Religion and relationships

[VertexSquared]

Again, there's no evidence in favor of God, so I don't know how anyone can say "people have deduced it from logic and reason."

 

 

"However, if I make the claim that you do not exist, then I must be able to prove that to be the case."

 

This is not the case at all. I can prove he exists quite easily.

 

However, you can't disprove Zeus, or Apollo, or Thor, or the magical teapot, or the tooth fairy, or Santa Claus, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or even the Celestial Space German with Peanut Butter Jars for Hands. There are an infinite number of possibilities, and I am sure you can understand why it's impossible and simply not necessary to disprove each and every one of them.

 

Therefore, if you think God exists, the onus is on you to say why you believe that. You are picking one of many possible beliefs in the face of a lack of evidence, much like how any of the prior examples I cited lack evidence. Just because we can't disprove something doesn't necessarily make for a good reason to believe in that thing.

 

If you want to pick an arbitrary belief as truth, then that's entirely fine. You're free to do that in our society. But just because it's something that is without evidence and can't be disproven doesn't make it a "logical" conclusion. It is, literally, not logical.

[FryFish]

I'm not a fajita. You're a fajita. Your FACE is a fajita.

Sounds like a claim... Prove it.

 

If you were to make the claim that I do not exist and that claim were to be refuted, the person challenging your claim is the one who obtains the burden of proof.

That is actually not how it works.

[hoping2heal]

Just a note: if you're offended by people with anti-religious opinions, please don't read or respond to this thread. You can have your views, and I can have mine.

 

My girlfriend of 5 weeks asked me a question this morning, and I am very conflicted.

 

She comes from a religious family, like old school religious. Both her parents are lay minsters.

 

Growing up, my family was Lutheran, but very relaxed, and didn't go to church very often at all.

 

I've been an atheist from a pretty early age, and have an admittedly antagonistic view of organized religion.

 

Anyway, she asked me this morning if it would be a problem if she and her kids started going to church regularly at some point in the future, but the tone was wishy-washy, and I can't tell if she was hinting that she would not do it if I had a problem with it, or that I should decide if it's a deal breaker sooner rather than later.

 

To be utterly, completely honest, I have serious issues respecting people who are blinded by religious beliefs. They can be my friends, family, and associates, but I will not willfully get into a relationship with someone who goes to church, reads the bible regularly, and uses religious nonsense in serious arguments.

 

Can you be a successful couple and have wildly differing views on something that seems so important?

 

If two people have very strong convictions about something that will affect how they lead their lifestyle and portray conduct, I am not sure how well that is going to work out long term if they are always in opposition of each other. I do think it is better to determine that kind of thing early on.

[VertexSquared]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

[Bejita463]

That is actually not how it works.

 

I looked it up, and it appears you are correct. Apparently burden of proof typically falls on those making an ontologically positive claim, or a more extraordinary one. My understanding was a little flawed. Seems I have some reading to do.

[ADF]

The real issue here is why the religious feel such a need to indoctrinate children with their beliefs before they are old enough to rationally evaluate them. Why not wait until the kids reach adulthood and can choose for themselves whether or not to believe? We don't talk about "liberal children" or "conservative children." The reason we don't is that we know children are too young to make informed decisions about political ideology. Why shouldn't religious beliefs be treated the same way?

[VertexSquared]

From the article:

 

The fallacy of argument from ignorance

 

The fallacy of argument from ignorance (sometimes known as demanding negative proof[citation needed]) is a fallacy of asserting that a claim is true as long as it has not been refuted. In other words, X is not proven simply because "not X" cannot be proven. This is related to the burden of proof, because one is placing the burden on the refutation, rather than on the proof of the assertion.

[Rorschach]

I think the issue here is less who is right and who is wrong when it comes to religion. But more your own ability to shut up and let people believe what they want to believe out of respect. Being completely honest I have some serious issues with the logic in this thread, but I'm not about to say anything specifically because it's not really my place to question what you believe, and neither is it your place to question what I believe.

 

Relationships work the same way for most reasonable people.

[Crazy Magnet]

gnomes in my garden

 

I'm pretty sure gnomes exists in my garden. lol

 

Back to the ACTUAL discussion at hand about religion in relationships.

