the hallmark of you progressive atheists, right? It just makes sense. 😉

Quinn:

It’s just... I don't know, this whole chauvinistic moral code where being "male" is somehow the center of the universe? It’s everywhere. You’ve got the male god, the male savior, the male priest—basically, everything is framed through men, while women are treated like these second-class beings, just some afterthought created from a rib or something. Like, apparently, a woman isn't even fit to hold a position of power or pass down something as "sacred" as the word of God. Honestly, I don't know how people live like that. It actually makes me feel sick, thinking about this kind of "morality and ethics." It's just... ugh.

Yeah, that's definitely a red herring—like, a totally biased way of looking at things without showing even a shred of tolerance for anyone else's perspective. I mean, honestly, this is exactly why we have to make sure everyone actually has the right to choose for themselves... otherwise, these kinds of lies just end up being accepted as the absolute truth. It's scary, really.
Quinn:

The Ten Commandments? I mean, isn't it kind of sad, honestly... like, if someone is actually a believer, shouldn't they just *know* better? It feels a bit heavy-handed, I guess. Like, does God really have to step in and go, "Hey, don't kill people," or "Don't steal stuff"? Those are just basic human decency things, right? It’s almost a little pathetic that those kinds of rules even need to be laid out like that. Maybe I'm overthinking it, or maybe I'm just being cynical, but it feels a bit redundant, you know?

I mean, I could probably ask you... is it actually kind of sad? Like, the fact that we seriously need laws written down just to tell people, "Hey, don't kill anyone" or "Don't steal stuff or you're going to jail." It feels heavy when you think about it. Back then, before all this legal paperwork, there was just... this other kind of justice, I guess. Maybe it was more raw? But I suppose the biggest thing is that we shouldn't be pulling things out of their historical context, right? You can't really judge how things worked back then by looking at them through today's lens. That's just... yeah, it's a lot to wrap your head around.

Quinn:

I mean, we secular folks don't exactly need some deity hovering over us telling us what's right or wrong... we just know, you know? We wouldn't want to do bad stuff anyway. And honestly, we don't need someone threatening us with the devil just to make us act decent. Ethics and morality? They come from people, not from God.

So, I guess that’s why religious studies is an elective in American schools—it's totally up to you.
Quinn:

Studies have actually shown that kids raised in religious environments tend to be less tolerant and more aggressive toward their peers. Just think about why that might be.

And, uh, there are also studies saying that people who believe everything they read online are usually wrong most of the time, too... maybe think about why that happens.

Quinn:

Parents and society are the ones teaching them morality.

Great—less than 10% of highly educated Americans, plus a fair amount of people without even a high school diploma. It’s almost a miracle that kids aren't all just watching MTV or listening to pop music instead of enrolling in trade schools rather than philosophy degrees and other... well, useless stuff.😉

Or we would've gotten out of it a whole lot faster.

briskbison55 said:I guess I'll just ignore the black-and-white way I phrased my last post and just offer a warning: the Roman Empire basically slaughtered the entire known world just because they wanted to spread their powerful civilization, which was built entirely on slaves serving a tiny group of 'enlightened' people. And then, I suppose I should also ignore the fact that those Romans and Greeks eventually converted to the faith of the very slaves they used to rule.

It's nothing like the Crusades, which were actually motivated by humanitarian goals.

Richard Perez3 said:briskbison55, you even realize, right, that with the way you're acting—which I assume you think is just being "enlightened" or whatever—you're actually doing the exact opposite of what you intend? Honestly, man, the whole vibe is just counterproductive, at least in this thread.

I’m not really out here advocating for anything or defending anyone, honestly. I was just reacting initially because it’s an elective course, and then, I guess, I stupidly got worked up over some comments that felt more suited to some totalitarian regime rather than our system here in the 21st century. Especially when the arguments basically boil down to, "Well, I'm not religious, so why should my kids have to deal with a drafty hallway in school where it's freezing and nobody is watching them."

And I know everyone gets it, but maybe they don't want to admit it because, let's be real, being super performative about church or someone else's faith is pretty much "in" lately—even though, realistically, it doesn't actually affect anyone else at all.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Or we would've gotten out of it a whole lot faster.

Honestly, you know what? Just go call up some historians and ask them how the first colleges and universities actually started throughout the world... then we can get back to this if you really want to have a serious debate about it.

Jason Ortiz5 said:It's nothing like the Crusades, which were actually motivated by humanitarian goals.

