Category: philosophy/religion topics
I wanted to put this forth as a topic for people who are exiting or have exited a religion, and also for religious people. Most of whom probably are Christian on this U.S.-based site.
Here's what I want to know from fellow-ex'ers:
How has your coming out been?
Who have you told?
What is your strategy, if any, for preserving current relationships?
To religious people, especially Christians:
How would you like to be told that a loved one is no longer a believer?
How would you feel if they never told you, but you discovered it for yourself over time or by accident somehow?
Are you afraid that your loved one is just wanting to be bad, so they don't believe anymore in order to go off and do bad things?
Are you afraid your loved one will change, or that you won't know them anymore? (that "Who ARE you!) momen?
Will you feel betrayed to learn that your loved one has been working out these personal issues privately for some time?
I understand some of this sounds loaded. But religion often is a very loaded subject, perhaps part of what led some of us to find the whole thing implausible. It is not my intent to be offensive, but it is my intent to gain insight. I'll answer for myself as an ex in the next post.
Leo,
I will elaborate on this, as you and I have had many discussions on this topic.
While I am a Christian, it has not been without struggles; there have been difficult dark days where I wonder about God's existence and whether or not being a good person is part of or in spite of my faith journey. I have also struggled with many aspects of Christianity, but that's not why you posted this topic.
In answer to your questions:
I think, if we are honest with ourselves, we can see the struggle for those who have wrestled with questions of faith. If we don't, then we're not that observant, especially those who are closest to us. To be honest, I would rather come alongside those who are struggling rather than finding out later by accident, but that's just me. To those who may think that this is so I can "reconvert" someone, nothing could be further from the truth. I am a believer that no one should ever have to suffer and wrestle alone... with anything.
Kate
* How has your coming out been?
I didn't so much deconvert, as finally realized I had not been one, or wasn't one in the sense that most people think of it. I realized it was me making sense out of nonsense, cobbled together with a few experiences, fewer than most people of faith have but still experiences, plus a growing understanding of how experiential events work on the human mind.
I actually love the Christian people I know, far more deeply now that I am not engaged in an internal turmoil to try and make sense out of their nonsense. I do not scorn them, ridicule them, make fun of them. In fact, I will defend their natural rights, up to the point where they would deny the rights of other people.
I was what most fundamentalists call a double-minded Christian. I loved my wife far more than the assumed love of an invisible fictional character in the sky. I'll admit, I live to plese her. I never put God first, as they say. I put my family first. Sure, I read from the Bible daily, have read its entire content about 3 times through entirely. Each time it made less sense than the time before. Especially when I tried to read without all the justifications we are taught to give for the terrorist we call Yahweh, a being nations would forever imprison for crimes against humanity, if the trials of Nurenburg are any indication. I also read every apologetic I could get my hands on. Well-meaning Christians would either say my intelligence was getting in the way, or recommend some lawyerly dissertation on some point of God or another. The falsehoods they claimed about evolutionary theory, the direct lies about how natural selection works, the gaps, the moral first cause argument using old testament Yahweh as the moral first cause, make Plato's dialogs 'It's Turtles all the way down!' seem peachy.
I went to church with the family during my deconversion, even though I didn't call it deconversion then. I was still looking for evidence to support Christianity and make sense out of nonsense. Looking for evidence under every rock the way some look for demons under every rock. And all the conclusions had errors. Every single one. I could go on, and it would probably bore most people. But in summary, I discovered I was not a Christian. I also discovered I had committed their unpardonable sin. They call it blaspheming against the Holy Spirit. I ran into its definition by accident, looking at something else, and its definition had my name written all over it. Basically, the thinking goes, you are attributing the works of the deity to something that is not god. I've always done that. Further, once I realized this was all an elaborate hoax, perpetrated by legislation and some very tenuous but fervent people, I couldn't get any further than that. I'm not a Christian anymore, but I have no quibble with Christians. And I don't begrudge any of them anything. I am still married to one and love her deeply.
If their god is right, and I face judgment, before I am thrown into hell, I would only say two things: This was no Christian's fault, and secnd, my loved ones who are Christians are counting on you to create everlasting bliss. How you will do that while they know some of us are being tortured forever, I don't know. Perhaps I don't want to know how that kind of mind works.
I admit, I do not know faith like this.
Someone did a Kinsey Scale of belief something like what they have for sexuality. 7 is 100% belief and adherence to a god of some sort. 0 is absolute 0 no existence at all of a deity anywhere.
I'm probably somewhere between 1.5 and 3.
* Who have you told?
People on this site. Two people in real life, one Christian and one who is not. The one who is not had, ironically, guessed me for what I am years ago.
I did drop a hint to the Wife, but She is way too observant to not know something is up and has been for years. I sent Her an email with a link to an article, and interview with an ex-Christian atheist husband and still-believing wife, how they are respectful and get along. I have not directly asked Her about it, but shortly after what I presume Her having read it, She came in and said some very affirming things. We have not directly spoken of it yet.
* What is your strategy, if any, for preserving current relationships?
Relationships are, and always have been, far more important to me than beliefs. That is why I was a double minded Christian, not sold out for the cause of Christ. People say to be true to oneself. I always think that's a bit of a funny phrase that sounds like religious mumbo jumbo. But pretending it has meaning for a moment, a huge part of myself is the value I place on relationships, the value I place on the thoughts and feelings of other people.
I am grateful this is my time and not sooner. Had the daughter still been at home there would have been more static than there already was, what with the trendy thinking that the father's faith involvement is paramount.
I'm not convinced I need to come out to everyone. I'm not convinced I need to tell a fundamentalist Christian that I am going to hell, and leave them to be tormented in the hell of false guilt, wondering how they caused this, and what they could have done differently. They caused nothing, except that we mutually care for each other.
If atheism were a religion (I laugh as I write this), I would indeed be a doubleminded atheist, not sold out for the cause of ... wait, that doesn't add up, now, does it?
The problem with faith for some of us has always been the one-dimensional, my-way-or-the-highway, no-compromise nature of each splinter group. So why would I go be to people what I don't even like?
Now, I do expect some Christians to call what I am a violation of their rights. If I do not readily affirm by rote their political and religious beliefs, they'll have to stop calling me a double-minded Christian or a Christian in need of spiritual growth, and probably think of me as the enemy. I find that truly sad. Most of those people are eally not bad people. Some are, most aren't. I want to always and forever remember this.
According to their theology, I am now part of the 80 percent going to hell, worse than an unbeliever who never believed. I will do so while protecting their dignity and honor, and for some of them at least, holding them as human beings, in the highest regard. Some of them are even on this site.
Kate, I ended up posting my responses before I read yours. Thanks for your thoughts.
I'm a believer in only asking for insight when I intend to really consider it. So I will consider what you have said. I think my wife in particular is probably in this camp. I will admit, I don't want to hurt Her. That is a bald-faced admission - I put Her feelings above any sort of belief or lack of belief that I have.
Hey there Leo. I too, am a Christian. My faith is solid again, but I spent a lot of years doing some serious struggling and questioning. I'll answer your questions as best I can from where I'm standing.
*How would you like to be told that a loved one is no longer a believer?
I'd like them to just tell me straight-out. I would like to think that, if they're a loved one of mine, they'd keep it about themselves. I guess by that, I mean using "I statements," if you will. Tell me they're no longer a believer, and tell me why if they wish, but do it in such a way that doesn't attack my own beliefs. I'd like to think if they're a loved one, we'd know each other well enough that that would be possible, and that I would listen to them and hear them out with the same respect.
*How would you feel if they never told you, but you discovered it for yourself over time or by accident somehow?
I guess I'd be hurt, but not so much because it's specifically about religion. Once again, if they're a loved one, I'd like to think they could come to me with this kind of thing, either while they were wrestling with it, or after they'd made a decision. I prefer to hear things from the source, not through other people, or just acccidentally find them out. If that were to happen, it would speak to a much larger issue of communication in the relationship (whether that's romantic, friendship, or otherwise), than an issue of religion. I mean, I understand they may not involve me in the actual process of working this kind of thing out, (though it'd be nice if they did), but I'd hope that they'd be comfortable enough to tell me themselves rather than me finding out second-hand or by accident.
*Are you afraid that your loved one is just wanting to be bad, so they don't believe anymore in order to go off and do bad things?
no, I'm not afraid of this. I've had friends who have left their faith before, and I've never thought this of them. In fact, I don't know as I've ever met anyone who left simply because they just wanted to do so-called bad things. Usually someone's reasons for making this kind of decision run far, far deeper than that. It's often a very intense mental, emotional, spiritual process. Now, are there people out there who do leave for that reason? Probably. I'm just speaking to the ones I know.
*Are you afraid your loved one will change, or that you won't know them anymore? (that "Who ARE you!) momen?
Hmmm, maybe a little bit. One's faith is usually a pretty core part of themselves. Not always, again, I know some people where it's not. But with me it is, and with many I know, it is, so when that changes, some part of them does change. Or again, that's my personal experience. So yes, I think I would be a bit afraid of this. But we all change over our lives, for a whole variety of reasons, so I'd have to roll with the changes caused by this kind of decision just as I would the changes caused my any other life experience or circumstance.
* Will you feel betrayed to learn that your loved one has been working out these personal issues privately for some time?
Probably. I realize I keep saying this, but it's true. If they're a loved one of mine, I'd like to think that if they're wrestling with something this deep, particularly if it's a struggle, they'd come to me. Like Kate, I don't like the thought of someone I love struggling with something alone. I want to help, in whatever way I can. The level of betrayal I would feel about not being allowed to be there for my loved one would depend on the specific relationship I had with the person. Is it my partner? Deep betrayal. A close friend? Some, but less. Just a more casual friend? No, I don't think I'd feel any of that. So, depends on who it is.
Hope some of that helps, or at least interests you.
Leo, I don't want to belittle your struggles, but my exodus was pretty painless.
Rather than going from Christian to atheist, as you have done, I went from Christian to agnostic. I guess you could say I quietly slipped out the back door.
I find that I no longer argue religion. I'll discuss it, but I don't really have a point of view to argue from. I discuss religion so that I can find information, not so I can convert anyone.
Most of the people I really care about knew I was agnostic before I knew it. So my "conversion" was more like admitting the obvious.
Bob
Thanks guys.
Alicia, points are as always very well taken. I'll admit it, my biggest fear is hurting her. I know Christians - genuine ones at least, faith is an extremely personal issue. I have to admit I never felt the same way that she does.
I find your I statements interesting.
I'll admit when I rehearse this stuff in my head, I'm pretty afraid she'll think she's done something to drive me off. Quite the opposite. She, and some other Christians I know, and some on this site yourself included, from what I know, I find to be genuine people.
Personally I feel it would be weak of me to leave the faith because of somebody else. I don't stop acknowledging gravitational theory because you stepped on my foot, for instance. Not to make light of others' pain, but that is how I see it for myself.
I have no disrespect for Her beliefs, or yours or Kate's. I simply can't live with the cognitive dissonance, and finally got tired of trying to justify Christianity to myself.
I think when I was one, there were Christians who doubted my authenticity, though they would never say so. Possibly they doubted it as much as I did: I don't know. I simply realized I was trying to make myself believe.
I never want certain people to feel like I was living a lie. That is patently unfair to them. Now that my struggle is over, my concern is in whole for their feelings. I do sometimes want to "get it out of the way with" and tell a certain person outright. But then I ask myself why? Will it benefit them? How will I make them feel if they actually believe I'm to suffer eternally for this?
I am far more concerned about their suffering, than anything else. Far too many 'coming out' stories I have read simply don't place as much emphasis on the others' feelings as I do. Ironically, that is what made me, in the minds of some, a wishy washy. But I have never thought considering others' feelings is weak at all.
Bob, you're probably right. In fact, my one friend who isn't a Christian, predicted this years ago, and honestly was not surprised.
Also, as I can't make myself believe in higher deities, it doesn't offend or worry me if someone is praying I will come back. I'm not going to read their apologetics books anymore. It makes no sense to me to make sense out of nonsense. (my opinion of course).
I only hope that for some Christian people I know, there is someone who, in the context of their faith, can give them comfort that they will understand. For some people who are real literalists, it's devastating. I've seen them when someone dies who isn't a Christian. They themselves are in hell, and I wanted to somehow reach in and lift them out. But they could take no comfort from one such as I was.
With all the potential hurt caused, then why come out? Honestly, it is out of respect for the people, even if I see their belief as entirely fictional. The people are not fictional. And so, I don't want to claim to them that I am something I am not. They deserve better, all of them.