 

Both parties need to be on the same page. I am a Christian, but I had one ex who would constantly quote the bible to me in arguments to try to prove that he was right and I had to defer to whatever the bible said. Huh? Really? Over my dead body!

 

Although our beliefs were similar (both Christians) his interpretation was radically different than mine and it was too much for me personally. I imagine that two radically different beliefs would pose even more problems.

 

I ended what was otherwise a fabulous 2 year relationship with another man who was a member of a different denomination (he was Church of Christ) than I am because my only option according to him and his family was to become a member of that church as well. I don't agree with the way they choose to implement certain things and found it to be very chauvinistic. So, I bailed.

 

Other debates aside, how does religion play out in your relationships?

[Bejita463]

I think the issue here is less who is right and who is wrong when it comes to religion. But more your own ability to shut up and let people believe what they want to believe out of respect. Being completely honest I have some serious issues with the logic in this thread, but I'm not about to say anything specifically because it's not really my place to question what you believe, and neither is it your place to question what I believe.

 

Relationships work the same way for most reasonable people.

 

This. I don't really understand why everyone is so concerned with being "right." It isn't like the beliefs of others threatens your own in any way. It is what it is, and accepting that no one is likely to alter their viewpoint makes tolerance far simpler.

[FryFish]

For all that religion does to the world it is afforded WAY TOO MUCH tolerance.

[someotherguy]

This. I don't really understand why everyone is so concerned with being "right." It isn't like the beliefs of others threatens your own in any way. It is what it is, and accepting that no one is likely to alter their viewpoint makes tolerance far simpler.

 

Actually, you are very wrong here.

 

How many people have died in the name of one religion or another?

 

Atheists don't kill in the name of non existent gods.

 

If one definition of tolerance is "don't kill people who don't believe the same things you do", religions of every denomination fail miserably.

[sunshinegirl]

Can you be a successful couple and have wildly differing views on something that seems so important?

 

Sure, my parents are one example. My mom is a fundamentalist Christian, my dad is agnostic. Like others have said, for them it boils down to mutual respect: Dad lets Mom practice her faith however she sees fit; Mom doesn't proselytize Dad. Dad was also okay with Mom raising us in the church; if he hadn't been, they would have had big problems because it was really important to my mom.

 

As for me...today I am agnostic. I am getting married in October to a man who believes in god generally but isn't zealous about it, and doesn't even really have a coherent theology about who God is. I'm perfectly happy to be with a person who believes in a spiritual plane; in fact, I prefer that to being with an atheist because I really like the values and aspirations that came with my religious upbringing even though I reject pretty much all of the theology that they draped over those values and aspirations. I'm not saying atheists don't have values or aspirations, by the way. I'm just having trouble finding other words to describe what it is I appreciate about religious communities.

 

If my fiance were much more religious than he is, we would have some issues to work through because I sure as heck don't want our kids to be proselytized into a specific dogma or theology.

[Rorschach]

Actually, you are very wrong here.

 

How many people have died in the name of one religion or another?

 

Atheists don't kill in the name of non existent gods.

 

If one definition of tolerance is "don't kill people who don't believe the same things you do", religions of every denomination fail miserably.

 

yeah boy I wish those religious people were just more accepting like us aethiests

 

OH WAIT

 

way to buck the trend boy-0, I'm done with this thread

[Bejita463]

Actually, you are very wrong here.

 

How many people have died in the name of one religion or another?

 

Atheists don't kill in the name of non existent gods.

 

If one definition of tolerance is "don't kill people who don't believe the same things you do", religions of every denomination fail miserably.

 

Do you honestly believe that the fighting that used religion as an excuse would not have occurred using another excuse, were it not religion?

[troggleputty]

Just a note: if you're offended by people with anti-religious opinions, please don't read or respond to this thread. You can have your views, and I can have mine.

 

Thanks but I didn't actually need your permission to have my own views.

 

 

My girlfriend of 5 weeks asked me a question this morning, and I am very conflicted.

 

 

How does your gf's request for information (her question) create internal conflict for you? It's only a question; a request for information/your views on some issue or other.