I mean, that's a pretty good example, I guess... except it's talking about the 12th century AD, and we're specifically dealing with the Middle Ages here. 😉

briskbison55 said:I’m not really out here advocating for anything or defending anyone, honestly. I was just reacting initially because it’s an elective course, and then, I guess, I stupidly got worked up over some comments that felt more suited to some totalitarian regime rather than our system here in the 21st century. Especially when the arguments basically boil down to, "Well, I'm not religious, so why should my kids have to deal with a drafty hallway in school where it's freezing and nobody is watching them."

And I know everyone gets it, but maybe they don't want to admit it because, let's be real, being super performative about church or someone else's faith is pretty much "in" lately—even though, realistically, it doesn't actually affect anyone else at all.

It absolutely has an impact on others, don't even try to say it doesn't.
That’s just plain wrong. If someone's faith had no influence on others, we wouldn't be sitting here typing about it. Get it? Because if it didn't matter, everyone would just practice their faith just for themselves, and there'd be nothing to debate.

Second thing, let's look at this differently.
Even though, yeah, I’m being a total idiot right now by even getting into this, but whatever—I'm starving and my coworker totally screwed me over by not coming back from lunch, so let's just say this debate is keeping me occupied.
So, you aren't religious. You don't want your kid learning stuff that goes against your values, stuff you don't live by, stuff your personality rejects and your spirit defends.
And you don't want your kid left unsupervised while that happens.
You got a problem with that fact?
Setting religion aside for a second. Let's say you have a son (do you?) and you absolutely loathe the idea of him learning something that clashes with your soul, your stance, or your vibe. Say he learns... I don't know, pick something, I don't care, but let's say you don't want him learning how to crochet.
And you have every right to say he shouldn't learn to crochet.
Everyone else is doing it. Crocheting is trendy.
Your little guy is just sitting outside somewhere, completely ignored.
Would you be okay with that?
And mind you, crocheting fills you with such horror that you'd rather take a crochet needle to the testicle than send him off to do it.

Then some smart-ass or whoever pops up here trying to convince you that crocheting is what pulled the world out of the Dark Ages, because before that... before that, nobody had invented fiber. That wool doesn't exist, leather doesn't exist, synthetic fabrics don't exist, nothing exists, only thread is the real deal.

Like, seriously, give me a break.

Richard Perez3 said:It absolutely has an impact on others, don't even try to say it doesn't.
That’s just plain wrong. If someone's faith had no influence on others, we wouldn't be sitting here typing about it. Get it? Because if it didn't matter, everyone would just practice their faith just for themselves, and there'd be nothing to debate.

Second thing, let's look at this differently.
Even though, yeah, I’m being a total idiot right now by even getting into this, but whatever—I'm starving and my coworker totally screwed me over by not coming back from lunch, so let's just say this debate is keeping me occupied.
So, you aren't religious. You don't want your kid learning stuff that goes against your values, stuff you don't live by, stuff your personality rejects and your spirit defends.
And you don't want your kid left unsupervised while that happens.
You got a problem with that fact?
Setting religion aside for a second. Let's say you have a son (do you?) and you absolutely loathe the idea of him learning something that clashes with your soul, your stance, or your vibe. Say he learns... I don't know, pick something, I don't care, but let's say you don't want him learning how to crochet.
And you have every right to say he shouldn't learn to crochet.
Everyone else is doing it. Crocheting is trendy.
Your little guy is just sitting outside somewhere, completely ignored.
Would you be okay with that?
And mind you, crocheting fills you with such horror that you'd rather take a crochet needle to the testicle than send him off to do it.

Then some smart-ass or whoever pops up here trying to convince you that crocheting is what pulled the world out of the Dark Ages, because before that... before that, nobody had invented fiber. That wool doesn't exist, leather doesn't exist, synthetic fabrics don't exist, nothing exists, only thread is the real deal.

Like, seriously, give me a break.

Not really. I mean, a kid who doesn't take religion class isn't affected by it at all. There were kids in my school back in the day who opted out, and obviously, we all just chose to go outside and play soccer—that was our elective. But if you're talking about the impact on society as a whole, well, that's a totally different conversation, I guess.

Quincy:

So, you aren't a believer. You don't want your child learning things you don't advocate for, things you don't live by, things your personality rejects and your spirit defends. And you don't want your kid left unsupervised during that time either. Does that fact bother you?

Wait, sorry, what do you mean by "unsupervised"? I feel like I've asked this here before and nobody ever actually answers me—what kind of schools were you guys going to where someone was supposed to watch you when there was a gap in the schedule? Because there were plenty of gaps in my school, and I'm hearing this for the first time.

Quincy:

And now you'll have some Richard Perez3 or some third person popping up here trying to convince you that crochet is the thing that rescued the world from the Middle Ages, because apparently... apparently no one had even invented fiber until then. I mean, come on, please.

Okay, now we're just mixing apples and oranges and... well, whatever else. Someone is watching kids in school while they aren't in the classroom? Like, how, when, where, and—good grief—who?!?