Alicia, you're right, some things have already changed. I'm no longer resistant when She talks about prayer or god or something, trying to see if it really is or isn't. I just let it all be. And since I no longer have that nagging guilt they give you, about love for her has to come from love for god first? I'm more free to just be what I always have been, and just care for the people I know. Once I actually realized I didn't believe any of this, and hadn't for some time, the struggle and toil to reconcile the irreconcilable was simply over.
Now, I'm actually less likely to argue about some things. Think about it like this, and don't take this with offense if you can: Imagine that you were trying to reconcile Santa Claus as being real. You had a few rare experiences that you possibly could attribute to him being real. You read all the literature, there's documents where they try and explain Santa's existence to you. You're under some serious cognitive dissonance there.
Once you acknowledge you just can't make sense of it, and give up, you actually have an easier time with people who believe in it, because you don't, and they do. And if there are those who are uncompromising and try and get in your face all the time, you simply prepare for it ahead of time, and deal with it the best you can. But the internal struggle is gone. So you're free to care for them, rather than trying to justify to yourself how you can be a Santa-believer even if you aren't as fervent as they, and you never seem to have an end of cognitive dissonance about it.
With no more cognitive dissonance, me being offended makes no sense. Except, I'm not reading their apologetics and other materials anymore. Ironically, the more of their documents I read, the less plausible for me the whole thing became. I could explain why but I'm not here to bash beliefs. Especially not here to bash people. And people of a stronger faith than I ever had, they are connected in a way that makes the bashing of beliefs very personal.
This probably makes no sense to some people, but hopefully it does to others.
But I'm really concerned about some people's suffering, because they'll think I'm going to Hell. They really believe in it, have all the imagery for it, and especially apostates, as we are called, ex-believers. For some of them, they will believe the harsh words about what we're like, rather than see that I still am the same old Leo, concerned for their well-being, helping out, and so on. I think some people I will never come out to, because I cannot conceive of inflicting that type of torture on them.
I have mentioned my "exiting" as it is called here many times on other religious topics in this community but I will elaborate on the reasons as to why I came to this decision again.
Probably like the majority of you folks I was born and raised by Christians. They all claimed to be from various denominations, from Presbatyrian, to Catholic, to Baptist, but nobody hardly ever went to Church unless it was a holiday. Nobody told me I had to read the Bible on a regular basis. The only thing I was expected to do was believe that there was a God and that we would someday be saved by Jesus like many of our ancestors have been. There was no explanation behind it, and because I used to rarely question things I did what I was supposed to. I myself had gone to various churches with friends or through suggestions of people who I encountered in places such as school, and it turned out to be overwhelming. I was always congradulated for taking the time to come to the Church. I was told how I had made a great decision and the people of the Church continuously probed on about how this Church, this denomination was the correct one. When I went to Louisiana for a time I joined a Mormon church. This was perhaps the turning point and the reason why I changed my views and beliefs entirely. I was told that it isn't right to drink things such as coffee and tea, and those of you who know me well know how I love my coffee. Yet they said that the above mentioned contents along with alcohol, tobacco, and drugs prevented the Holy Ghost from communicating with me. That really made me think, because to be completely honest I can not recall ever having heard something being said to me by any spiritual Holy Ghost. When something good or bad happened to me I didn't believe it to be a blessing from God even though I tried to convince myself and others that that was the reason. To me that is a lack of credibility for what it is I worked for. Thanks to some people on here I was able to admit it to myself that this was what I believe, and even though my family and friends may not be happy with hearing this from me, it isn't fair to myself to keep lying about something that I don't believe to be true. You live for you. It is similar to the troubles that people of various other groups have to face. What I mean is the fact that it is a continuous, worrysome struggle that people need to face, because not everyone will accept the fact that you don't agree with what they believe. But just know you are not alone. I tend to not bring it up unless I am directly asked about it, or say if I need someone to give me advice and they pull the "ask God" card. I have gone on and on about it with some family for hours. Thankfully they are still willing to help me out when I need some help. I know there are some who are not so lucky and I wish I could extend a helping hand to those who do.
To religious people, especially Christians:
I classify myself as a Moderate, VERY liberal thinking Christian woman.
How would you like to be told that a loved one is no longer a believer?
I'd want to be told in whatever way makes them most comfortable telling
me. It's _their_ prerogative to believe or not believe and I know that
nothing I could possibly say would change their mind, nor would I want to
change their mind any more than I'd want them to try and change mine... I
believe that believing or not is a personal choice and as such it'd be up to
the loved one to tell me if they stopped believing.
How would you feel if they never told you, but you discovered it for
yourself over time or by accident somehow?
Again, it's a personal choice to disclose or not, so I wouldn't have a view
on the matter either way.
If they're going to get all in my face about what I believe and how
"brainwashed"/"weird" etc I may or may not be for my belief, then I'd be
pissed off, and I think I'd need some "personal time" away from them in
order for me to regroup and get over being pissed off at them... this could
be a few days, a few months or a number of years. It would depend on
the situation and how it unfolded.
Are you afraid that your loved one is just wanting to be bad, so they don't
believe anymore in order to go off and do bad things?
Don't know, as I'd never really thought about it before.
Are you afraid your loved one will change, or that you won't know them
anymore? (that "Who ARE you!) moment?
Depends on how they change.
If they brought harm to others (women, children, the elderly etc) or were
being a stupid asshole in general, I'd be extremely pissed off at them and
I'd seriously consider shunning them (after all, you don't need to be
religious to show some kindness and respect).
If they just continue on being themselves (i.e. no noticeable change in
attitudes and behaviours), then I wouldn't think anything of it.
Will you feel betrayed to learn that your loved one has been working out
these personal issues privately for some time?
No. It's a personal struggle, and it's really none of my business to
interfere unless the person in question specifically asks me for help.
If/when they are ready to talk to someone about their struggle, they'll talk
(I know this from personal experience)... you CANNOT force them to talk if
they're not ready.
My exit was mostly to do with reading about the history and origins of christianity and the theory that Jesus was a fictional character based on much older stories of dying and rising gods and such. Now of course I don't know for sure, maybe there was a founding teacher of christianity but so what? Proving the man wouldn't prove there's a god.
I've been hanging out with a group of church people lately. they're pretty liberal, and I use the experience as more of a personal meditation/philosophy/life meditation time than a time to rejoice in Jesus. I guess I'd say I'm a Unitarian, which sounds like a cop-out to me, but I think God is different for everyone. Easter is coming up, and the Lutherin group is doing an Easter vigil. they want me to come. Looking over the PDF for the service, all I could think of was how much I didn't believe in any of it.
so I'm talking to my grandma on the phone, telling her about the Easter thing and how I would feel like a fraud for going. I can believe in God as fate, destiny, and coincidence. I can believe the Bible is made up of distorted historical stories written down by some guys. I don't believe the stories are real, and I don't believe in creationism. She says, "Well it hurts me to hear you say that, but you believe what you believe, and I'll just keep praying for you like I always do." Nobody ever wants to hurt their grandma, but it made me feel so bad for even bringing it up to her. It's difficult, because religious people take their faith so closely to heart. So to me, "Your exit from religion" sounds overly dramatic. So what? You don't believe in Jesus and Bible stories. Big deal, who cares? It's hard for me to remember that to other people, it is just that big of a deal.
Well I must say that my exit from Jehovah's witness to atheist was rather pricy.
It cost me my relationship with my biological family. Not that it was a good one
anyway, as they sided with the member that abused me sexually and still
remains within the family, but what I thought I could fix to make things right
with them was gone in a heartbeat. I actually had no choice, as it was either I
followed the religion and forget about my wordily friends and music career, or I
live with my family. Now understand that while I was living with my family at a
younger age I wasn't allowed to ask question about things that didn't make
sense, and I was to parrot the bible on the streets and my mother would quote
bible verses only to make me feel bad. So I eventually started reading and
researching and coming to terms with my beliefs. Anyhow when i told my family
what I believe I wasn't harsh, and I even emplied that I could follow their rules
but they said that they love god more than me and that religion was the basis of
their life so I was to leave. So in answer to all your questions, It's none of my
business what people believe unless they try to preach to me or change my
mind. Whether they tell me before or after or whenever doesn't matter to me. I
have no problem saying I'm an atheist. And whoever my husband will be will
know that too, so it doesn't become a problem. Now it's not like I'll empost it, I
just won't bother with religion. That's all
Loving an invisible unprovable god more than your kid. Yeah, that's wonderful. Not!
Lately for me there’s religion and spirituality. When I think of religion, I think of a series of principles that must be followed no matter what. You must learn the catechism to be saved. Spirituality to me means believing there’s something, or probably something, more than this. Whatever it is, I don’t particularly know. Humans are, to my knowledge, the only species on this world that can reason and even fathom ideas like religion, spirituality, atheism, deism, agnosticism. I guess that begs the question of whether humans came by the whole religion thing naturally because there is something more, or whether it was entirely manmade. In any case, freedom from religion in the sense of this is how things are and you will follow it, was pretty easy for me because my family was not particularly religious. My father was raised a Catholic, and for that very reason he withdrew from Holy Mother Church. I guess spending six years in a Catholic school of the old style back in the 40s would do that to you. But while I’m pretty easy being a non-Christian, I guess on some deeper level I want there to be something more. Maybe it makes no sense to me that there isn’t something more, and this is all there is. So I find some comfort in the belief that we never really go out of existence entirely, as my college biology prof theorized. If consciousness is energy, for instance, then consciousness never really dies, and we do actually have a soul. That, for the present, is what I believe, but I don’t look to holy scriptures for evidence of same. I think this is where a lot of people get into trouble when it comes to Christians versus non-Christians. They only consider the bible and whether that book is or isn’t right or true. When you confine yourself to just this principal argument, all you get is a screaming fest over issues that neither Christians nor non-Christians can currently resolve, at least to my mind.
It’s also interesting how you coined the phrase “coming out” because it’s something gay people have to worry about all the time, at least currently. I’m very out at work. However, I never told my father, nor will I tell my brother. There are just some people I either never told or would never tell because oftentimes it’s too much trouble, or you hurt someone too deeply. Mostly though, I guess I’m not sure how much I care what people think because let’s face it, there’s only so much energy you have to give and so much bullshit you can stand at any given time. Of course, there are times when I enjoy a good argument! Interesting topic.
Interesting posts, guys. I really appreciate everyone's thoughts. And yes, imprecator
there are people who love gods more than people, something I personally find mentally
unsound.
I especially appreciate those old enough to understand the possible relationship troubles.
For my part, I'm over being someone's project. I need a break from their apologetics.
Fortunately, I don't have this problem: she is not a apologetics-arguing kind of girl.
Keep em com in'. Your insights are not wasted.
Johndy, you and Bob raise some good points about agnosticism.
Ironically, I haven't had any interest in spirits and similar things in years. I used to say if
you were going to ascribe to a religion, the Big Three are the easiest on those of us who
think like atheists. Truth or fiction, that is how I saw things.
I can now say, with no shame anymore, I love the people close to me, I don't find the
world or the universe inherently wrong. I love to learn about the universe for its own
sake. I find the god of the gaps really cheapens things.
Some have asked why I don't consider other religions. Or why not the Unitarian
Universalists.
The short answer is, religion has never interested me that much. Had I not been raised in
a Christian culture and Christian household, I never would have given it much mind past
childhood or at least past my 20s.
To be a Christian' in the American sense, I had to violate my conscience. I can only
assume any other religion would force me to do the same in some way, or might have
tenants that are even more impossible for me to believe than Christianity does.
As to what we have after this life? Even as a Christian I always thought the greatest thing
we have is what we leave: the people we love and care about, the things we accomplish,
the discoveries we make, and so on.
I'm not trying to convert anyone, just sharing my perspective.
how has your coming out been? at first, it wasn't easy, but with time, I've come to realize the importance of speaking out about it, the way religious people speak out about the particular religion they belong to. not cause I'm trying to convert anyone, but cause society needs to see that atheists are just as good or bad as anyone else. society also needs to understand that we won't be silenced, just like they won't be.
who've you told? everyone I could.
what's your strategy, if any, for preserving current relationships? I don't need to preserve relationships. if people can't accept any part of who I am, they're free to choose what to do.
Interesting post, Chelsea. I guess, a major part of who I am, as it were, is I very much
care about the relationships I have.
So in my case, I guess one could say they will have to accept that they will continue to be
loved by me, and I will continue to be sensitive to their feelings. I am simply incapable of
doing otherwise, which is why I never could love an invisible being more than them, if I
ever really lovEd it at alll, a question I don't know the answer to.