 

 

She comes from a religious family, like old school religious. Both her parents are lay minsters.

 

Why preface the issue with irrelevant information about her family's background? What did she ask you, and why did that cause you to feel "conflict" within yourself?

 

I mean seriously...you've only been going out five weeks? What could she possibly have asked you to create "conflict" in yourself?

 

 

Growing up, my family was Lutheran, but very relaxed, and didn't go to church very often at all.

 

Again, moderately interesting, but what does this background info have to do with your gf?

 

 

I've been an atheist from a pretty early age, and have an admittedly antagonistic view of organized religion.

 

You're taking an awful long time to get to the question your gf asked.

 

 

 

Anyway, she asked me this morning if it would be a problem if she and her kids started going to church regularly at some point in the future, but the tone was wishy-washy, and I can't tell if she was hinting that she would not do it if I had a problem with it, or that I should decide if it's a deal breaker sooner rather than later.

 

What possible difference could it make to you if your gf and her children went to church, or didn't go to church? Who cares? I'm actually kind of amazed that she even bothered asking you what you thought about it.

 

Well, I guess she did ask. The only "correct" answer to such a question would be, IMO: "It's up to you if you want to go to church, or not. Also it's up to you how you want to raise your children. I'm fine with anything you think is right for you. It's a matter for your own conscience."

 

I certainly don't get why her question would leave you "very conflicted." Where is that all coming from? I mean how could you possibly have a problem with her going to church? What if she told you she likes to go bowling every Sunday?

 

 

 

To be utterly, completely honest, I have serious issues respecting people who are blinded by religious beliefs.

 

Well then as to your respect for or lack thereof of your gf, then that's your issue, not hers. Whether or not she is "blinded by religious beliefs" is obviously, completely separate from whether or not she likes to go to church. Plenty of people go to church as a primarily social or communal activity but are not particularly "blinded" by religious belief. As a matter of fact I'm quite sure the average church has more than its share of apostates in attendance on any given Sunday.

 

Fanaticism comes in many forms and is certainly not restricted to religious beliefs. Far from it.

 

 

They can be my friends, family, and associates, but I will not willfully get into a relationship with someone who goes to church, reads the bible regularly, and uses religious nonsense in serious arguments.

 

Yes but all your gf asked was whether it would bother you if she went to church and took her kids. I can think of many many much worse things a significant other might be doing then---going to church (of all things). Would you perhaps prefer her to be going out to bars and getting wasted on Sunday afternoon? I mean seriously dude--I can think of few things more innocuous, and totally non-threatening,then going to church.

 

Also, what is this about the bible-hatred? It's a book of social, historical, and political significance, even if you don't buy the theology. It's a work of great literature and has had an immense influence on our culture. Again, as with the activity of going to church, I can think of many many activities which are far more damaging than....reading the bible. I mean this attitude of yours is pretty much LOL funny.

 

Certainly, you are under no obligation whatsoever to go to church, or to read the bible. But, I don't get the attitude you have that it's such a bad thing if someone else--even someone you perhaps might love, or want to get closer to--relates to religion in that way. Whether that's christianity, judaism, islam, buddhism, tao, or whatever the belief system happens to be.

 

I know plenty of people who are religious, but their religious belief is a net positive for them, and it makes them better people, all around. Then there are not-so-nice people, some of whom justify their not-niceness based on religion. It's the not-niceness part that I disagree with, not the religious part that might serve as the justification for the not-nice behavior. There are lots of people who are non-religious, or irreligious, and are just pretty crummy people to be around, but I wouldn't claim that their lack of religious belief is what necessarily makes them the way they are, either.

 

 

 

Can you be a successful couple and have wildly differing views on something that seems so important?

 

Well explain something: Are you simply an atheist (i.e. someone who does not believe in a diety/supernatural forces as being responsible for our existence) or are you someone who is hostile to the notion that someone else may harbor a religious belief that you do not share?

 

There's a difference you know. Atheism is simply absence of belief in a diety/supernatural causation. As far as I know, being an atheist doesn't require you to be intolerant of the religious belief of other people.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong about this. Does atheism require the atheist to insist that other people must also be atheists?