If a professor happened to call out sick and we had a gap in our schedule—which was basically the only time we ever had free time during our entire schooling—someone was always stuck in the classroom with us. We were never allowed to just wander off or be left alone in the room.

Yeah, honestly, kids are supervised in every single school whenever they aren't sitting in their classrooms. There’s this whole thing called "hall monitor duty"—which is basically just a group of poor souls who don't get a break that day. They can't eat, they can't grab a coffee, they barely have time to use the restroom because they're constantly sprinting into the hallways to make sure nothing goes sideways—you know, kids getting hurt, breaking stuff, or just turning the place into a total disaster zone. And if anything actually goes wrong? Man, the finger-pointing starts immediately. You've got parents, school boards, the local news—everyone starts screaming, "Where was the teacher on duty?!" "Why wasn't anyone watching them?!" "How could they be left unsupervised?!"
And look, I'm serious—kids are NEVER allowed out on the playground without an adult present. From the second they walk through those school doors before first period until the moment they head home after the final bell, those students are the responsibility of the school and its staff. At least, that's how it's supposed to work—someone should be held accountable if there's a lapse in supervision and something happens to a kid while they're left alone.

Look, there weren't any gaps back then. In my day, there was never a single moment where kids were just left hanging.
Mind you, I was born in '77, so all that religious nonsense didn't really affect me—we didn't deal with that stuff in the lower grades.
Now, once you hit the upper grades, sure, nobody needs to babysit a thirteen-year-old (even if they technically should!), but here I am talking about a seven, eight, or nine-year-old.
Yeah, those are the ones you have to watch.
Watch them.
Be there for them while they're at school, because the school and the staff are responsible for them.
And they absolutely have to be looked after.

Because if they didn't have to be, we wouldn't even have after-school programs where staff are specifically there to supervise and keep an eye on the kids. If something happens to a kid while they're inside the school building, the school and the faculty are liable. They face the consequences.

So, if that's considered normal—which it totally is—then why on earth isn't it considered normal to look after a child during religion class?

Ugh, okay, so people say kids shouldn't be exposed to religious education if they aren't actually enrolled in the class? Yeah, right. Total nonsense. My kid had direct contact with it just last week because the teacher handed out these religious workbooks to the whole class right as we were walking out the door. I'm quoting her here, she literally said she "handed them out to everyone in the room" as we were leaving.

Oh, they have contact. It’s sneaky. It's underhanded. They're finding ways to sneak it in through the back door.

I honestly find it baffling how someone with such a limited grasp of history, ethics, and theology—someone who struggles so visibly with basic facts—can have the audacity to weigh in on this topic at all.
To be blunt, about 95% of the "historical" and "ethical" points you’re making are just flat-out wrong. Let's try to untangle this from the beginning...

briskbison55 said:I mean, you really shouldn't go calling on those history buffs too aggressively... because, I don't know, they might just end up explaining how the first schools actually came from the Church. And honestly? They’d probably be right. Without the Church, I guess humanity wouldn't have even made it out of the Middle Ages, or at least not in the way we know it. It's just one of those things, maybe.

I’m saying this for the third time now—look, we shouldn't be being all exclusive here. Not that I want to sound completely brainless or like some total weirdo for how I phrased it, but seriously... if you actually took my last post at face value, you might need to go get your head checked. My whole point was just to mock the idea that parents need to hold their kids' hands every single second instead of just letting them go out and play. That's all it was.

Quinn:

Religious education and the church teaching kids about ethics and morality? I mean, really... what kind of ethics are we actually talking about here? Is it the kind where you just go around discriminating against anyone who doesn't believe exactly what you believe? Or maybe it's that whole thing where you judge someone just because they don't feel the same way you do? It feels a bit off, I guess. Maybe I'm overthinking it, but it seems like it's more about drawing lines in the sand than actually being a good person.

I mean, no matter how much those judgmental types and similar folks keep harping on about it, the church just doesn't teach that stuff. It’s such a massive issue here—you have people running religious education classes whose own kids don't even attend. It’s honestly just this senseless intolerance for no reason at all. I guess... I don't know, it feels like tolerance should really be the hallmark of you progressive atheists, right? It just makes sense. 😉

Quinn:

It’s just... I don't know, this whole chauvinistic moral code where being "male" is somehow the center of the universe? It’s everywhere. You’ve got the male god, the male savior, the male priest—basically, everything is framed through men, while women are treated like these second-class beings, just some afterthought created from a rib or something. Like, apparently, a woman isn't even fit to hold a position of power or pass down something as "sacred" as the word of God. Honestly, I don't know how people live like that. It actually makes me feel sick, thinking about this kind of "morality and ethics." It's just... ugh.