Good or bad, I am simply incapable of jeopardizing relationships for the sake for belief, or
lack thereof. I have known many fundamentalist Christians who could sacrifice
relationships, like sacrificing children to Baal of old. That is an act I could not do as a
Christian, and am even less capable of now that I am not toiling under the burden of
belief. When Christians called me inauthentic or double-minded or soft for it, I used to get
hurt or defensive. When atheists do it, though, I have to laugh: it's silly.
I wasn't a missionary Christian so I see no point in being a missionary atheist. People see
what they want and I will strive to live with honor and integrity, as I always have, only
now openly master of my own mind, and shamelessly putting human relationships first
and foremost.
I love my past and present christian friends, but it pains me that they believe such patently silly things. A talking snake? A talking and burning bush? What? Are you fucking kidding me?
I'm less concerned about the talking snake and bush than I am about their beliefs about
us, and many of their friends and even families, whom they believe are even now being
tormented in Hell.
I think any nonbeliever with Christian friends would do well to read Jonathan Edwards'
"Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God." This is popular Fundamentalist reading, if not
the original 19th century work, some dramatization form.
After you get past the psychotic terrorism — never mind, no logical mind can ever get
past that — imagine really believing it. Believing it for one's father, mother, close friend,
even coworker, even enemy!
After reading it, you will have more compassion for Christians.
As I said elsewhere, I have had one cling to me in desperate agony after someone died,
whom she thinks is in hell. I saw Hell all right: all the psychotic Bin Laden-style terrorism
wreaked mercilessly on this poop person left to imagine the terrible fate of the deceased.
Even though I called myself a Christian then, I could not fathom the terrorist tactic taken
against this person who was still alive and with us. Let alone what mind could design and
create the torments for her friend.
It's awful. But read "Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God" and think of your poor
Christian friends when they lose someone who wasn't a believer. Bin Laden could not have
envisioned such terrorism, and the Lockerby Bomber's stomach would empty itself of its
contents.
People always talk about Christians should have more compassion. I think it's the rest of
us who don't follow the warrior god Yahweh that really need to.
A butit of strong language, I guess, probably offended somebody. But I really do feel
strongly about this. I think most of them do well in spite of the trouble I posted about
here.
I've read it, and some writings of John Calvin. Absolutely insane.
Hi all. Leo, you have not said anything that offends me. We may disagree, and strongly so, but you are one of the few that has written in a way that puts your own points across without attacking or disrespecting the beliefs of others. It's a rare person that can do that. You're doing exactly what I referred to in my posts. You're keeping your posts about yourself and your own thoughts and experiences, not bashing those who may disagree.
As for loving God more than people, I think if someone is truly following their faith, that loving God first will only make their love for those people around them stronger and make us treat them better. Putting God first doesn't mean mistreating family or friends. In my view, it should mean quite the opposite. Again, we should treat others well regardless of religious beliefs or lack thereof, but just wanted to address that I don't think putting God first means neglecting or mistreating loved ones, or anyone, for that matter. That kind of leads into the compassion issue. Once again, we'd all do well to be more compassionate, regardless of religious beliefs. Christians, Atheists, whatever.
I also smiled a bit about your concept of a missionary Atheist. That was well put. Christians get accused for wanting to convert people, and yet I've met many an Atheist who does the same. They try just as hard to pry me away from my faith as Christians sometimes try to bring people to it. That's always been the irony I've never understood. We get bashed for shoving our beliefs down people's throats, but I've had many an Atheist try to do the same to me with theirs. Neither is called for, as far as I'm concerned. So once again, I'm glad you're not one of those kind.
Your choice about whether to tell her is your own. I in no way am trying to tell you what you should do. Just giving my opinion here. If I were in her place, I'd want to know. Even if it meant fearing you were going to hell, I'd want the truth. Well, I'd want it from either point of view. Yes, in her place, I'd want to know so I could pray for you. You said you had no problem with others praing for you, and she'd likely want to. But aside from that, just as someone that close to you, I'd want to know the truth, even if it hurt. So, your call, just my thoughts.
Thanks for your response, Alicia. I sent Her an article with an interview with a Christian
wife and now-atheist husband, and how they get along.
She made a point of coming in and reaffirming Her love for me, I can't now remember the
words she used. Perhaps, after this anniversary weekend is over, I might tell Her more
specifically. But as someone recently told me, She already has known perhaps before I
realized it. She's probably the most observant person I know, when it comes to attitudes
and perspectives in other people. It's a little uncanny how She can observe and accurately
tell you what it is someone is thinking, or how they'll respond to something.
If anything, I'm more affirming, not less so, about anything faith-related that She says or
does. I'm not trying to overcome any cognitive dissonance in myself anymore, so I am
free to be affirming, without trying to SEE if what she's saying can be proven to come
from natural causes or if it is what She really believes.
Although I find some ex-Christian blogs and posts instructive, for those of us who care
about existing relationships, there's one term I really don't like: Xian, Xians or Xianity. We
don't X out other mythologies, so why do this to the Christians?
Why are people so concerned with others quote unquote attacking their beliefs? To me, that rings of insecurity, bigtime.
Impie, perhaps this is because there's a vast difference between questioning or honestly wanting to know where we're coming from and outright attacking. I have no problem if someone has questions and/or wishes to respectfully disagree with my beliefs... but if you call me stupid, insane, dilusional, whatever, that becomes personal and not about faith itself. I have many friends who do not believe as I do, and have never once felt disrespected by them. We are all secure in our beliefs, so there is no need to attack others.
I honestly believe that attacking (note: I did not say questioning or disagreeing with) someone's religion is the mark of insecurity.
Kate
But how is it any different from me calling someone insane for loving a food that I find totally abhorrent, for example? Meatloaf? You're sick! Meatloaf is horrible! I stand by what I said. If you're so secure in what you believe, you would let the criticism roll off your back and move on.
The difference between religion and food is obvious; religion is integral to how most religious people live their lives (in one form or another), food is a preference. I don't take it personally if my best friend doesn't eat meat; if she calls me names for eating meat, then it's personal. If I call her names for not eating meat, then that is likewise disrespectful.
Kate
Imprecator, I think I can answer this for you.
first of all, I agree with you about insecurity. But if you rationally examine the situation,
you will note that people like Kate and Alicia are not panicking and stomping their feet.
They are not, as some do, demanding their own way, demanding that the Zone change to
reflect their thinking.
Also understand that for them, as Alicia pointed out earlier, their faith is in fact a part of
them. When they are disrespected regarding their beliefs, you're disrespecting them
personally.
Now, I would stand shoulder to shoulder next to you, as free men, defending the U.S.
Consttitution and western civilization against dominionist takeover from Christian
Reconstructionists and Sharia law courts. Domestic and foreign terrorism are terrible
things, and have to be eliminated.
However, Kate and Alicia are not terrorists. Faraaz is not a terrorist. You and I are rational
objectivists, if I understand your perspective properly.
People of faith have an excuse for getting confused sometimes, if their preacher tells them
to mobilize against the school board to get rid of evil ooshun. But as rationalists, we have
no excuse, because we have no dogma. It is an elementary exercise in observation to see
the profound difference between the Kates and Alicias on the one hand, and the panicky,
choleric, terrorism-friendly extremists on the other. You have to be blinded by some sort
of dogma not to notice this stark contrast.
Do I think ex-Christians in the South need help? Absolutely. They need an Underground
Railroad. They are driven out from house and employment like wild animals into the
streets. These people need an Underground Railroad, frankly. I don't really know Cody or
Chelsea that well, but I have found myself wishing I could buy them both airline tickets
and reprieve from the real hell that the South is for those who don't hold to the dominant
religion. Those two are like the African slaves of old, bearing with courage and dignity a
load no human should ever have to. And, in my opinion, both are in need of rescue from a
merciless Northern invasion and perhaps some form of Emancipation Proclamation.
But again, the Kates and Alicias are not doing this. They are not even complicit. As a
rational thinker, with very human emotions, I am capable of respect for the Kates and
Alicias, while having nothing but unbridled wrath for those who willfully oppress the
marginalized groups, ex-Christians for one, and then have the audacity to play the victim
and cry persecuted when the oppressed groups cry out or push back.
I was never one for corporal punishment, but the one recipient of my hand was a 12-year-
old boy living with us, who, after being repeatedly told to stop by his mother and my wife,
continued to pick on the younger girls. He dared to persist, and was foolhearty enough to
come complaining to me that he was being picked on, meaning one of them had pushed
him out of her space while he was bullying.
His punishment was swift, if not terrible. Well within legal bounds, of course, and I would
never use a weapon on a child: a hand is more than sufficient.
But if that is the way one would correct a foolish bully boy who then cries victim, what
might some of us do with grown adults who act like this?
A tip: it has nothing to do with their beliefs.
But again, the Kates and Alicias are not denying kids access to college, they are not
making people projects in churches so that gangt of goons constantly harass. They are
not destroying relationships, encouraging spouses to break faith with each other. they're
not doing a whole host of other atrocities in families and workplaces across the Heartland
and the South in particular.
The thing that is radically offensive and inhumane, is to convict the innocent. The Kates
and Alicias of the world are innocents, and guilt by association is an aberration, a mockery
of Justice.
As for the first question…
Almost every household has one religious adherent who requires round-the-clock sympathy and tolerance. The concept of god, as far back as my memory permits, has been open to discussion in my family, and the ever-faithful believer was responsible for this non-confrontational atmosphere. Anyhow, such was the case during my formative years, though the majority of my siblings arrived at a concentrated belief in god only recently. Consequently, I’m one of the late-comers for whom they all wait. But, lamentably, I suspect their hopes for my conversion will wear out sooner. Hence, I haven’t had to withhold disbelief or disloyalty from any of them, nor will they ever experience subversive action from my side. It’s more desirable to live in harmony than to contend over issues which not even geniuses can resolve.
As for the second…
Presently I find myself re-investigating subjects that include theodicy, epistemology, death, religion, anthropology, as well as criminology. I don’t sense an end to my curiosity in the horizon, seeing as preoccupations related to earthly existence have a tendency to re-emerge throughout one’s lifespan. The attitude with which individuals treat these serious matters changes over time. So-called analysts and pollsters say interest in spirituality or religiosity wanes as people age. That may be true for some folks, but not for me. I see no reason to hurry up and make up my mind, especially when dealing with profound questions having to do with my personal life. Every day the opportunity of newly-discovered ideas and theories comes into view, bringing no feelings of annoyance or an irrational sense of urgency to quickly discard them. As a result, I often engage relatives with discussions that revolve around their beliefs, or material I’ve read, and thus we air out all our opinions and sentiments.
And thirdly…
I’ve never been a denier but have always been a skeptic, and as I get older I’m convinced my mind will remain open till the very end. People close to me know this about me very well, and we do our best to respect each other. I’ve come to learn that quiet study, alone with a book in my hands, slogging through archaic terms is a thousand times more beneficial and enlightening than shooting the breeze with someone, only to hurl someone else’s ideas back and forth. All cultures have borrowed from each other. You can see it in literature. There really is no original thought. Atheists claim to hold proof that such and such belief is flawed while ignoring the limits of their own knowledge. They support their arguments by using texts that believers themselves fail to comprehend, and at the same time they refer to scientific theories with which many of their so-called opponents also agree. The fact is that it’s a free-for-all. All sides have access to the same evidence, and they bicker over the details while trying to outdo the last practiced orator. Entertainment is all it is, but I have nothing against non-believers and their opposites.
Philosophy and religion have always intrigued me. I guess this indicates that I’ll always find myself surrounded by people who harbor all kinds of viewpoints and are eager to deliberate religion and spiritual stuff.
One thing I must share here is that the toughest obstacle I’ve encountered was coming face-to-face with what they call a newborn in the faith, a novitiate, who in his former life had had such a strong character. We would impersonate and do other such things to people who looked religious simply for their torment, and I’d be a liar if I said no chuckles came from it. However, his struggle to conform was obvious and it only seemed right to allow him space while he adjusted to his new way of life. I’m sure a recently declared atheist would want breathing-space. Maybe in your case all that would really be necessary is mutual respect. But I’d prepare myself for a secret mission to deliver the backslider as some religious folk are prone to heroics.
In addition, I have a sick sense of humor that would sooner disturb someone than make them laugh. I’m working on ridding my brain of the rubbish that pollutes it. There’s nothing worse than having to rebuild your trustworthiness and credibility after violating and trampling on a loved one’s deep-seated beliefs. One thing I fiercely strive against is allowing ridicule and insensitivity to become habitual. Try as I might, I sometimes find it impossible to resist making a laughingstock out of certain doctrines, phonies and religious hypocrites, and such instances can be quite offensive to a believer. Call it discrimination or religious intolerance…
But if I had to alter my way of thinking or simply become more vocal and frank about my true thoughts toward long-held family traditions, I’d do it respectfully, avoiding lengthy explanations, and guard myself against self-recrimination. I’d be considerate of their reaction and make myself available as much as is humanly possible. Then I’d never speak of it again. Luckily my loved ones know my mind is open, and if the day ever comes that I give in to one side over the other, by then I’ll be gray and old.