[troggleputty]

Until this morning, she led me to believe her religious beliefs were very informal, more of a metaphysical thing, but now it seems like she's coming out of her shell and exposing me to her true beliefs, which seem to be pretty mainstream "go to church once a week and pray every day".

 

Which, frankly, is not what I signed up for. It seems a little duplicitous.

 

 

Someotherguy,

 

why would she have gotten into some kind of a heavy philosophical discussion with you prior to recently? You've only been dating five weeks. I mean seriously, do you even know what her favorite flavor of ice cream is?

 

And based on your apparent hostility towards beliefs that you don't agree with, I'll speculate that the only reason she brought it up is because you said or did something that triggered a concern on her part about your tolerance level for differing views.

 

Coincidentally, just now by doorbell rang, it was a couple of Jehovah's Witnesses. No I don't believe in whatever they believe in (some flavor of Christianity, I don't know the details), but I had no "inner conflict" or urge to argue with them about how stupid they must be for believing in whatever they believe in. I was not threatened by them, or their beliefs, in the slightest. I wished them well, told them sorry I'm not interested, and sent them on their merry way. I don't resent them for having their beliefs, I don't resent their beliefs, nor does it bother me that as part of their belief system, they have a need to ring by doorbell and try to enlighten me. It just doesn't bother me one iota, because this is a big big world, and everyone is different. And that my friend, doesn't bother me.

 

But, getting back to your gf--why does it bug you that she would go to church once a week? So what. Stay home, watch football, and drink beer or something.

[make me believe]

Mkay I'm ignoring this ridiculous, predictible debate. (You can't even mention the word "atheist" or "atheism" without getting hounded, can you?) I am an atheist and have a similar opinion as you do about religious people, someotherguy. I would absolutely NOT be able to get into a relationship with somebody who goes to church, prays, believes in god, etc. It is most definitely a deal-breaker to me. I don't respect religion and I could never accept somebody as a life partner who doesn't feel similarly. Plus, the indoctrination of kids is disgusting to me, so if I somehow did manage to overlook my partner's religious beliefs, I would draw the line at taking the kids to church and all of that stuff.

[troggleputty]

I'm so glad honesty doesn't go unpunished.

 

As I said in my original post, if you can't be constructive, piss off. You're the one that's intolerant of my views.

 

You're the one who's complaining about your gf's religious beliefs, right? Did she tell you she didn't want to be with you because you're an atheist? Let's be honest here shall we.

 

 

 

I am open minded about other people's beliefs, I just don't want a partner that is diametrically opposed to my own belief structure.

 

EVERY other atheist I've ever heard, does not refer to atheism as a "belief structure," but rather, as an absence of belief. She believes in god; you don't. There is nothing that is "diametrically opposed" to anything.

 

The only thing that would be "diametrically opposed" is if: She believed in God and also insisted that you also believe in the same God, and you didn't want to; OR if you did not believe in God and also insisted that she not believe in God, either, and she didn't want to be an atheist like you are.

 

So far, all you've said is she believes in god and you don't.

 

Again: so what?

 

 

 

My opinion is that this is a fundamental difference of worldviews and the effects bleed into other parts of the relationship, usually in a negative fashion.

 

You're entitled to your opinion. However most of the people you meet will likely have some connection or involvement with a religious outlook or organization to some extent or another. If you want to restrict your relationships only to other atheists, then it's incumbent on YOU to make that clear to the other person on the very first date, if not before.

 

It's unfair of you to criticize your gf for having religious beliefs simply because you don't agree with them. It's also unfair for you to criticize her for not getting into this at an earlier stage of the relationship (five weeks, after all, is pretty darn early to be discussing this sort of thing). You're the one who apparently views religious belief as the "deal breaker." If you don't want to date someone who believes in god, then don't. Break up with her. What's with all the fuss and drama and "conflict" on your part.

 

 

 

For example, if the relationship culminated in marriage, we would have a split household in many respects. She and her children would be saying grace at dinner, going to bed early saturday nights, getting up early on sundays for church, going to church potlucks and other functions, building all kinds of ritual into various holidays, etc. While me and my kids would be on a completely different wavelength.