Yeah, that's definitely a red herring—like, a totally biased way of looking at things without showing even a shred of tolerance for anyone else's perspective. I mean, honestly, this is exactly why we have to make sure everyone actually has the right to choose for themselves... otherwise, these kinds of lies just end up being accepted as the absolute truth. It's scary, really.
Quinn:

The Ten Commandments? I mean, isn't it kind of sad, honestly... like, if someone is actually a believer, shouldn't they just *know* better? It feels a bit heavy-handed, I guess. Like, does God really have to step in and go, "Hey, don't kill people," or "Don't steal stuff"? Those are just basic human decency things, right? It’s almost a little pathetic that those kinds of rules even need to be laid out like that. Maybe I'm overthinking it, or maybe I'm just being cynical, but it feels a bit redundant, you know?

I mean, I could probably ask you... is it actually kind of sad? Like, the fact that we seriously need laws written down just to tell people, "Hey, don't kill anyone" or "Don't steal stuff or you're going to jail." It feels heavy when you think about it. Back then, before all this legal paperwork, there was just... this other kind of justice, I guess. Maybe it was more raw? But I suppose the biggest thing is that we shouldn't be pulling things out of their historical context, right? You can't really judge how things worked back then by looking at them through today's lens. That's just... yeah, it's a lot to wrap your head around.

Quinn:

I mean, we secular folks don't exactly need some deity hovering over us telling us what's right or wrong... we just know, you know? We wouldn't want to do bad stuff anyway. And honestly, we don't need someone threatening us with the devil just to make us act decent. Ethics and morality? They come from people, not from God.

So, I guess that’s why religious studies is an elective in American schools—it's totally up to you.
Quinn:

Studies have actually shown that kids raised in religious environments tend to be less tolerant and more aggressive toward their peers. Just think about why that might be.

And, uh, there are also studies saying that people who believe everything they read online are usually wrong most of the time, too... maybe think about why that happens.

Quinn:

Parents and society are the ones teaching them morality.

Great—less than 10% of highly educated Americans, plus a fair amount of people without even a high school diploma. It’s almost a miracle that kids aren't all just watching MTV or listening to pop music instead of enrolling in trade schools rather than philosophy degrees and other... well, useless stuff.😉

That is incorrect. Formal education existed for millennia before your religious institutions ever established their school systems.
Contrary to your worldview, the church actually stifled intellectual progress and scientific inquiry, dragging us into a dark age rather than "saving" us from one...

As for the rest of your ramblings regarding Serena Williams and similar topics, I see no reason to even dignify them with a response, as I am unfamiliar with her work. Unlike yourself, I possess a functioning brain that isn't alienated by historical facts, general culture, or logic; I am perfectly capable of forming an opinion based on actual knowledge. I realize that concept might be somewhat abstract for some people...

briskbison55 said:I guess I'll just ignore the black-and-white way I phrased my last post and just offer a warning: the Roman Empire basically slaughtered the entire known world just because they wanted to spread their powerful civilization, which was built entirely on slaves serving a tiny group of 'enlightened' people. And then, I suppose I should also ignore the fact that those Romans and Greeks eventually converted to the faith of the very slaves they used to rule.

In contrast to Christian Europe, which began with The Crusades, followed by the persecution of scientists and so-called "witches," and continued through humanitarian efforts (shtefy 🤣) involving the subjugation of Africa, the conquest of much of the globe, and the ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples in both Americas, Australia, and Oceania—all while imposing its religion—and more recently, Christian America, which carries on this tradition by printing "In God We Trust" on its currency while simultaneously causing the suffering of millions in the pursuit of oil...
You cursed, "enlightened" Roman pagan. They were certainly worse than the "enlightened" Christians who followed them...

Jason Ortiz5 said:It's nothing like the Crusades, which were actually motivated by humanitarian goals.

😉

briskbison55 said:Honestly, you know what? Just go call up some historians and ask them how the first colleges and universities actually started throughout the world... then we can get back to this if you really want to have a serious debate about it.

I mean, that's a pretty good example, I guess... except it's talking about the 12th century AD, and we're specifically dealing with the Middle Ages here. 😉

👏 Forget the Greek academies. Forget the advanced Far East. Forget the Middle East, which spent centuries writing about those smelly (Christian) Europeans while they were lightyears ahead of us in every scientific discipline imaginable... And since we're on the subject, do you know what happened to them next? They reshaped Christianity (ahem, Islam) and tumbled straight into their own Dark Ages.
Are you really suggesting we should take this seriously?