I'll do my best not to offend anyone here. the following is a collection of my own
beliefs and experiences. Nothing more.
For most of my life, I lived in Texas. Even though Texas is considered a south
western state, culturally it takes many of its religious leanings from other states
around it such as Louisiana, and Arkansas. I think these details are relevant
because maybe if i'd grown up in a more neutral environment, I wouldn't have
experienced as much of what I consider to be the dark side of christianity.
Christianity seems to take a lot of different forms across the country, at least
from what i've experienced. Over all, in California, even devout christians i've
met here, are very open and relaxed about their faith. they don't really make it
their defining feature, and neither do they use it as any kind of weapon.
Christianity in the north east is similar to what i've noticed on the west coast,
apart from the fact that Religion sits on a much higher pedestal there, and
rather than people being layer back, their is a kind of quiet solemnity about
northeastern christians and their values as a hole.
the south.... Well, the south is a very different story. the christianity of the
south, in most states i've experienced it in, is loud, brash, very in your face,
unapologetically quick to condemn anything and anyone, its not reasoned, its
both thought out.... It has that small time town church vibe, even in bigger
cities. Which is good, and bad. So, for most of my life, dealing with the majority
of devout christians i've encountered was unpleasant, uncomfortable, and
annoying. the conversation often turns to condemnation, as they try and figure
out who's the most likely to go to hell, who will and won't go to hell, and how
many infractions someone commits daily. While it was clear these people feared
god, far too many for my liking got off on the feeling of superiority religion gave
them. they didn't see it as ungodly at all to point out other peoples sins. though
were you to judge them based on the same standards they judged others, the
excuses would pile up so quickly you were overwhelmed. this never struck me
as christian, or right... Watching the way these people lived their lives with the
record book of who did what wrong affixed to their mind, and the hate required
to make everyone around them miserable or uncomfortable, if they weren't
part of the group, drove me away. Even though I know many christians who
don't act like that at all, I'll admit that its still these kinds of people that I
associate with as christian in my mind. the hypocrites, the lyres, the people out
to make sure they've got a place in heaven by finding everyone around them
unworthy.., because for so long, these were the majority of ones labeling
themselves christian.
My family was somewhat religious. My mom said and still will say that we're a
christian family, though i've only seen her enter a church for weddings. I know
both her, my adoptive dad, and my step dad all went to church as kids. I also
know that my mom, and adoptive dad went to catholic school when they were
younger, in Michigan. My adoptive dad told me at an early age that he was an
atheist, and there was no god. though I never really thought about this much at
the time. I was a believer then, and thought he was saying these things to
justify the way he lived his life, and the things he did to me. I think to this day
that my reasoning there is still part of why he's atheist. He wants to be the
highest power in his life. In addition to this mix of viewpoints, I had many sets
of religious and less religious grandparents. As a result, i've been to a lot of
different christian churches, of several denominations around the country.
I always felt out of place in church. I never really felt the connection with god
you were supposed to feel. I never got the sense that these places were holy.
Were they forbidding, sometimes, did they inspire me, sometimes. But I never
got the sense they were holy. I just got the sense they were serious places,
particularly for those that believed. I never told anyone at the time I didn't feel
gods touch. That was more drama than I wanted to start, and could have lead
to more heart break, or punishment than I wanted to deal with.
As a result, I nominally stated I was christian, to avoid all the harder questions,
until 10th grade year of high school.
That year, one of my subjects of study was world history. And we covered the
crusades, among many other things. You combine that knowledge with much of
the metal I was listening to at the time, books I was reading, and you get a
powerful catalyst for change. Not only was I finding things in my life that
showed me different world views, but I finally started to have the life
experience to contemplate them as more than fantasy.
In school, I was also presented with accounts of the salem witch trials, taught
about sharia law, and given countless other examples of actions, beliefs, and
points of view I couldn't reconcile as Christian, islam, etc.
All these religions of piece advocate terrible things, and this struck me as
wrong, fundamentally wrong. I started exploring the bible. Learning about other
religions that were out there, and attempting to broaden my horizons. At the
end of the day, I was left with the same problem. None of these religions the
world offered me stood up to scrutiny. None of them really called out to me.
Most importantly of all, none of them gave me the piece of mind a religion is
meant to bring.
At that point I started exploring atheistic thought and beliefs. I found these to
be practical, logical and believable. I haven't really questioned my way of
thinking sense. Being atheist means I no longer need to find excuses for things
like stonings/burning people in gods name, the crusades, Why gods advocate
raping conquered women and taking slaves, etc...
how I handle telling people what I am really depends on who they are, the
situation, and the expectations.
some of my family know. Some don't. either because its never come up, or
because I don't want to lose my inheritance. Such as it is. Normally I don't shy
away from being honest, though i'll admit I lie by not contradicting them. Even
if I don't affirm their beliefs. Realistically speaking, its a situation of risk vs
reward I don't want to risk. I'm not in a situation where I can afford to burn
those bridges. If I were, i'd be more honest.
some people I know are sad. My mother for one, doesn't seem to be willing to
accept it, though we've never really spoken on the subject much. Though some
are understanding, and i'm glad of that.
My friends know, and its never really been an issue between us. most people
know i'll jump in to a debate, but i'll try to avoid starting them, and thats why
things work out with my friends. We can table that kind of stuff.
I don't think of them as idiots, though I can't understand why logically they are
where they are, either. I just do my best to be understanding and accept things
for what they are.
Alecia, I can explain why some atheists feel the need to share their beliefs. I
think calling this preaching is wrong, considering atheism is not a religion, etc.
Never the less...
We grow up in a society where according to surveys i've seen from several
sources, parents would rather their children be gay than atheist, rather their
children marry outside their race than marry an atheist... People would rather
hire religious people than atheists.... People think atheists are more likely to be
criminals, dishonest, and morally corrupted. I know a lot of christians like to
gripe about religious persecution, though in my humble opinion, they haven't
experienced anything, until they try being an atheist in the south.
Most atheists want to change these ideas, they want people to understand
where they're coming from. I've so often heard things like "those atheists need
to shut the hell up, and stop ruining gods country.."
A lot of people forget that not all the founding fathers were christian, or
religious, for that matter, or that under god was added to the pledge in the
1950s. when you here people condemn atheists, and accuse them all of being
homosexual dog fuckers. You want to stand up and fight, because you know you
could never get away with saying "all christians either want to be the priest or
the alter boy." and more importantly, because you think discrimination is wrong,
and just like any other minority group that gets stamped on... You want your
rights respected. I'm glad so many people i've met are tolerant of atheists, and
atheism. though I think the tolerant among us all forget just how common
persecution of several groups of people is in this country.
as has been said before, in other topics, what the hell are beliefs worth, if they aren't attacked, or even mocked, when they're beyond ridiculous?
I'm sorry, but I'm totally with imp, on this one.
just cause people are religious, doesn't mean their beliefs should go unmentioned, without someone expressing thoughts on why those views are wrong, and why they're meant to be what those people would term as being negatively critiqued.
as imp said, if people who are religious are truly secure in what beliefs they hold, they wouldn't bat an eye when someone with a vastly different perspective comes along.
that being said, I feel I didn't clarify a couple things, in my previous post.
in saying that I don't need to preserve relationships, what I meant, is that all I can do is be open and honest with society about who I am.
no matter what subject matter is at hand, I can't control whether people love how I live, or even agree with how I live.
that's why I said that once I'm outspoken about whatever it happens to be, it's people's choice from there how they want things to go.
cause, the reality is that, in life, whether we're atheists, polyamorists, monogamists, straight, gay, whatever, there will always be people ready to shit on something we do, don't do, say, or don't say.
that's another reason I encourage outspokenness as much as possible. not in the sense of being preachy about atheism, as some seem to think I'm advocating, but to the extent of showing people that, no matter their beliefs/the struggles they've endured, they shouldn't have to be closeted about them, for any reason.
in my view, if you wanna talk about hell, having to be quiet about who you are, being encouraged to be silent about what you believe, cause it's vastly different from most people's beliefs, or being unable to express why you believe what you do, for fear of being seriously hurt by someone...that's hell. nothing less than absolute hell.
Heh. I think ultimately, people are scared of being proved wrong. They're afraid that someone will present an argument that will completely shatter their "faith" some day. The churches no longer have the power to torture and execute unbelievers that they held for centuries, only thing they have left is the plea of "please respect my religion."
And its really hard, when many of these big churches use that line to stifle any
criticism, debate or talk that is anything less than pro their religion of choice.
Mean while, they use their hallowed position to put other religious ideals down.
Stormie... I think that my experiences are similar to yours (raised
Christian, feeling out of place in a Church, not being 'happy' with what
religion has done to the world over the millennia etc), except that I just
couldn't be bothered to explore atheism to be bothered to "leave" my faith.
I am of the opinion that the very basic tenets of any religion are more or
less the same, with each religion having a different point of view on how to
go about it, and it's the fundamentalist zealots (the Christians are just as
bad as the Muslims in stirring the shit) who spoil it enough for me to keep
me from being more devoutly Christian.
I try to live my life according to the basic message in the Word of the
Christian God (Golden Rule, Ten Commandments etc), but I know that I fall
short of this on a continual basis.
I don't believe that I will rot in Hell for believing in this way, nor do I
believe that atheists will rot in Hell either, just because they don't believe
in God, Buddha, Allah, the Easter Bunny, the Flying Spaghetti Monster or
whatever else is out there.
As a self proclaimed Christian, and quite unlike the Christian
Fundamentalists in the US South, I don't believe that I or anyone else has
the right to pass judgement and decide what God (or Allah/Buddha/FSM or
similar) thinks of another's actions. I believe that we ALL have an equal
chance to go to a final reward or down to purgatory (Heaven and Hell, for
lack of better descriptors) regardless of whether we believe in a deity or
not... after all, there are some so-called Christians out there who are as
bad, if not worse, than some Atheists and non believers who are sure
within themselves that they're going to Heaven, in spite of the way that
they behave.
There is enough in Christianity to keep me here, just as I know there isn't
enough in it (or any other religion) to keep others interested and as such, I
would never decry/judge/try to convert to Christianity anyone who isn't
Christian, nor would I decry/judge/try to convert to religion anyone who
declared themselves to be an Atheist. It's also in this way that I ask that
people who don't believe what I do mock or harass me for what I may or
may not believe... it's not too much to ask for from anyone.
I'm sorry if my thoughts/ideas sound muddled... it's kind of hard for me to
describe exactly how I got to where I am in life... it's just something that
I've always known within myself and have never really had to explain.
I believe in what Kate and Leo said. In my opinion if you're genuinely interested
in the what's of a certain belief and something doesn't make sense, for which
you queish to have a better understanding it's fine because you have a reason
to question. But if you're just doing it to argue, because you know that
particular person may not have an answer then it's stupid, pointless and utterly
ridiculous. I also feel that the same applies to us atheists, when it comes to
being asked about our lack of belief. I think there comes a point where you
know what you can and cannot talk about with certain people to avoid having
steamy conversations that go no where. And proving someone wrong isn't going
to change their minds, just as we won't change our own. Also when you go
personal with someone because they don't believe as we do doesn't prove
anything, nor isn't it enlightening. Frankly I don't have the time and energy to
try and prove someone who's been catholic or christian for years that there isn't
a god. Just as long as they don't start condemning me or trying to shove their
beliefs down my throat I"ll just be polite and hope and pray, because it won't
have any result, as opposed to me getting all sensitive with people. Now I'm not
saying I won't debate. If you want debate lets talk debate. I just don't want
unnecessary arguments and or problems.
I meant I'll be polite and let them hope and pray. I apologize.
Stormwing, and others, I really appreciate your posts. I think we do need to educate the
world on the plight of atheists, and even moderate believers, in the American South.
Those of us atheists in moderate areas cannot afford to lose that understanding of
privilege, while atheists in the South are driven from homes, harassed by goon squads
until they come back cowering, have their wives taken from them by proponents of the
invisible deities.
I am curious, however, how you, Stormwing, call Christianity a religion of peace? You and
I are both reasonably well read, I suppose. Though being I grew up before the Internet
and book accessibility, I think it's entirely possible you might outdo me in this respect.
But both you and I know that Baal and Yahweh were competing deities of warrior cults.