 

How do you know? If she wants to say grace at dinner, why would that bother you? If she wants to go to church on sundays, why does that bother you? Going to a potluck dinner gives you cause for offense?

 

Dude, I have to say: what the heck is wrong with you?

 

I'm not Catholic but I married a Catholic woman with a very religious mother who is very Catholic. I don't go to church (neither does my wife actually LOL) but my mother in law does "religiously." On Christmas she has the tree, gives the kids presents, Jesus this and that, when we eat dinner over there she says grace (on Easter anyway). She's a believer. I respect her beliefs even though I don't really share them (other than some of the more generic cultural standards i.e. "do unto others" etc.)

 

My mother in law is a good person. Now whether that's because of her beliefs, or in spite of her beliefs, or some mixed up combination, I can't say. But dude in this life you're going to have to learn how to get along with people who don't believe the same things you do and you're going to have to learn to do so with respect for beliefs that you don't happen to share. Now's as good a time as any and if your current gf has good qualities in other respects, i.e. whatever attracted you to her in the first place, then don't be so quick to kick her to the curb simply because you have what amounts to a philosophical disagreement concerning her ontological metaphysics. IOW you disagree with her that for all intents and purposes is pretty much meaningless.

 

It has been my experience in observing other couples that in situations like this, the religious partner generally nags the nonreligious to conform to their system, and I want to know if that is accurate, or by some coincidence have I only been exposed to one type of dichotomous relationship?

 

You know what? If you don't really want to be in a relationship with this gf, no one's forcing you. However if you do want to have a relationship you will have to make allowances for opinions about certain things that you don't agree with.

 

Which would you rather have, dude? A woman who goes to church every Sunday, and is religious, and because of those beliefs, never cheats on you, is a faithful wife and companion for your entire marriage, and takes care of you in your old age; OR a woman who shares your atheistic beliefs, but cheats on you? (I'm not saying the two are associated; I'm saying what you choose to regard as a "deal breaker" is sort of ridiculous, IMO.)

 

Life is about choices. If you want to only date an atheist, be honest, man up, break up with your gf, and tell her why.

[troggleputty]

Since we're woefully off track anyway, lol:

 

I'm still waiting to read a logical, intelligent, coherent argument for the existence of god...

 

Why? That's not the issue in your original post. The issue is whether you want to continue to have a relationship with someone who is not an atheist, and who is apparently at least somewhat religious (to the extent of going to church on sundays at least).

 

The fact that she will never be able to "prove" to your satisfaction that her religious beliefs are reasonable ones, is irrelevant.

 

I'm still curious as to why you even care. Plenty of people get married to other people and don't share their religious beliefs. It happens ALL the time.

 

You've only been going out with her for five weeks. All of a sudden you find out this girl's somewhat religious and it's like the boogeyman jumped out from your closet and said "Boo" or something.

 

 

 

Simply saying "no-one has disproved it" is total BS. You don't disprove things that don't exist.

 

So what you're saying is that you feel that something that doesn't even exist somehow threatens you? Again why do you even care.

 

 

 

Here's a very simple question: of all the gods mankind has put his collective faith in over hundreds of thousands of years, how likely is it that the Christians finally got right what millions of people before them somehow got wrong?

 

Why is Zeus or Bacchus any less likely a divine power than yahweh?

 

Dude you're an atheist. Why are you even wasting any of your time asking these questions?

[troggleputty]

Actually, you are very wrong here.

 

How many people have died in the name of one religion or another?

 

Atheists don't kill in the name of non existent gods.

 

If one definition of tolerance is "don't kill people who don't believe the same things you do", religions of every denomination fail miserably.

 

Look if anyone actually wants to learn about the merits of atheism they'd be far better off to read some of Richard Dawkins's stuff then have you try to explain it to them.

 

Is there some "rule" of atheism somewhere, that says an atheist is not allowed to have a relationship with a religious person? Or, if they do have a relationship, that the atheist has to rant on about how stupid religion is?

 

Either break up with your gf or stay with her, it really doesn't matter. But for [insert name of imaginary supernatural diety here]'s Sake, if you don't learn to "give it a rest" you won't have any relationship with her, anyway.