Richard Perez3 said:Look, there weren't any gaps back then. In my day, there was never a single moment where kids were just left hanging.
Mind you, I was born in '77, so all that religious nonsense didn't really affect me—we didn't deal with that stuff in the lower grades.
Now, once you hit the upper grades, sure, nobody needs to babysit a thirteen-year-old (even if they technically should!), but here I am talking about a seven, eight, or nine-year-old.
Yeah, those are the ones you have to watch.
Watch them.
Be there for them while they're at school, because the school and the staff are responsible for them.
And they absolutely have to be looked after.

Because if they didn't have to be, we wouldn't even have after-school programs where staff are specifically there to supervise and keep an eye on the kids. If something happens to a kid while they're inside the school building, the school and the faculty are liable. They face the consequences.

So, if that's considered normal—which it totally is—then why on earth isn't it considered normal to look after a child during religion class?

But honestly, what goes through the head of a thirteen-year-old?! I was telling someone about this time at a school where some kids tried to corner a new student in the restroom during break... just imagine if there had been a gap in the supervision schedule.
Back when I was working at one school, a group of kids actually started a "lottery" in one of the classrooms—they’d draw matchsticks, and whoever pulled the shortest one got dragged into the bathroom, lights off, and basically harassed until the bell rang. Luckily, since it was during recess, the teacher on duty caught wind of it pretty quick (they were stationed right by the restrooms and wouldn't let anyone else in). But man, can you imagine if there had been a hole in the schedule and they were left totally unsupervised?
And then there's that whole mess 7nation brought up—kids hitting on girls. Please, just picture being a parent to a daughter who has to deal with a gap in her class schedule twice a week, only to be cornered by three hormone-driven middle schoolers who, because nobody's watching, decide to shove her into a hallway corner to harass and touch her. Would you be happy about that? Do you really think that couldn't happen?

So, to wrap this all up—after hearing those three examples—do you seriously still think thirteen-year-olds don't need supervision? 🙂

briskbison55 said:Well, personally, I find the exaggeration a bit much. Like, do you have an issue with the Ten Commandments? Of course not. Sure, how someone chooses to follow them is another story, and that’s why we need actual laws, but those general guidelines are just as important as how you're raised at home or your own character. I see religious ed no differently than any other lecture; you get a framework and some principles, and then it's up to you how you use them. I think anyone who views it strictly as brainwashing is totally missing the point and looking at the whole thing through a really narrow lens.

Well, I certainly do.
I’d propose striking several points entirely and adding a few amendments of my own.

Points to strike:

1. I am the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me.

2. Do not make for yourself an idol or any likeness of anything in the heavens above, or on the earth beneath, or in the waters below. Do not bow down to them or serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God. I punish the sin of the fathers—those who hate me—on the children to the third and fourth generations, yet show mercy to thousands who love me and obey my commandments.

3. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work. But the seventh day is the Sabbath, dedicated to Yahweh, your God. On that day, you shall not undertake any work: neither you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your servant, nor your maidservant, nor your livestock, nor even the immigrant within your gates. For Yahweh created the heavens, the earth, and the sea, and everything in them, in six days, but rested on the seventh. Therefore, Yahweh blessed and sanctified the Sabbath day.

Proposed amendments:

4. Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live a long life in the land that the Lord your God gives you.
This should be revised to emphasize honoring parents only if they have actually earned such respect. Furthermore, we should strip the references to Yahweh and God entirely; after all, people believe in many different deities. Some don't believe in any at all.

10. Do not covet your neighbor's house! Do not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that belongs to your neighbor!

The terms "male servant" and "female servant" ought to be removed from the text, as they are completely out of step with modern American life.

briskbison55 said:I mean, you really shouldn't go calling on those history buffs too aggressively... because, I don't know, they might just end up explaining how the first schools actually came from the Church. And honestly? They’d probably be right. Without the Church, I guess humanity wouldn't have even made it out of the Middle Ages, or at least not in the way we know it. It's just one of those things, maybe.

I’m saying this for the third time now—look, we shouldn't be being all exclusive here. Not that I want to sound completely brainless or like some total weirdo for how I phrased it, but seriously... if you actually took my last post at face value, you might need to go get your head checked. My whole point was just to mock the idea that parents need to hold their kids' hands every single second instead of just letting them go out and play. That's all it was.

Quinn:

Religious education and the church teaching kids about ethics and morality? I mean, really... what kind of ethics are we actually talking about here? Is it the kind where you just go around discriminating against anyone who doesn't believe exactly what you believe? Or maybe it's that whole thing where you judge someone just because they don't feel the same way you do? It feels a bit off, I guess. Maybe I'm overthinking it, but it seems like it's more about drawing lines in the sand than actually being a good person.