Both are pretty fixated with stoning, burning, raping, ethnic cleansing, and a whole host of
other attrocities. Ultimately, Yahweh won because of some very dedicated scribes in
Babylon during the Babylonian empire.
Christians take it for granted the only punishment or retribution for the slightest infraction
is blood. This is where the Yahweh deity sentences his son to be killed by Roman
Crucifixion, if you believe the writings cobbleled together in the first three centuries CE.
Universalism, and even universal love, was greatly condemned by the great Augustine. In
his time, universalism would have meant those wild Germans, was his words, people
taking over his beloved Roman Empire.
Speaking of Roman Empire, Constantine clearly brought Christianity from a fragmented
set of splinter groups into a single warrior religion. The conversion of Clovis, King of the
Gaules (early France) is a beautiful example of the Yahweh Cult modernized. He continued
his pre-Christian violence, only this time instead of under polytheistic religion, it was one
army under one tribal deity.
Then you look at Charlemagne, the man who singlehandedly force-converted most of
Western Europe in the 8th century.
I think the American South in particular, is the last vestige of the Christian branch of the
original Yahweh cult. One thing that made monotheism so successful was in-group
loyalties. There are Christians now who say that God does not love everyone, that when it
says he came to save the World, that means only those in His group.
If you are group-solidarity, it is possible for a warrior cult to believe itself to be persecuted
because it can't expel dissidents properly, or more to the point, because it can't enforce its
systematic conquest on outsiders.
I think many Christians, perhaps some even in The South, don't understand this. But look
closely at all the war language they use. It has only been since Victorian times that they
don't quite openly wage war in the name of their religion. By the way, this is also true for
all the other branches of Yahweh religion.
We often cite the Old Testament as ex-believers, and with good reason. Any moral first
cause would not be so immoral as the Old Testament deity or other similar warrior deities.
If you read their apologetic for it, it comes off as weak, something like the left-wing
propaganda supporting Mao Tsetung that we read and laughed at in the 1980s.
But outside Revelation, where 3/4 of the Jewish Population we spend billions supporting
will be wiped out, besides that craziness, the New Testament still shows Yahweh
conducting business as usual.
When a King Herod acts pompously in a palace, accepting the praises of his people, being
treated like a god, his competitor was understandably a little upset. In true deity-fashion,
he had him killed, in this case eaten alive by parasitic worms. He's pretty creative, no?
While I still tried to apologize for Christianity to myself, or as you said, make excuses to
myself for so many things, I brought this up in a study group. One in which they were
saying the Old Testament was different, and so on. I think some were a bit grossed out
when I read aloud the passage using a modern version of the Bible: This is the New
Testament.
To the American South, to Alaska, Kansas and some other states, America is the throne of
power for their warrior religion. The thing that scares such as these as we are simply not
competing.
Think about these warlike battle maxims:
Those who are not for us are against us.
Everybody worships something.
You're in God's camp or the enemy's.
Speaking of the Devil, he's quite the pussy, isn't he? If you believe them, he breaks and
enters houses, terrifies usually women and children, invading their dreams. If you believe
what they say. He's quite the soor loser, in true tribal fashion.
I have no doubt that for many Christians they use their faith as a basis for peace and
love. But the religion, all the Yahweh religions, collectively own more resources and
armies and land than any other group. Even though the various Yahweh factions are at
perpetual war, something like the world of 1984.
Persecuted? Christianity as a religion, far from being under threat, owns more buildings,
land resources, money, oil, armories, and political seats of power than many medium-
sized nations combined.
Clearly there are some cases around the world where adhereents are persecuted. ironic
example would be China. Yahweh's own party in the U.S., in the South, could use its
powerful hand to force China to stop the abuses of human rights. It won't, though,
because China as an economic resource is more important to its fighting the Battle of the
Gods, and according to Yahweh's own party China's Yahweh followers are necessary
colateral. With the occasional tearful display in churchs to appeal to the more sensitive of
the followers.
This is not a religion of peace, although there are an awful lot of peaceful, loving
Christians. But the Yahweh warriors usually scorn love of other people: according to them,
solving issues for poor or disenfranchised people goes against their god.
They're right: one of their own famous leaders, President George W. Bush, was correct in
stating that terrorism thrives where economies are unstable.
You need to perpetuate a class of disenfranchised, poor, numerous people in order to keep
up the war effort.
I wonder what will happen when they stop fighting the Battle of the Gods and really take
to us who can't really understand gods at all? Will they be more accepting of groups like
Wiccans than they are of us?
It's something I don't know. But I would be careful before calling any Yahweh religion a
religion of peace. The reason the aforementioned President did so with Islam, was to keep
Yahwehists of different flavors from eating each other alive in the streets.
But again, there are a lot of Christians who show love and peace. In front of them,
anymore I do not bring up this aspect of the situation. Usually, these who show love,
might have a brush with the Yahweh warriors, but there always comes a point where they
simply will not harden themselves sufficiently against other humans, and so back away
from it.
What's interesting is that many Christians view universalists as the worst kind of heretics.
I have never understood why. Universalism is so incredibly impossible that had the early
Christian universalists had their way, Christianity simply would not be the religion of
power that it is today. It probably would have died out completely.
I understand why they don't like universalists, no tribal collective would. And we humans
are so tribal in nature that the war in Gulliver's Travels over which end to crack the egg, is
not much of an exaggeration. I understand universalists being an affront to Yahweh
tribalists of any flavor. To some of the rest of us, they seem impossibly idealistic and silly.
But a threat? How, exactly? It's never been popular, Yahweh-style tribalism is extremely
popular.
I guess perhaps it's that odd doublethink where they imagine that they are some kind of
minority, ignore their obvious superiority in power and might, and pretend that a group of
obscure nontribal idealists is somehow supposed to constitute a threat.
That's just one of those things that I could never overcome in my mind. That would be
like me, rolling down the street in a tank toward a hippie waving a flower at me, and me
being terrified of the flower.
Perhaps this is what happens when we take a warrior Yahweh cult and turn it into three
major military industrial powerhouses. Their makeup may not be capable of realizing its
supermajority status, and has to bat at shadows. I think thousands of years from now, the
archeologists and historians are going to have some fun exploring this. Thousands of
years from now, when all the colateral is long dead and nobody in living memory has
interests in the people and resources involved.
Hey guys, I'm really tired of the south bashing that's going on in this topic.
Sure, I understand that there are a lot of assholes that live down here, but, look around, there are assholes everywhere. Believe it or not, there may be one or two on the zone.
Your stark generalizations (especially you Leo) and your flamboyant language make mock of your argument.
You talk about the war like tendencies of Yahway, but you don't speak about the psalms, or the beatitudes.
Your original topic is still a good one, but, you sound to me, like Rocky crying "I coulda been a contendor" or something like that.
If you don't want to be a christian any more, that's fine, your choice. But you don't do your well-deserved reputation as someone who can carry on a good discussion without belittleing someone else to make a point, much good.
Just my opinion.
Bob
Fair point, and point taken.
I'm guessing it's very popular in the south because Scotch Presbyterianism and such arrived and took hold a long, long time ago. My apologies if I spelled the P word wrong.
My observations on the Yahweh religions are not my own, but it was a brief summary of a
lot of scholarly reading I've been working through over the past few years.
Bob is right about the attitude. So, how to communicate about the problems many people
face without alienating their regional allies.
My personal observation always tends to the majority sociopolitical behavior, I'll admit. As
to the Beattitudes and such, they're few in number compared to the total text, and are so
out of character from what you usually find in there, it strikes me of different authorship.
And now, many of its popular and politically successful evangelists openly treat them with
disdain. I have no right to say, I suppose, but the conclusion for me was pretty self-
revealing.
1 additional observation from a lot of pqns I have gotten on this site, private notes on
Facebook and other places: most who have had troubles with deconversion, and dealt with
family and employment fallout have done so in the past couple of decades.
What some of us have unflatteringly called the Fallwellian Explosion. The South was a
direct target by these people. Bob was right to upbraid my south-bashing. I will go so far
as to say I was victim blaming, to a point.
I hope thinking Southern people who are proud of their region and heritage can reclaim it
from the Yahwehists and their politicians.
A good subject to take a look at is the use of black churches in the 2004 election, and
more recently against gay marriage initiatives. In both situations, they were promised
representation and help they never got.
Rather reminds me of that Bagwam Raaj Neesh character in Antelope, Oregon in the
1980s. Promises in exchange for votes or support. Once people see they've been used by
a gang of despotics, I'm guessing they will reclaim their heritage.
This guy's post about his Hindu neighbours pretty much sums my feelings up.
Substitute "Hindu" and its traditions/ideologies/habits with Christians and Christian
concepts and you pretty much have me and my family.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10152347921277235&id=500887234
Great point Westcoastcdngrl.
I think the point that the author was trying to make was the idea of acceptance. He was accepted by his neighbors, not because he was different, but despite his differences.
I've been thinking about the generalizations about southern christians and my reactions to them.
I think one thing that might define a red neck Christian--and I think this is the group we are talking about--is poverty.
The New York Times has a wonderful article about poverty in today's paper. Though this article is looking at poverty (mainly in West Virgina), some of the things it says is pertinent to our discussion.
The New York Times
"Of the 353 most persistently poor counties in the United States —
defined by Washington as having had a poverty rate above 20 percent in
each of the past three decades — 85 percent are rural. They are
clustered in distinct regions: Indian reservations in the West; Hispanic
communities in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas; a band across the Deep
South and along the Mississippi Delta with a majority black population;
and Appalachia, largely white, which has supplied some of America’s
iconic imagery of rural poverty since the Depression-era photos of
Walker Evans.
...
She turned up Shaft Hollow, where many people live in poorly built
houses once owned by a coal company, their roofs sagging and the porches
without railings. At the foot of Shop Hollow, a homemade sign advertised
Hillbilly Fried Chicken. Another pointed the way to the True Light
Church of God in Jesus Name. “This is one of the most country places,
but I love these people,” Ms. McGuire said. She said it was a bastion of
Pentecostal faith, where families are strict and their children well
behaved."
In case my link doesn't work, here's the url to the article:
The New York Times
Bob
Wow what a beautiful past couple of posts. I read both articles this morning while getting ready for work.
Sad, really really sad. The poor are taken advantage of. And I saw the opulent rich in Jacksonville Florida, although there are a bunch of these in Colorado Springs and even parts of California, who are the religion's power players. keep them interested only in the world to come, so they are content with the lowly station they are in in this life.
Despotic. And yet, these are the Chosen, the Few, the 20% who make it into the tribal deity's heaven.
But again, I take Bob's post as a challenge against my own judgments of the redneck people. It's even true out here in rural parts of the west.
Bob, I am sorry I painted with such a rash brush. I did try to make it clearly
that many of the moderate to somewhat christian people weren't so bad, and
we got along well, but guess I just saw a lot of what probably is best called
christian extremists/extremism, and encountered much of that growing up
where I did.
No problem, I understand.
I, too, grew up with extrimist people all around me.
My main point is that not "all" christians nor "all" southerners are extremists. That's all.
Bob
I understand the tendency to want to get away from the extremists. At best they’re annoying and pushy, while at worst they can be destructive. But totally absenting myself from any kind of spirituality? Total atheism? That’s all very well and good when you’re in your early 20s, when I professed to be one, but now it just seems too stark. Just speaking for me, but there has to be some kind of hope of something more. Not saying I’m pushing it down others’ throats, because I don’t think I’ve ever done that nor will I, but then, I think we all have to find our own comfort levels or what we need. For me, total atheism leads to its own questions and problems; I think I explored that in an earlier unlamented post. I think for me gracefully exiting from religion therefore means finding my own way; maybe that’s what we all have to do.
@Post 2 and Post 5: Both of you are correct.
I did finally broach the subject with the Wife. admittedly should have done so sooner, as posts 2 and 5 so eloquently stated. For all the reasons stated therein.
My own personal failure in that area is I tend to pondedr things till their ultimate conclusions before drawing other people in, and in sensitive personal areas like this, I ought to have included Her earlier on. I freely admitted as much, and it's not the type of mistake I'll be making again.
I'd certainly advise anyone to do as I didn't and take Kate and Alicia's advice in posts 2 and 5. A lot of wisdom in those posts.
Anyway, it's all up for discussion and I'm keeping an open mind rather than a brick wall.
Interesting post.
I’ll not answer your questions one by one, I’ll just explain what I think, and you’ll get your answers.
I credit my way of thinking, or the way I live to my father.
My mother is a deeply religious woman, so I always had church in my life.
I was taken to church, and spent much time in churches as a child, and as an adult.
I was a choir director for years and promoter of Christian musical groups. I’ve written and sang gospel music. I still love it now.