[JamesM]

lol.... NO. You start from such a disadvantage in this debate that in order for you to properly participate you will need to take a course on applied logic. Your god has yet to be observed by ANYONE and has yet to say OY!

 

If you were to believe the Bible as a testimony to those that have spoken and seen God, then I could easily say...yes, some have seen God. However, you have decided that using the Bible will never convince you.

 

And when someone says they have seen God, then most who do not believe God say, "That isn' t possible." So testimonials won't work.

 

BTW, usually when one starts to deride his opposition in a debate, it is a sign of a lack of something. You do best using respect and logic.

 

Actually its based entirely on subjective interpretations of their own personal experiences.

 

See....an atheist uses logic and objectivity while a theist uses only personal experience? Again, not true. Just because the conclusions are different does not mean that the reasoning is not the same. Both sides will use their own education, personal experiences and background, but that does not give one less credibility than the other.

 

Incorrect. Otherwise we would ALL be theists.

 

Actually, many people can look at the same evidences for something and draw different conclusions. And yes, they both are not right.

 

Again, there's no evidence in favor of God, so I don't know how anyone can say "people have deduced it from logic and reason."

 

Many see it differently than you. You deduce different conclusions from the same evidences.

 

And I will say it again...people look at the world and its design and draw the conclusion that there is a God and a Creator. Others see it and decide that we somehow came from non-living chemicals through some magical mixing.

 

 

Therefore, if you think God exists, the onus is on you to say why you believe that. You are picking one of many possible beliefs in the face of a lack of evidence, much like how any of the prior examples I cited lack evidence.

 

There are some questions that need answers....

1. Does God (as in a Supreme Being) exist?

2. Who is that God or what is his name?

3. Does that God need to be worshiped?

4. How should he be worshiped?

 

Deciding that there is a God is one conclusion. Deciding who that God is a second conclusion. Deciding if the god is Zeus or any other name you want to give it comes after we decide if there is a God.

 

But just because it's something that is without evidence and can't be disproven doesn't make it a "logical" conclusion. It is, literally, not logical.

 

Looking at the world and its creation and seeing that the design cannot simply be a reaction to the environment can lead one to conclude that something or someone is behind it all. I guess if you use the word logically in the sense of the philosophical word logic, then I concede, it may not be called logic. However, as one looks at a murder scene and draws conclusions as to what happened by examining the evidences, so one can look at the world and draw conclusions as to how it started based on the evidences.

 

Do you honestly believe that the fighting that used religion as an excuse would not have occurred using another excuse, were it not religion?

 

Agreed. That does not excuse the people who thought that they were doing as their religion taught, but that does not mean that this is what their religions taught. Many have been killed because of their religion as well. Still...such as in the case of Nero of Rome, this was an excuse and a scapegoat to put the blame that was really his onto someone else.

 

Blaming atheism (ie Stalin and others) or religion for a person's selfish or greedy motives is not accurate.

[ADF]

I think the issue here is less who is right and who is wrong when it comes to religion. But more your own ability to shut up and let people believe what they want to believe out of respect.

 

But why do religious people automatically get to have their ideas respected? No one else does. If someone insists the earth is flat, are we all bound to "respect" that view?

[FryFish]

Just because the conclusions are different does not mean that the reasoning is not the same

Actually that is exactly what it means.... This is the disadvantage I was talking about. To be fair though you should know that the disadvantage is not your fault and I dont hold the fact that you find yourself in the position against you. At fault is the deadly meme that is your religion.

[JamesM]

At fault is the deadly meme that is your religion.

 

Oh-oh....we have a Dawkinsite in house. The superiority of your genetics is coming through.

 

Perhaps the reverse is true. It could be that you are missing the gene that would enable you to realize that God exists. ( I like the guy's idea in which he said that those who believe in a God do so because of the "God gene." That at least makes more sense than some invisible "meme" ...in my disadvantaged mind.))

 

BTW, what does a meme look like? Can we see one? We do know that they were created...by Mr Dawkins. Perhaps he is the God he so violently argues against?

 

Apologies for the tongue in cheek humor. Perhaps that is a meme I also have.