I mean, no matter how much those judgmental types and similar folks keep harping on about it, the church just doesn't teach that stuff. It’s such a massive issue here—you have people running religious education classes whose own kids don't even attend. It’s honestly just this senseless intolerance for no reason at all. I guess... I don't know, it feels like tolerance should really be the hallmark of you progressive atheists, right? It just makes sense. 😉

Quinn:

It’s just... I don't know, this whole chauvinistic moral code where being "male" is somehow the center of the universe? It’s everywhere. You’ve got the male god, the male savior, the male priest—basically, everything is framed through men, while women are treated like these second-class beings, just some afterthought created from a rib or something. Like, apparently, a woman isn't even fit to hold a position of power or pass down something as "sacred" as the word of God. Honestly, I don't know how people live like that. It actually makes me feel sick, thinking about this kind of "morality and ethics." It's just... ugh.

Yeah, that's definitely a red herring—like, a totally biased way of looking at things without showing even a shred of tolerance for anyone else's perspective. I mean, honestly, this is exactly why we have to make sure everyone actually has the right to choose for themselves... otherwise, these kinds of lies just end up being accepted as the absolute truth. It's scary, really.
Quinn:

The Ten Commandments? I mean, isn't it kind of sad, honestly... like, if someone is actually a believer, shouldn't they just *know* better? It feels a bit heavy-handed, I guess. Like, does God really have to step in and go, "Hey, don't kill people," or "Don't steal stuff"? Those are just basic human decency things, right? It’s almost a little pathetic that those kinds of rules even need to be laid out like that. Maybe I'm overthinking it, or maybe I'm just being cynical, but it feels a bit redundant, you know?

I mean, I could probably ask you... is it actually kind of sad? Like, the fact that we seriously need laws written down just to tell people, "Hey, don't kill anyone" or "Don't steal stuff or you're going to jail." It feels heavy when you think about it. Back then, before all this legal paperwork, there was just... this other kind of justice, I guess. Maybe it was more raw? But I suppose the biggest thing is that we shouldn't be pulling things out of their historical context, right? You can't really judge how things worked back then by looking at them through today's lens. That's just... yeah, it's a lot to wrap your head around.

Quinn:

I mean, we secular folks don't exactly need some deity hovering over us telling us what's right or wrong... we just know, you know? We wouldn't want to do bad stuff anyway. And honestly, we don't need someone threatening us with the devil just to make us act decent. Ethics and morality? They come from people, not from God.

So, I guess that’s why religious studies is an elective in American schools—it's totally up to you.
Quinn:

Studies have actually shown that kids raised in religious environments tend to be less tolerant and more aggressive toward their peers. Just think about why that might be.

And, uh, there are also studies saying that people who believe everything they read online are usually wrong most of the time, too... maybe think about why that happens.

Quinn:

Parents and society are the ones teaching them morality.

Great—less than 10% of highly educated Americans, plus a fair amount of people without even a high school diploma. It’s almost a miracle that kids aren't all just watching MTV or listening to pop music instead of enrolling in trade schools rather than philosophy degrees and other... well, useless stuff.😉

I'm torn between 🤣, 🤦, and 🙄—actually, let's call it a three-way tie.

If we were to ask actual historians how we even transitioned from the height of classical civilization—that era defined by incredible art, literature, architecture, and science—into the Middle Ages, the answer is pretty straightforward.

You guessed it: the Church.

So, should we all be rolling out the red carpet for the Church because they carefully tucked away knowledge and books in monasteries for monks to use while keeping the rest of the public in the dark, only to graciously decide over a millennium later that they’d finally open up schools and universities? It's almost as if they were the only ones with the keys to the library, holding onto everything from advanced philosophy to basic literacy.

It’s funny how history works—like how it wasn't Nat Turner who revolutionized optics, but Blaise Pascal instead. Just strange, isn't it? 🤦

I'm just copying and pasting this from another thread so I don't repeat myself:
Religious studies could easily be handled through Mass once or twice a month, or perhaps during special holidays before First Communion or Confirmation, like it used to be. That would be perfectly fine. But today, we have a massive workforce of religious instructors with guaranteed jobs, while the overly pious crowd refuses to pull their kids out of school because they don't want them missing Confirmation. Consequently, children end up stuck in these classes against their will just because that’s what their parents demand. It is rare for any parent to actually let their kid choose; we are still in those traditionalist circles, after all. To make matters worse, you have to opt out before the current school year ends to change electives for the next one. On top of that, some of these lectures feel completely contradictory to modern culture and common sense. They teach kids that certain forms of exercise or Eastern cultural traditions are basically satanic. It's absurd. It honestly feels like they are inviting backwardness back through the front door.
So, kids spend eight hours a week in religious studies for eight years straight just so they can go through Confirmation and get some jewelry, a new phone, or whatever else is thrown at them, eventually entering a holy marriage that they’ll likely divorce at the first opportunity when things aren't "clicking." All of this happens instead of giving those hours back to Art, Shop, Music, or finally making Computer Science a mandatory subject. Instead, kids who actually want to take Comp Sci end up filling their schedules with random electives in different shifts, all because of some shady deal between the Vatican and our local politicians that makes religion the number one elective.
If I haven't instilled moral principles in my children through my own upbringing, no specific curriculum is going to shove them into their heads. I have nothing against faith—in fact, I am a believer—but I find the institutional Church quite repulsive. It’s just a bunch of corrupt, greedy individuals who take and take and are never satisfied. Instead of focusing on their relics or social empathy issues, they've pivoted toward meddling in politics, all while hiding behind their sanctity.
A pack of hypocrites.