I have felt what is called the spirit of God so understand what this is like.
I am not a Christian. I am a strong believer in God, and love.
I dropped the title years ago, due to the Christian club, as I think of it, not having the same ideas and belief system they follow, so how could I use the title?
A sheep, is a sheep, so if I were a sheep, I could say so right?
My dad and I saw religion as how a person was defining themselves.
We had Jewish, Catholic, Atheist, and you name it welcome in our home.
There was a Method us preacher, who was head of a really large congregation, that loved to shoot pool and have a good glass of scotch. He come around, and my dad welcomed him with open arms, and never judged him. I am the same.
My dad’s best friend was a deacon of a large church.
My dad use to say he’d go to church at his funeral, and that was only because my mother would have it there. Smile.
When I was married, my wife understood from day one, she could tell me anything. We discussed it, and worked out the terms.
If what she wanted was not destructive to herself, or our base relationship, she was free to do it with my blessing.
If she had the desire to sleep with a woman, she was free to do so. If she wanted to explore Buddhism, or anything else for that matter, she was free to do it, and the same went for my children and friends.
Destructive behavior, I cannot condone, and is the reason I am not married anymore.
I’d love to find a mate that thinks as I do, but have never been able to find a free thinker completely.
My dad wasn’t as free a thinker as I am, but he gave me the bases to get to the place I live, and have lived, sense I was in my 20’s.
If God is love, and loves us all, God accepts us as we are.
We were given free will I believe, so we could live happy, not in fear.
I believe some people are evil, and God will deal with them.
Homosexuality, drinking, and such things, are not evil acts.
I never “came out” because I was never in.
My way of life and belief, are based on love, not control, and that is what I truly believe God wishes us to be.
Yes, I know the Bible stories. I have posted on this board, I believe the stories are guide post, or examples to study, not gospel, so to speak.
How a story is interpreted makes a difference, and these stories get interpreted many ways.
Read them with love, and you get the same view every time.
I always use David as my example, and God loved David, didn’t God?
Thanks, Wayne.
Your words are well taken.
The challenge with people of a strong faith, is their version of compromise. What that typically means is everyone will eventually come around to their way, or suffer somehow. And they suffer when one doesn't come around.
Ironically, when I was still in it, if She had had the experience I am having now, I would have been completely open about it and even learned from the situation. But this is one very good reason I realized why I was never that faithful to it. I have never put ideas over people. I'm not claiming that She is, or anyone is. But in my mind, I simply cannot make that leap. Labels like who is liberal or conservative, or what the terms mean, make less sense with time.
My mind constantly reverts to that tale from Gulliver's Travels where the Lilliputians fought a bloody war over who cracked their eggs at what end. Not to be dismissive of faith or spirituality in general, or Christianity in particular. But even amongst them the squabble is continuous.
You describe it as a club, and perhaps you're right. But I see it as a series of clubs competing for most right. And usually most right on some rather insignificant points, insignificant to those who are not really committed.
Ironically, to them, if you are a good person, that can even prove you are proud or deceived if you are good without God. I understood this to be going on around me. But I can't say I ever felt that way about other people.
I'm not sure why some do and some don't attach to this. But I can tell you, there are a lot more on the inside of those places who have serious questions, are slow to give the rote answers when asked the right questions, and so on. Everyone wants to talk about sex scandals, because they are both rare and titillating. But honestly? I ran into quite a few people over the years at varyng levels of this. I've even read online of peple in the Christian industries who can't get out for career and family reasons, but they're not buying it anymore. They simply discovered they did not buy it. And they are in far worse a quandary than I am.
The other thing I realized is, to people still on the inside, they don't see it as a discovery of ours, they see it as a deliberate decision. But you don't decide to not believe something. I can't decide, for instance, to not believe the sun will come up tomorrow, or to believe that gravitational theory is a myth. I could give all the rote answers for each, and depending on who I am, come off as more or less convincing.
But this part is difficult for them. I'm realizing this require a bit of sensitivity on my part.
Johndy, here's an idea.
Most people who are not dedicated theists are agnostic, meaning they don't know if there is or isn't a god and what that god would look like. I am technically an agnostic atheist, because in all probability there is no god, but I will concede there well might be. Probability and possibility are quite different from each other.
I conceded this point when the Wife and I had the final talk on this this weekend, her wanting to know a few answers to some things, and ultimately asking if I could at least see that there might be one.
But to your question of going out of existence?
I don't mean to make light of your existential and personal crisis, but. Once I overcame the natural fear of Hell that you get being raised in a Christian-centric society, the idea of blipping out of existence when done is actually not such a bad thing. People have these idea of sliding off into darkness and falling falling falling, or something like that.
If you die peacefully, it's like going to sleep and staying that way. If you die in pain, it is a termination of pain.
And, you cannot avoid the fact that you do live on forever in everything you've done, every person you have helped. Can you absolutely say for certain, for instance, that you have not saved a life? What if your encouraging word or cheerful greeting or even acknowledgement was the tipping point that kept an otherwise isolated lonely person from committing suicide? And they get help and end up having kids and procreate?
The theists are correct about light trumping darkness, in a physical sense of course, but you could apply that metaphor. I don't really get the idea of a soul. The matter / energy exchange is largely understood now, and your matter and your energy are actually the products of former generations of life, and will continue so long as this biosphere we call Earth continues to sustain it. After life is no more, it will be part of whatever is left, or ultimately part of the Red Dwarf the Sun will become, and ultimately part of it as a black hole. But you won't worry about it. You'll be asleep forever, as it were.
I'm not that existential, and have no real god concept except the American Christian package which may not really be a god concept at all. But think of this: you sleep, yu dream. Aren't your dreams as real to you, when you're in them, as your awake life is to you? Haven't you fallen asleep and had a long dream only to wake up and find only two minutes went by? There is some growing scientific evidence that your state of mind when you die might modify what the paranormals call the near-death experience, when ketamine-like hormones take over while you are shutting down. Would seem like an eternity wherever you are at.
I don't know really. Maybe Bob can pitch in and help.
But for me at least, once overcoming the irrational control fear of Hell or Dante's inferno, the idea of blipping out of existence doesn't bother me. I wouldn't be around to worry about it.
Even though you say you weren't raised by Christian fundamentalists, you were raised in America, and so have been exposed to the idea of punishment after death. I can't say but it is common that is the underlying fear. Even of purported believers. Once you rise above that, I did so via rational observation of myths, you might find it easier.
I get being in touch with your mortality though. I'm only 43, but I do think about the kind of world we're leaving for my daughter and her kids, the environmental disasters and political problems, and so on. When someone dies, I think about what I will have left for people when I'm gone.
I think this stuff is normal. And you may have an actual god-concept, or if the new hypotheses about phenotypes or genes for faith or existentialism are correct, you may have some of these which I apparently lack.
Not that I don't imagine slipping off into unconsciousness and before blipping out or whatever, being in a large meadow with green grass and trees, something unlike any of the major religious groups portray. But I can't get past the thought it is most likely just my imagination. I think people have a greater or lesser god concept. But I cannot prove this, of course.
I try not to label myself, but the thinking I've bee doing lately has caused me to come tothe conclusion that if I were to try labeling myself I would call myself an Agnostic Atheist. I don't believe there is a god (certainly I've seen no evidence of it), but I don't deny the possibility that I might be wrong. I just don't believe in the Christian god. Nor did any of the other religions I've studied over te eyars seem to be able to provide the peace they promised. Lately I've been reading up on Deism and I find I could accept that more than I ever could Christianity.
If you don't actively believe in a deity, why not just call yourself an atheist for the sake of simplicity?
Terms mean something.
As Cody pointed out in another thread, agnostic = cannot know whether or not there is a god or gods, and what he / they would look like if there were. Atheist = operating as though there is no god or gods, because the probability stands in favor of that position.
Labels are not wrong, words are not wrong: they're what brought us forward in the past 50,000 years of evolution. It's how we describe things to each other, using commonly-understood terms.
You, for instance, might be an apatheist (Only you would know this, of course), meaning that you are apathetic to whether there is or isn't a god.
Words and definitions and labels, when applied by us to us, help us understand any number of things. The only thing that can be harmful, if they are applied in an unkind manner by other people.
And, nothing wrong with being willing to be wrong, or developing, or based on the evidence, becoming unconvinced of something you were formerly convinced of or vice versa.
Failure to do these things leaves one quite rigid.
Well said. I don't know for sure that there is or isn't a god. I could be wrong. I just don't believe in the Christian god or think him worthy of my worship.
Nor do I. He's infinitely worse than Hitler if he does exist.
Precisely. I could accept the Deistic concept of god but not the Christian one.
Not much point in that either, since that basically means worshipping nature. And nature doesn't care about us either way.
What is really even meant by worship anyway?
The Abrahamic traditions (the Big Three) have a sort of bronze-age feudal method of bowing and groveling and being unworthy. Any real honorable and noble character of a god with a higher moral sense and a higher sense of honor and nobility would find all of that charade rather insulting and ridiculous, something born of primitive man.
When we create artificially intelligent machines that are free agents (we're closer than you may think), we would call such a creator sadistic and narcissistic if he created such programmed to bow and scrape and beg for their lives, and constantly butter him up.
Consider the following avatar from Revelation 4, taken from the New Living Translation. If you want to skip over it, it's a blockquote
I'm surprised at some of you folks. Your analytical wisdom astonishes me.
In one fell swoop you are dismissing the creator of the universe, the person/thing/concept that made your life possible, not only possible, hell, he/she/it made it happen.
No thanks. I'll worship God--whatever that is--by enjoying the day; perhaps I'll listen to some really good music; perhaps I'll take a moment to discuss the wonder of things with my five year old granddaughter; perhaps I'll simply enjoy the day.
When I come across things that are wrong, I'll fix them, if I can, or I'll simply speak up about them.
Whatever I do, I'll try to make my God proud of me. That's my way of worshiping.
Bob
And there you answered the question 'what is worship?'
Wisdom? That is the previous post.
Some of us have picked this stuff apart, yes, as a way to disentangle and understand what got us into that mess to begin with. But this will most certainly not be a way of life for me. I am simply not that one-dimensional. I was called a double-minded Christian by the Christians. Perhaps the antitheists will call me a double-minded atheist?
But, I like your attitude, as I sit here on lunch break with robins and swifts outside my window, the smell of rain, and the unique privilege of now living at tree level on the 4th floor in the heart of one of Portland's pedestrian-friendly districts.
My picking apart of this stuff will be shortlived and its days over soon, I suspect. I have nearly read all I need for the moment from deconverts and thoughtful atheists, and I do eschew the more loud and brash, even if I express my frustration at times. Admittedly my own frustration is that of a man disentangling from a rope and wondering how the rope got there, and how he was so complicit.
All that, for me at least, will probably be short-lived.
But, thanks for your thoughtful post.
So a bit of an update:
On the home front, She can best be described as going through the 5 stages of grief.
We're near the end of the numbness, and entering the emotional phase of the process.
She has said, with no malice but with sadness, that She feels like She has lost a spiritual
connection. She was careful to say nothing of my behavior has changed, this is a spiritual
issue. Then, unwittingly perhaps, she gave voice to emotions and sensations that all of us
who have had a loved one die are very familiar with; foods taste bland, just not wanting
to think about it, and, as She expressed, "It's never going to be okay."
Now, to fellow nontheist rationalists, I know for us the spiritual connection bit doesn't
make sense. And I know others on here have accused me of being over dramatic.
But I, as one who has always placed humans over creeds or lack thereof, I am committed
to be beside Her while She gets through this, anchoring myself to the anchors of human
kindness towards Her, and the rational disciplined mind to hold my emotions in check. I
don't miss the fear of inauthenticity and hell, nor the heavy load of constant self-
monitoring and cognitive dissonance in those circles. But She does have something She
misses and grieves for. If anyone could be the pillar in this situation, I think that logically
falls to the nontheist.
That being said, I went to a nontheist meetup. No, this isn't a place to talk about one we
find improbable to exist. It's a group of like minds navigating similar situations. I got
affirmation for the grief situation, from a former evangelical missionary turned atheist.
While not all were skeptical rationalists as I am, a great many of us are humamists , a
term he used which is till had not identified with, due to leftover fear from my very
Republican upbringing. But, the humanist shoe fits, so I'll wear it.
Anyway, may this help someone who is navigating this type of tough spot. And no, this is
not being over dramatic: it is only human.
