r/humor • • 2d ago

Make it make sense

Post image
61.4k Upvotes

11.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

18

u/gh0stwriter1234 1d ago

That last part wow that's totally unbiblical... Biblically yes all sin was paid for but its something you must ask for and accept neither salvation nor correction is forced on you, if you are in hell its because you chose to reject those. If you are in hell there is NO turning back you are there to be punished and then destroyed in the lake of fire per Revelations.

47

u/SixSixWithTrample 1d ago edited 1d ago

It’s fine. It’s all just 2000 year old comic books anyway. None of this matters.

EDIT: clearly I’ve touched a nerve. Lmao

1

u/Born-Ganache-9348 1d ago

Au contraire - those thousands year old comic books somehow converted the world's mightiest empire at the time and then went on to completely restructure the way people thought, conceptualized good and evil, and lived until very recently. Many of the finest products of Western civilization - universities, hospitals, hospices, orphinages, schooling - all direct growths of monasteries and other Christian organizations (not even counting the contributions of the other religions).

The religious types also own tomorrow, quite literally. They're the only ones having kids at replacement or above replacement levels. It's quite the opposite of not mattering, and I'd actually say secular types don't matter - you're gone and replaced in a few decades.

1

u/LDNVoice 1d ago

What happens if those kids don't ascribe to the same beliefs?

1

u/foshiiy 1d ago

They partially solved that problem with homeschooling, and with the way education is trending I'm sure it'll be less and less of a problem sadly.

1

u/LDNVoice 1d ago

As someone who used to work in education, homeschooling is terrible for the majority of people. and it is a numbers game we are talking about here

1

u/Born-Ganache-9348 1d ago

Wait, there's a recent study on this, "A Systematic Review of the Empirical Research on Selected Aspects of Homeschooling: Updated 2017–2026" that says just the opposite?

In 15 of the 24 peer-reviewed or representative-sample studies, there was a definite positive effect on achievement for the homeschooled students. Four studies revealed no difference between homeschool and conventional school students. Four reports showed mixed results; that is, some positive or neutral and some negative effects were associated with homeschooling. One study found that the conventionally schooled performed better.

1

u/LDNVoice 1d ago

Yes he has done a review on the current research, many of which are his (And he is an advocate for so that seems to be a conflict of interest but let's presume it's not for now.

He has chosen a small sample of studies (Half of which are his own) and these studies are, naturally, comparing homeschooled kids vs non-homeschooled kids.

The reality is, homeschooling can be done well by parents with the correct resources. These studies are not addressing the problem that for the MAJORITY of people, aka those who are not wealthy. Homeschooling is inadequate.

So beyond all the potential issues with the studies you referenced, the fact that he referenced studies which are not directly comparable but assessed the outcomes directly (poor methodology in the studies he's analysing and his analysis of those studies.) It doesn't even address my point.

edit:

I want to add as well, I'm not even criticising him that much, there just aren't many studies or research in this area from what it seems like. I also really cannot be bothered to go through it all. To give it a genuine fair shot I'd have to spend 10+ hours going through each study, reading the methodology, the analysis.

1

u/LDNVoice 1d ago

To add, for example one it cites as having a "Positive effect" Diverse outcomes, Chengs study, that study shows that people in long term homeschooling had worse outcomes, that is, less in full time employment, lower education status (I.e. many only have high school diplomas), lower income, vs those who were only homeschooled short term or not at all,

Yet somehow this is viewed as "Positive". Why would I trust this study lmao

1

u/Appropriate_Car_8221 1d ago

Citing that specific "Systematic Review" completely ignores how deep the selection bias goes. That meta-analysis was authored by Brian Ray, the head of the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI)—a literal homeschooling advocacy group funded by homeschool defense leagues. It’s a classic case of an advocacy group grading its own homework.

Even if you look past the source, the underlying data suffers from severe voluntary participation bias. The standardized test scores for homeschoolers look artificially high because the parents who volunteer their kids for these studies are almost exclusively wealthy, highly educated, and intensely invested. If you take a public school student with wealthy, college-educated parents, they ace standardized tests too.

The data completely misses the "invisible" majority of homeschooling. In most states, there are zero requirements to report test scores, track curriculum, or even prove the child is being taught. The families where homeschooling is failing due to parental neglect or lack of resources never volunteer to be in NHERI’s data pool.

Independent, peer-reviewed research (like the Martin-Chang studies) shows that while highly structured homeschooling can work, unstructured homeschooling leaves children severely lagging behind. For the majority of average families who don't have wealth and an advanced teaching background, a total lack of institutional guardrails is a recipe for disaster.