Should we be thanking the Church for "carefully" guarding knowledge and books in monasteries for monks while denying it to the masses? And then, after more than a thousand years, they mercifully decided to finally establish schools and even universities? As if they were the only ones capable of it, while everyone else was kept in the dark. Not just regarding knowledge, but basic literacy itself.

The herd needs to be kept in check and made more submissive; they aren't doing this for the people, they are doing it for themselves.

Richard Perez3 said:Look, there weren't any gaps back then. In my day, there was never a single moment where kids were just left hanging.
Mind you, I was born in '77, so all that religious nonsense didn't really affect me—we didn't deal with that stuff in the lower grades.
Now, once you hit the upper grades, sure, nobody needs to babysit a thirteen-year-old (even if they technically should!), but here I am talking about a seven, eight, or nine-year-old.
Yeah, those are the ones you have to watch.
Watch them.
Be there for them while they're at school, because the school and the staff are responsible for them.
And they absolutely have to be looked after.

Because if they didn't have to be, we wouldn't even have after-school programs where staff are specifically there to supervise and keep an eye on the kids. If something happens to a kid while they're inside the school building, the school and the faculty are liable. They face the consequences.

So, if that's considered normal—which it totally is—then why on earth isn't it considered normal to look after a child during religion class?

I honestly don't have any clue about that stay or the people in charge of watching over the students... I’m asking sincerely because I just haven't come across anything about it. Maybe it's some newer thing? But, I guess, looking at how much time has passed, we probably aren't that far off.

Richard Perez3 said:Ugh, okay, so people say kids shouldn't be exposed to religious education if they aren't actually enrolled in the class? Yeah, right. Total nonsense. My kid had direct contact with it just last week because the teacher handed out these religious workbooks to the whole class right as we were walking out the door. I'm quoting her here, she literally said she "handed them out to everyone in the room" as we were leaving.

Oh, they have contact. It’s sneaky. It's underhanded. They're finding ways to sneak it in through the back door.

So, I was out on the street today, just walking along, and someone actually handed me this flyer... it was one of those things claiming that eating meat is basically murder. Like, seriously? Do I think meat is murder? No. I mean, I don't know, if you apply that logic to anything else, it just doesn't really hold up, I guess. It’s just... yeah.

Lisa Rivera said:I honestly find it baffling how someone with such a limited grasp of history, ethics, and theology—someone who struggles so visibly with basic facts—can have the audacity to weigh in on this topic at all.
To be blunt, about 95% of the "historical" and "ethical" points you’re making are just flat-out wrong. Let's try to untangle this from the beginning...

That is incorrect. Formal education existed for millennia before your religious institutions ever established their school systems.
Contrary to your worldview, the church actually stifled intellectual progress and scientific inquiry, dragging us into a dark age rather than "saving" us from one...

As for the rest of your ramblings regarding Serena Williams and similar topics, I see no reason to even dignify them with a response, as I am unfamiliar with her work. Unlike yourself, I possess a functioning brain that isn't alienated by historical facts, general culture, or logic; I am perfectly capable of forming an opinion based on actual knowledge. I realize that concept might be somewhat abstract for some people...

In contrast to Christian Europe, which began with The Crusades, followed by the persecution of scientists and so-called "witches," and continued through humanitarian efforts (shtefy 🤣) involving the subjugation of Africa, the conquest of much of the globe, and the ethnic cleansing of indigenous peoples in both Americas, Australia, and Oceania—all while imposing its religion—and more recently, Christian America, which carries on this tradition by printing "In God We Trust" on its currency while simultaneously causing the suffering of millions in the pursuit of oil...
You cursed, "enlightened" Roman pagan. They were certainly worse than the "enlightened" Christians who followed them...