Well as I said in the last post, She can best be described as going through the grief process. Add to that, She is having a lot of extra emotional stuff to do at work. So as a compromise, I agreed to not go to my atheist meetup I have gone to twice a month for the past couple months. It has been enlightening, and nice to hang out with fellow freethinkers. Right or wrong, this is where things seem to be at the moment. She's not trying to get me to go to a church, but it stresses Her out that I go to that meetup. I have also tried to explain it is not like when fundamentalists get together. Tis is not a pack of antitheists ranting. Just common people , many atheist, some other nontheistic types of differing persuasions, just hanging out for a few hours. But I understand this is hard for the Christian mind to grasp, as they are told so many things about us, and their perception tends to the idea of conversion or proselytizing, something all religions do. But this is not how that group works
Anyway right or wrong I proposed that compromise when She explained how emotional it was making Her, especially in light of the problems She is having at Her work - unrelated but emotional. As a Christian I like most Christians was trained against compromises on this sort of thing, but I never really bought that idea. Surely, two reasonable people can do this. I know She says there are parts of it She is putting off dealing with in Her own mind right now. But even She admits, I haven't really changed. I would never say this to Her, but I think She's dealing more with the loss of the idea of something. Also there are a lot of fallacies abroad about interfaith relationships, which are not really borne out in reality, except where the Faithful are directed to be more aggressive and not compromise a thing, or where they're told the faith-less have no moral compass or something. But interfaith blogs abound on the Internet. Some from the victim stance of the evangelical put upon by having someone of a different faith or lack thereof, but many are reasonable humans.
I mean no disrespect, and I will honor Her wishes on all counts here, but in my opinion this is a problem that created itself. It's not a real problem like someone being derelict in duty, or not loving, or something. They've created a persona and a play, and we are all for better or worse, in their mindset, the actors, either acting as one of theirs, or acting as the evil that is not one of theirs. She doesn't embody all of this, but now that I am unplugged from the matrix, I can see this with clarity that rather startles me at times.
Sure, it has been good and instructive to meet with atheists and other nontheists, and perhaps I will be able to do so again once She has settled some. She knows now that I am a member of a nonChristian forum, a place dedicated to people breaking out of it. But I was careful to not do anything like this until I was completely sure of my position. One way in which to maintain my personal honor and integrity as much as possible in the eyes of any Christian, since to many, they think people are 'led' to deconvertsion, rather than just find themselves out. It's that matrix thinking: everyone is allegedly 'born again' into all of these thought processes, in some sort of leader / led relationship, some sort of good or evil influnecers. Us rationalist freethinkers just don't see the world that way, but that doesn't mean I don't understadnt it. So, to that end, I was careful during my prcess, very careful, so as to maintain credibility in this very tenuous situation for the Christian mind set to understand.
Some people say, "be yourself," but that is not as easy as one might think. A large part of myself is the desire to make Her happy. In fact, that is something within Christianity I was accused of having out of order, Her before god, all that stuff. I'm as liberated from that as the sixties feminists were liberated from sexual and economic restriction: I embrace my freedom to wholeheartedly support Her happiness. But I need to decide where I can and cannot compromise. So to a limited extent I have foregone some of my personal autonomy, no longer attending that atheist meetup. But I still function online in a forum related to that stuff. And, like I have for years, I still read books, now books about secular philosophies to understand them.
Also, I do meet fellow nontheists at the local coffeeshop here in our building, or if I go out to pubs. I'm not going to stop meeting with those, or reading the books I read, or interacting in online forums about it. I haven't joined Atheist Nexus or any others save the ones She knows about, so as to protect against the "leading a private life" fallacy. For those not in the know, if you are doing something outside the worldview or ideology, entertaining some form of conversation that stimulates your thought in an unorthodox direction, that is seen by Evangelicals as 'leading a private life'. This is not just restricted to domestic betrayal or other domestic treacherous acts. It's often thought of as taking place over the Internet, but I've seen men destroyed over becoming unorthodox in some fashion, based on conversations they had at work or books they picked up at the library. In terms of myself, I wish always to protect my own personal honor, so I have taken those steps. As to books, we just have never really discussed them. It often caused problems, not because She went out and got it and disagreed, but more had seen something akin to the Evangelical version of biased cliff notes or review of the work or the author. Or, I read things obscure enough most of them don't seem to know: Bertrand Russell, David Hume, etc. I may try and find just a coffee meetup, a secondary place to hang out on weekend mornings besides the place I often go to, but something generalistic enough not to have any of the triggers for Evangelicals, like humanist, nontheist, atheist especially, something like that.
Anyway, I'm not sure there is a right or wrong in this situation. I don't pretend to think I can fix it all, solve it all, or any of that. After all, when She tearfully challenged my unorthodoxy a few years ago, I set out to prove it all to myself, bring back a solution, and lay it at Her feet. Only to find myself out to be an atheist. So 'fix it all?' my track record there would be slim to none. But I can at least handle the situation honorably and compassionately. Right or wrong, I believe I can prove to Her that we're not 'going in different directions now,' by continuing to be there, support Her efforts whatever they are, as I always have, only free to do so without any guilt about loving Her more than some god, or prioritizing people over ideologies.
Isn't there a verse about believers being unequally yoked or something?
There's two, if I remember right, Imp. None deal with the Ex-Christian, however. in 2 Corinthians 6:14
where it states to not be unequally yoked with unbelievers, 'joined' in more contemporary translations. A lot of apologetic spin goes into that one for all sorts of reasons. But generally the church's interpretation of that one is to not marry outside the faith. And usually that means outside either your brand of the faith, one of the 40,000 available Christianities, or at least not to one who violates certain teachings. Remember, for varying groups you have varying damnable heresies and other pretty severe restrictions of one another. It is nowhere near as simple as your average tract makes it out to be.
The other passage, 1 Corinthians 7, urges unbelieving spouses to stay with the believer. The context on that one indicates someone where you both were unbelievers, then one gets converted, don't ditch the other one for faith reasons, unless the unbeliever wants to go.
There's no write-up about deconverted, because the texts were written during the first generation of the mythology. There had been no meme created, no Christian babies raised in Christian homes with Christian books to read, and so on. The only apostates you could have around 50 A.D. or so when the very talented rhetorician Paul wrote these texts, were people who got swept into it and weren't really into it. It's similar to Africans now who get swept into Christianity or Islam but then don't stay because they don't find it compatible. Of course the mafia boss texts in 1 and 2 Peter, which resemble Osamu Bin Laden's writings about wishy-washy al qaeda members, are there to keep the masses in line.
But there was no indicator for what to do if you had a culturally constructed scenario where Christianity was the dominating religion, and someone makes an exit. The apologists are going hog wild with this, and spending a ton of your grandmother's tithe money to research arguments for their claims, but there really isn't a fit, because those who wrote the texts never saw Christianity or the world surviving the first century CE, let alone outlasting the Roman Empire. So the Christian married to an apostate is left on Her own, though interfaith blogs try to make arguments in favor of the Christian staying if she wants. But the default position from the Church itself seems to be that the apostate, especially the atheist apostate, is somehow hiding some grievous immoral acts, usually not specified. See the essay by Dr. Comings in the 19th Century on the atheist. Or anything Dinesh D'Souza writes, or Ravi Zecharias for that matter. So it's uncharted water, basically. If She were to explore online, She could find anything from reasonable discussions on the matter, to emotionally-laden self-imposed victim stances where men are helping out at home, taking care of the kids, paying the mortgage, but because they don't subscribe to the default dominant religion anymore, everything in the world has apparently turned inside out. Some are so transparent about the obvious contradiction, it's quite striking, actually.
Better than the posts are the comments. Real victims: single mothers, women who lost it all due to affairs and other acts by a derelict husband, are usually appalled at these people.
Naturally I am being a bit one-sided, for two reasons. It does seem males tend to deconvert at a higher rate than females. And when I was in, I never bought the malevolent hierarchical constructs, which make it difficult for deconverting females, albeit in different ways. most the females that deconvert seem to come from the Quiverful and other pseudopatriarchal institutions where their only value is in numbers of offspring produced. Again, one-sided, because I simply cannot relate to the males of that crowd, although of course feel sorry for the females in there.
But anyway, your question has to do with getting married, not staying that way. And the 'staying that way' scriptures never could have accounted for the type of environment Christianity has been in since Constantine, being the most dominant world religion with the biggest guns, the most troops, the most expensive apologists and the most lawyers, not to mention the incredible efforts to maintain the meme to ensure that progeny maintain the meme. None of this was at all known even by intelligently persuasive apologists like Paul of the 1st Century CE, who basically wrote the book on how they do church, and also never met Christianity's alleged founder in person.
Been close to a year. No regrets. Bringing this back up in case it helps someone else, before it gets locked.
How has your coming out been?
It's been a long and hard process. People don't really understand that it's a lot harder to exit a faith rather than join one. exiting faith means that you give up almost every comforting thought you have ever held, and have to find new sources of comfort. religious people have the comfort of the belief they will go to heaven and see their lost loved ones there.
Atheists don't have this. we know that this is all we have. that is painful.
Who have you told?
Anyone who asks.
What is your strategy, if any, for preserving current relationships?
basically, people who do not accept and just get on with the fact that I am an atheist I have cut from my life. I don't want to waste the only life I have arguing.
You're brave, Leo, and you're kind. I respect how hard that had to be for you--long ago as it was--and I also respect the compassion you had for your wife's feelings. So many people "come out" with bitterness and spite...there's almost a fundamentalist zeal about the process (irony, anyone?). Thanks for sharing this.
My own coming out was...unconventional, and it occurred in stages. I grew up among liberal, relaxed Christians. Any bigotry that did exist (anti-gay sentiment, for example), had little to do with God and a lot to do with fear of deviance. Most of my family and friends had some vague belief in God, though many of them only saw the inside of a church (usually Catholic) twice a year or so. So, when I came out as a more fundamentalist Christian at about age twelve (I had gone to a very religious summer camp that did a great job at "getting them young"), everyone was shocked and a little dismayed. They didn't know me anymore, etc. etc. So my first "coming out"--as a Christian, not an atheist--was more stressful than my transition from religious to nonreligious.
I'd been doubting for years, but when I was about sixteen I finally acknowledged that rather than being led by my faith, I was pushing it forward, teeth gritted, trying to make it make sense to myself. I wasn't happy. I wasn't fulfilled. I felt constricted, and alone, and unworthy. And when I started to realize (personal realization, not a universal one) that I was the only one with any power over my destiny, things got better. I became happier. I was a kinder person. I felt more free than I ever had while "saved". I blossomed. I miss it sometimes. I miss the fellowship with others, and the sense of connectedness. But I'd never go back.
The second transition, as I've said, was smoother. My parents, especially, did express some regret. They thought me cynical or irreverent, or maybe both. Everyone else was completely fine with it, and some even seemed happier for it. I have great Christian friends like Alicia and Kate, whom I can chat to about anything religious without any bad blood. I can ask questions, debate points, and even criticize, and it's all been taken with grace and understanding. I wouldn't give my Christian friends for the world, and I honestly wouldnt have them any other way unless they wanted change themselves.
Megs, thanks for this. We have had many long talks either tackling this subject head-on or dancing around it, and while we come at it from different angles, I have never once felt disrespected by you on this. Others - Christian, nonreligious and those of other faiths - are less careful in this regard. Even amongst Christians, I am far too liberal for the comfort of dyed-in-the-wool conservatives, and far too conservative for more liberal-minded believers. *sighs*
I'll admit all of my background before the past year, was scientific or intellectual. I knew nothing of humanist philosophy, save what the American fundamentalist pundits portray, which amounts to less than nothing.
What a lot of us miss -- and I missed it too -- is exactly what people like Kate, Alicia and Meglet are talking about.
One thing my Wife said when I first came out, and it was a nugget of wisdom I hold to this day: "Please don't lump me in with the extremists," something like that. Wise words. Always a dangerous game to try and mold a human being to fit into a narrative. Many ideologues do it, sadly many in the secular community do it. For anybody interested I suggest you look up Dale McGowen on Bard or Bookshare or wherever you get your books. A couple of good ones: "Good without God: What over a billion nonreligious people do believe," and "In Faith and In Doubt," which is a book about interfaith relationships. He himself was married to a Christian for quite a number of years before she went through her own deconversion process.
it was definitely harder at times when the Daughter was younger, but although I can attest that at times there are challenges, being in such a relationship keeps me extremely mindful of the humanity of the "other half", as it were. I've got a daughter who wants to major in social justice, a decidedly "left" field, and yet considers herself Christian, not sure if she uses the term evangelical or not. But in many ways espouses beliefs one could ascribe to that. This conundrum is unheard of to someone raised with Ronald Reagan, francis Schaeffer, James Dobson, Jerry Fallwell, etc. She's only 20 now, but she by extension proves a point. She's not even a good second amendment or death penalty supporter like her daddy. I say all this to say, you can't match a person with a prearranged narrative.
