As he put it, he feel in love with the person not the belief. He doesn't push it on us, never got annoyed if we didn't go to church etc
Girlfriend is religious, I'm atheist.. Can this work?
- Thread starter Stuff
- Start date
As he put it, he feel in love with the person not the belief. He doesn't push it on us, never got annoyed if we didn't go to church etc
And her feelings towards his, obviously quite devout, views? From personal experience, someone's belief in something that cannot be proved and is completely illogical is quite frustrating. Why can't people understand what I can, etc.
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,770
- Location
- Auckland
I think the difference is tolerance. The chap above's dad sounds tolerant of other religious views whilst your girlfriend does not.
No idea, didn't see it I'm afraid! Sorry to disappoint
I don't think that's it. She wouldn't be with me if that was the case, surely? She's known my views from before we were together, so that would have been an ideal time to not get involve in anything. I think it's different when you have kids.. But what do I know[FnG]magnolia;25504569 said:
Very well put.[FnG]magnolia;25504569 said:
As long as each is willing to let the other live as they wish regarding belief then it shouldn't be a problem (assuming nobody is harmed of course).
The only exception I'd put onto that would be if I had a child & the other parent wanted to start cutting pieces of him/her in the name of said religion - personally mutilation is where I draw the line.
What you feel does not determine what other people think. I'm an atheist because I am. I don't care about the things you mention above and it's irrelevant anyway. I'm an atheist. I can't be a theist. It's not a choice - I don't believe. I could choose to fake it and pretend to be a theist, but that would just be a lie. Even if I performed all the rituals and observed all the formal prayer times of any particular religion, even if I became a cleric, I'd still be an atheist because I don't believe.
That shows very clearly that you don't know what atheism is. Atheism is not a belief. It's a lack of belief. People can't believe in a lack of belief - that is clearly nonsense.
The two aren't mutually exclusive. I can argue my point and will do if it comes up. I find religion interesting in an abstract way because it's alien to me and in a more practical way because it has large effects on humanity.
Do you believe in the existence of a god or gods?
If you don't, you're an atheist. That's what the word means.
Theists have belief in the existence of a god or gods.
Do you think that's wildly incorrect?
That's my mother's view, in all seriousness. It's internally consistent within Christianity (the omni god - omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent - is a pretty important part of the religion) and you can find direct biblical support for it if you want to (e.g. Matthew 6 in general and 6:6 in particular).
Because it defines them as not having those values.
Imagine, for example, that the values you refer to were called "white values". Which they have been in some cultures at some times.
If good values that make people civilised rather than animals are defined as being <group X> values, that means that those who are not in group X are at best not really civilised. They can't have group X values because they're not part of group X, so the best possible option is to try to civilise them by making group X their rulers...history shows where that leads.
A fair few people have said in this thread that everyone must respect religion (by which they mean religions they consider valid, of course).
Why?
Serious question. I don't mean in a relationship with a specific individual - that's crucial to the relationship. I mean in general. Why should religion command automatic respect? Why only approved religions? If someone, for example, believes that mice and dandelions are gods, why does that not command automatic respect? Why only religion? Why not, for example, a devotion to Twilight so extreme that they believe it's a true story? That belief might well be as important to a person as religion is, but it's certainly not something that other people demand everyone respects.
Why?
Serious question. I don't mean in a relationship with a specific individual - that's crucial to the relationship. I mean in general. Why should religion command automatic respect? Why only approved religions? If someone, for example, believes that mice and dandelions are gods, why does that not command automatic respect? Why only religion? Why not, for example, a devotion to Twilight so extreme that they believe it's a true story? That belief might well be as important to a person as religion is, but it's certainly not something that other people demand everyone respects.
Indeed, I think Scientology is a good example of that. People seem quick to mock it and call it a cult but if it means as much to its followers as other religions do to their followers, and it's not harming anyone, shouldn't it be given the same amount of respect?
It seems that for a lot of people, how long a religion has been around for is the determining factor in whether or not they respect it.
There's a difference between believing in God for whatever reason and following the teachings of a questionable paedophile and fraud that turned a ****** science fiction novel into a religion.
Even as an agnostic I find the comparison insulting to one's intelligence.
So you're saying the origins of the religion are the determining factor in whether it should be given respect? It doesn't matter what those beliefs actually mean to the followers of said religion?
The main differences are time and power. If Scientology gains the power it wants then after some time all anyone will know is the "revised" history it would write and the wondrous revelation of its founding prophet.
Harder to do today than in the bronze age, but the principle still stands. We see the beliefs of Scientology as silly nonsense, but the same was true of other religions when they were starting off. They were all weird cults with bizarre irrational beliefs to some people. The story of Xenu and blahblahblah isn't really any sillier than the story of the Abrahamic god and the garden of Eden, blahblahblah.
I'm saying that applying a common blanket of logic to clear outlier cases is silly and that claiming otherwise is argument for its own sake.
Outlier cases.. in your subjective opinion, of course. I doubt a Scientologist would agree.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 4,936
- Location
- Manchester.
Run for the hills.
It's an outlier case objectively. It's a very new religion any way you cut it and has courted as much controversy as the most established of religions. :/