😉

👏 Forget the Greek academies. Forget the advanced Far East. Forget the Middle East, which spent centuries writing about those smelly (Christian) Europeans while they were lightyears ahead of us in every scientific discipline imaginable... And since we're on the subject, do you know what happened to them next? They reshaped Christianity (ahem, Islam) and tumbled straight into their own Dark Ages.
Are you really suggesting we should take this seriously?

I guess I just really love these kinds of sweeping, grand statements that don't actually have any real substance behind them... you can totally see how empty they are right here in the following post.

Quincy:

Not quite. I mean, if you think about it... those first schools were around for millennia before your church-run ones even existed. I guess it's just a matter of how you look at history, but yeah, they definitely came first. I don't know, I guess I see things a bit differently... I mean, if you ask me, the Church actually ended up stalling out real progress in education and science. It’s like they threw us right back into a dark age instead of actually pulling us out of one. Maybe that's just my take, but it feels like they held everything back, you know?

What is this even based on? I mean, sure, I could probably sit here all day and rattle off data about when universities were founded around the world, or talk about how libraries work and how knowledge gets passed down through the generations... but it just feels kind of pointless, doesn't it? Especially when you have someone on the other side just declaring their own claim as if that somehow makes it an actual argument. It's just... I don't know, it doesn't really hold water, I guess.

Quincy:

I don't even see the point in addressing the rest of your rambling about Srnavka or whatever else, mostly because I haven't actually followed her work. Not that it matters, I guess. Unlike you, I actually use my brain—which means things like history, current events, and general culture aren't just total mysteries to me. I’m perfectly capable of using actual logic and what I know to form an opinion. I realize that might sound a bit abstract to some people, though.

I mean, she’s basically just spouting nonsense like that, you know? It’s never actually backed up by any real evidence or solid arguments or facts—it’s just this raw, open-ended bitterness and pure intolerance toward anything that doesn't line up with her association's bank account. And honestly, I guess that’s pretty much the main driver for all those groups that get so loud about trying to strip religious studies out of our public schools.

Unlike Christian Europe, which started with the Crusades, then moved into persecuting scientists and "witches," followed by humanitarian work (shoutout to shtefy 🤣) through the enslavement of Africa, conquering huge chunks of the globe, and ethnically cleansing indigenous peoples across both Americas, Australia, and Oceania, while forcing their religion on everyone... plus the modern era of Christian America where they carry on traditions by printing "In God We Trust" on the dollar bills while simultaneously causing millions of innocent people to suffer because of the oil industry.
You absolute damn pagan Roman. They are definitely worse than the enlightened Christians who came after them.

It’s kind of interesting, though, how that same Church actually preserved the very scientific works that people back then were being accused of heresy for. And, uh, the whole idea that the Church was responsible for the enslavement of Africa and the ethnic cleansing of the rest of the world is... well, I'm totally unfamiliar with that. Do you have some kind of connection or proof that shows the Church's actual stance on, say, the Belgian or Dutch atrocities in Africa?

👏 Screw the Greek academies, screw the rise of the Far East, screw the Middle East that was writing about stinky (Christian) Europeans while they were centuries ahead of us in every scientific field... Oh, and since we're on the subject, you know what happened to them? They twisted Christianity (ahem, Islam) and fell straight into their own Dark Ages.
Are you seriously trying to have a debate about this?

No. I just see how some people feel this need to randomly throw Greece into the equation, but I always ask them, like, which specific Greek school of philosophy are they even talking about? We could talk about the Euphrates and Tigris valleys, the cradle of civilization, or we could talk about China, which used to be way ahead of the West in everything, but why would we bring that up when we're discussing religious education in American schools? The Church and faith have seen China pass through different eras as a superpower, and then China became this communist mess where millions went hungry... times change, I guess.

wanderingbadger44 said:I'm torn between 🤣, 🤦, and 🙄—actually, let's call it a three-way tie.

If we were to ask actual historians how we even transitioned from the height of classical civilization—that era defined by incredible art, literature, architecture, and science—into the Middle Ages, the answer is pretty straightforward.

You guessed it: the Church.

So, should we all be rolling out the red carpet for the Church because they carefully tucked away knowledge and books in monasteries for monks to use while keeping the rest of the public in the dark, only to graciously decide over a millennium later that they’d finally open up schools and universities? It's almost as if they were the only ones with the keys to the library, holding onto everything from advanced philosophy to basic literacy.

It’s funny how history works—like how it wasn't Nat Turner who revolutionized optics, but Blaise Pascal instead. Just strange, isn't it? 🤦

Are we talking about the common people here, or those invading hordes that spent their time burning libraries and then moving on to pillaging and wiping out any foreign ideas or wisdom they found? I mean, come on, let's be fair. Look, nobody's perfect, obviously, but history shows that knowledge survives because of archives and preserved records, not because of cats and fireballs.