As to the afterlife, or no longer dependence on a god? Well, for me, during my lifetime I've lost about a dozen people: friends, coworkers, etc., who weren't Christian. The Christian narrative I am familiar with states that most likely they would be in Hell. My liberation from that awful thought has been greater than I could possibly have imagined. Not by the likes of Rob Bell, but by a clear analytical dissection and understanding of where the Hell mythos came from, who brought it and why. Once understood, and really digested, what a relief for those people! You can't unknow what you learn by careful study. I truly believe the worst part of that salvation / Hell system, what many of us in the secular community refer to as a divine protection racket, is the impact a Christian faces when a nonChristian dies. Of course this worries me to this day RE: my own Wife and daughter.
But again, the person doesn't always fit the narrative. My uncle was a Baptist preacher, politically and socially correct as an evangelical, a mountain climber, a musician, a warm-hearted person, and ultimately was claime by depression. His suicide a few years ago left a shocked and traumatized family, including some who were unfortunate enough to find the body. What I found grossly unfair at the time, is these people are traumatized and hurt, and yet expected to maintain a faith system that places this guy in eternal torment? You don't sleep well with knowledge like that, not when it's people you care about, people with young kids, moms who also suffer physical debilitating conditions like fibromyalgia and chronic pain. It's morally awful among other things.
And yet, I don't know how they worked it out: they believe he's in heaven. What a relief when I found out they believe this. Goes to show how far deconverted I was by then: no longer sure for myself that there is a god or a devil or a cosmic torture chamber for the mass majority of folks who don't believe the right things in the right way. But his daughter, my cousin, still a strong Christian, still very active in her church, told me they all thought he was "with Jesus." I was so relieved for their sake, I can't describe it, although I can still feel it now as I write this.
It's for this very reason I think it's wrong for us secular people to see Christians as "haters" if they believe in Hell, because they didn't decide to. I didn't decide not to. I only learned the information on the subject and was convinced by the evidence. Since most Christians know one or more nonChristians, they're pretty susceptible to this trauma, in my opinion. It's a terrible thing to live with, something I didn't fully realize until it was gone. Again, worse than fear for one's own burning in Hell, is the imagined scenario of secular friends who have died, burning in Hell, something I distinctly remember. It's the narrative and the texts as they've been edited, not the individual preachers. In fact, as a Christian, I distinctly remember that I discussed this with very few people. Sure, I read William Lane Craig and others on the subject, but it was all very shallow and unconvincing. I consider my family, who are evangelical in the American and Christian sense, to be very brave to have found their way beyond the narrative, for their sakes, in the case of my uncle. But it's a clear case where we secular people have to be very mindful. And those of us who were once in the Christian community can shed some light on the awful conditions these people are forced to live under when a nonChristian loved one of theirs dies. If you're 18, you probably don't care about that yet, but you will. It happens to all of us.
First off, I'm an atheist. I'm not 100 percent convinced that I'm right - why should I be that convinced - but I live my life as if no god or gods exist. to me, this is rational and it makes sense. I am not speaking for anyone else but me here.
I do feel that atheists get a bad rap sometimes, in much the same way other more religious people do. Sure, some atheists are going to try and convince you that their way is the right way, but that doesn't mean we all are. I'll happily debate with you if you like, but I'm not out seeking converts either.
I do not like organized religion, as a construct, and I never have. I don't like what it stands for (rather than what it purports to stand for), and I intensely dislike the power it holds. However, I have no problem with the grand majority of the people within organized religion that I've met, because by and large they don't embody the things I dislike. They're not trying for power. They're not hypocritical and self-serving. They're not justifying heinous acts in the name of their savior. They're people just like me, who just happen to believe in a different origin of the universe and such. That belief does not earn them my respect, but it also does not earn them my disrespect even if I do not share it and can't wrap my head around it. I respect them - or not - based on their merit as an individual, not because of (or in spite of) their beliefs.
With all that having been said, I want to sort of turn this on its ear for a moment.
As a nonreligious person all my life, I've never really had to "come out". my parents never really spoke of religion, and if any of my friends were religious, they were likewise quiet about it. However, one thing with which I've had to wrestle a little in the last decade or so is finding out that someone you know has changed faith. Rather than giving you a Christian's impression on what it's like when a loved one is leaving the faith, I'll give you my take on what happened to me when I found out someone close to me was no longer agnostic/atheist.
My brother passed away in 2005. Before this point, I had very little reason to think of my mother in a religious context, period. She never prayed, never went to church, very rarely if ever spoke about God or anything like that. After my brother died, things changed. My mom had a tough time with the trieving process and, over a period of years whose details I won't regale you with, she became much more religious. I hesitate to call her Christian because she still doesn't go to church, doesn't pray as far as I'm aware and doesn't read or observe the Bible, as such. However, she does believe in angels, and in a god of some sort, and in heaven (if not hell). In this way, my mom went from a religious nonentity, so to speak, to a mishmash of religious and semireligious beliefs, and quite frankly I found it bewildering.
I felt the strong desire to argue with her, despite the loaded emotional quotient. Sometimes I even gave into it, though I very rarely do now. It boggled my mind that a strong-minded and intelligent woman would suddenly believe in these things. I had never seen what fear of the unknown and grief combined can do to a person until then, and I was ill-equipped to handle it. I still thought (and think, to some extent anyway) that I have answers that make a lot of sense. I find concepts like angels fanciful at the very least, for instance.
Anyway, it got me thinking about how I'd feel if someone else close to me, who'd always been an agnostic or an atheist, suddenly went religious. I'd want them to feel they could come to me and talk, and have me listen, without fear of reprisal or judgment. I can't lie and say I'd be happy with it, but frankly, what I think about it doesn't matter much and I'm mature enough to realize it. I don't have to be happy about it, and I have no right to interfere unless I'm drawn in. I think a small part of me would feel like I was losing touch with a small part of that person though. This piece of me might think, "Why are you discarfing rationality in favour of faith?" It wouldn't make sense for me to do this in such a big way, so I'd have trouble with it. I very much doubt that my feelings toward them would change overall, but things might feel a little different, depending on how pervasive their faith was. If I was suddenly being badgered, or if I was having their beliefs constantly thrust on me, I think I'd feel trapped between silence and retaliation; I'd bespect them enough to want to leave them be, but I'd be annoyed enough to want the conversion attempts or constant referencing to stop. I know many Christian people who don't feel the need to fence with me (nor I with them), and I would expect that from a newly converted friend.
Anyway, I know this rambled a bit, but I hope it gives a little perspective. Leo, I do admire y our bravery.
Very interesting, Greg. It's always good to hear from different perspectives.
For those interested, I have found an interesting composit of objections to Christianity. The sources I have read quite a few of, but the site lays everything out in plain view.
386 reasons Christianity is false
Laid out fair and square, without vitriol.
for me, if a christian wants to try and convert me, they had better be prepared to receive a dose of their own medicine. The only elements of religion I want to fight are the extreme elements that have no place in a modern day society.
However I do have some core beliefs and values that I won't budge on.
1. law should never be based on religion, but on fact and the good of the community it is supposed to serve.
If you are religious and disagree with gay marriage, abortion and so on, display this by simply not marrying someone of the same sex or not having an abortion. your religious beliefs have no place in government or law making.
2. children should not be indoctrinated.
faith based schools and every other religious instruction class given to children should be closed down and stripped away. Young children do not have the ability to decide for themselves if the religion of their parents is true or not. people need to be able to make up their own minds. They should learn about religion, culture and so on, but not be instructed in it. it goes the same for religious baptism and so on. informed consent should always be given.
3. trying to convert people is wrong.
you have your beliefs. fine. well and good, and as an atheist I will fight for your right to believe whatever you like, however don't knock on my door, don't stop me on the street or insist that I read your fantasy books and pay for the pleasure.
I will give you the same courticy.
Thanks Perestroika for your words.
I can't recommend Dale McGowens books enough. They're available on Bard, and they're written for religious and secular people alike. Kind of speaks to some of the bridge-building some of us are talking about on here.
I’ll disagree with the second prescription in post 76. In this country there is a principle of law that parents should be able to raise their children basically as they see fit, and this includes religious education. I think this principle arose out of a series of cases before the Supreme Court in which state laws were challenged because they somehow interfered with parents’ rights to send their children to Catholic schools. It seems to me that some of these challenged laws were passed by largely Protestant legislatures at the time probably because of their anti-Catholic biases. If you can’t have Protestant legislators imposing their beliefs on Catholic parents by attempting to limit these parents’ rights to send their own kids to Catholic schools, then atheist legislators should also be prohibited from doing the same. Eventually children grow up and do decide for themselves whether the religion of their parents is true for them or not. It’s how we get progress. Many will determine that to a leser or greater degree, their parents’ religion works for them. Many will determine that it totally does not. Some will be more radicalized or choose a different religion. But that’s how freedom works. You pays your money, you takes your chances.
I don't see why religion shouldn't be treated like other things that children are prohibited from doing.
parents have too much freedom where religion is concerned. they can willfully ignore the fact that modern science trumps religion and not take their child to a doctor. JWs can refuse blood transfusions and risk killing their children.
Religion, like voting and drinking should have an age restriction.
we don't allow children to sign contracts, which is exactly what baptism is.
But then where do you stop? Even if you close down religious education for children, you don’t seriously think that parents are gunna stop teaching their children about religion, do you? And is that a goal we seriously want to entertain? If so, do you then want to bring social services into people’s homes to make sure that children are not being taught religion by their parents? Also, I can envision that many parents will still find ways to baptize their children. You won’t prevent that no matter what you may think of it. The parent doesn’t have to, for instance, bring the child to a church to be baptized. Seems to me that a cooperative priest or some other man or woman of the cloth can come to the parent’s home and perform whatever rite the parent deems necessary to save their beloved child’s eternal soul. How do you prevent that? Go around arresting priests or something? To whatever extent religion may or may not be trumped by modern science, it seems to me that when you start interfering too heavily into people’s personal beliefs, you’re asking for a whole lot more trouble than you may want. It’s just as wrong for atheists to try to interfere in such arenas as it is for the Christofascists to do. Besides, baptism is not really the same kind of thing as a legal contract. A poorly written legal contract, or one designed to cheat a child or his or her family out of their livelihoods is far more damaging in the here and now than being baptized in a church at the age of six months or whatever, and then deciding at the age of twenty that you no longer want to be a part of the religion in which you were raised. Millions of people all around the world do this all the time. Besides, while it can be argued that religion can really fuck with someone’s life, some other person can tell you how enriching his or her life is because of religion or spirituality. And guess what? They may actually thank their parents for giving them such a grounding. Whatever. Speaking just for me, this isn’t a war I wanna fight. I work for the federal government, and we get enough trouble as it is from people who think that all we wanna do is take their freedoms away. This sort of thing just might prove them right.
I see the logical sense in what Johndy is saying. After all, this does become very
restrictive, and quickly. I have no love for the indoctrination that religion
produces. But I think secular arguments, secular camps for kids that focus on
science or the arts, can win in the marketplace of ideas. Let's leave legislation of
morality to the morally weak, and those without rational arguments, not us
atheists. My opinion. I'm a dad, I was complicit in my daughter's spiritual
education even if I wasn't the Christian patriarch in that situation. Rather than
legislate against it, or rally to get others to legislate against it, I did what I think
is the honorable thing: I have taken full responsibility, in front of the daughter,
for being complicit in things I think can be damaging. Even after I had come to
such realizations. I asked her to please accept my preemptive apology in the
event she learns for herself what I have found out already. Taking full personal
ownership in my situation, I don't look to the Church, the State or the Academia
to solve my problems or help me win at my arguments for or against
something.
I will defend the rights of the Christian homeschooling anti-women's-rights
young earth creationists, far more than I could ever hope many of them would.
But I consider myself to be strong, and them to be weak. We who are strong
don't need the legal system to dictate our ideas onto everybody else.
I've probably stepped on more than one set of toes by saying this, but I really
do live my life this way. When I think hard, I realize I have lived like this for a
very long time. So I'm not blowing hot air, or favoring the religious, by saying as
much. And besides, laws should be about things we can prove. How is a parent
supposed to prove a negative? That they *didn't* teach religion to their kids?
And how are you or I supposed to meaningfully define religion and what is and
what isn't acceptable? So many problem areas, I'm just a plain old engineer, not
schooled in law and not a lawyer, but this idea of legislation just doesn't even
seem feasible, even if I do find it morally reprehensible as an idea.
I saved that article on me braille Sense.