Can an atheist marry someone of faith?

[Lightningman_42]

Hell, freshman year of high school my friend had to be evaluated for proper parenting because they were worried about the long-term effects of being raised without a mom and a dad, and in the school yearbook senior year they weren't allowed to sign their letters "Mama -- and Mama --" (as we all call them), they had to say either their names or just her parents, I can't remember what they chose.

Wow, what the fuck? This is a Catholic school, right? I'm amazed to hear about a religious school doing something like this, but a public school doing this would be even more absurd. At this particular school, does this happen to all students with 2 moms or 2 dads? Does this happen to all students raised by only 1 parent?

-back to my boyfriend- He always becomes sarcastic and snarky when I bring this up, saying things like "Well that's all we are is brainwashed catholics huh?" And then typically we stop speaking for a while.

So he'd rather make subtle implications that Catholics are not brainwashed, rather than actually presenting a well-thought-out explanation of why they're not?

He would say that if I raised my children atheist, I would be brainwashing them into believing in atheism.

This is a nonsensical comment on his part. Atheism is not something that one can "believe in"; it's just a lack of belief in any particular god(s). There are common misconceptions that:
-Atheism is a firm belief that no kind of a god-entity exists (untrue; lack of belief in something is not equivalent to belief in the opposite),
-atheism is a lack of religion (also untrue),
-atheist parents firmly insist to their children that no gods exist, and that they ought not to follow any religion.

From my own childhood experience, I can tell you that the last misconception was not true of me & my parents. I've been an atheist all my life. My parents who raised me are atheists too, but they didn't teach me to "be an atheist". They did not "indoctrinate me into atheism". They have never insisted with certainty that "no god(s) exist(s)", nor that there isn't any validity or practical use to religious teachings. They taught me to be open-minded to learning about all sorts of cultural practices, moral principles, and ideologies; and then judge their validity with my own critical-thinking skills, but not with pre-held biases. I was never taught to believe in any gods, nor was I taught not to. And guess what? I developed the default state of mind, regarding theism and religion: I never developed theism, nor belief in anything for which I didn't think that there was sufficient evidence supporting it.

To be honest, I really feel like it would be easier to be religious. It would be easier to blame all the bad things on a plan that I can't control and know that I can make up for my sins with a quick Hail Mary and a trip to the confessional. I find it a lot harder to know that every moment here on earth is the only chance I have to make an impression on people, and my hopefully, 90+ years of life are the only chance I have to leave my name in the hearts of the people I meet, good or bad. Unfortunately I made the mistake of bringing this up to my bf, and he used that as reason why I should raise my kid in faith. I just feel like I would be lying to myself and them.

This is a rather poor style of reasoning to insist on raising children in the Catholic faith (or any faith). Wanting to believe that something is a certain way does not make it so. You'd be imposing a fantasy-based worldview upon children by insisting to them that:
-heaven is definitely real, and that...
-...all of their misdeeds can be forgiven by prayin' to Jeeeezus! (without making it up to those they've actually harmed), because...

...why?

"Hey kids, an afterlife, doesn't that sound great? Would you rather there isn't an afterlife? That's no fun! So yeah, it's real!"

Without religion, kids might realize that an afterlife is unlikely (that this one life is the only that they have), and that they can only strive to be good people during the duration of there limited time in this world. If so, then I would hope that they develop an interest in helping/respecting others for their sake, and not for some "divine reward". Personally, knowing that this might be my only life, I'm optimistic that this can motivate me to make the most of it, and to leave the earth in the best condition that I can for future generations. For their sake; not to "buy my way into heaven".

[CXC0401]

This is a Catholic school, right? I'm amazed to hear about a religious school doing something like this, but a public school doing this would be even more absurd. At this particular school, does this happen to all students with 2 moms or 2 dads? Does this happen to all students raised by only 1 parent?

Catholic, yes. To be honest they were the only same sex parents, at least while I was there. And no, not for single parents.

So he'd rather make subtle implications that Catholics are not brainwashed, rather than actually presenting a well-thought-out explanation of why they're not?

Well he says he chooses his own faith, and that even if he were to choose all over again he would still choose this faith. But because he is a philosophy buff and studies logic, I hate debating with him because my first fallacy is attacked upon, even though I can sometimes catch it when he makes false claims. I am not really all that good at debating and I don't want to get in a yelling match with him. Like I always see people claiming that religion holds strawman fallacies, but to be honest I have no idea what that means and google confuses me.

This is a nonsensical comment on his part. Atheism is not something that one can "believe in"; it's just a lack of belief in any particular god(s).

We actually just had this discussion the other night. His philosophy professor said that even though it is not a belief in a god, it does follow a belief. I tried to explain to him that atheism is not a belief, but he was very persistent. And I got caught up in what he was saying and (not exactly gave in) but agreed to disagree. Yet the next morning I was pissed off at myself for allowing it and should have pushed the card. If I can't get that simple point across, how can I debate the deeper issues?

Further, now he is getting more and more submerged in his Catholic Fraternity. He says he is doing research and listening to both sides of the arguments and trying to see where I'm coming from, but I feel like he's emerging himself in this frat almost overload than he was even six months ago. And he knows I'm against fraternities (for different reasons other than the fact that it's catholic) but says he feels like it's great for networking and a sense of brotherhood just like sports. I feel like it's more like a club. Useful for the time you're in it, and maybe a year after... but truthfully no one really cares. But I'm sure that if he ever needed a kidney one of his brother's would step up for him.... and pray about it.

Personally, knowing that this might be my only life, I'm optimistic that this can motivate me to make the most of it, and to leave the earth in the best condition that I can for future generations. For their sake; not to "buy my way into heaven".

I mean, he believes that in general religion is good for us. he believes that morals come from god and that even if you grew up atheist that the morals are written on the hearts of all humans anyway. He believes that god creates us for a purpose (which why would a god that wants us to believe in him to only create atheists... maybe to challenge him in his faith since he's so much more special?). He believes that America was founded on a Christian faith. He believes that we have a soul. He believes in evolution. He believes that god is outside of time and anything physical, and is the only plausible cause of the universe. He believes that stories in the bible are used for moral purposes... meaning Adam and Eve were used to represent the power of god, not as a historical novel as with other stories of the bible. He believes marriage is a religious institution and should be separate from the state. He believes monogamy has a religious base.

Yet... he doesn't go to church every weekend. We've had premarital sex. He swears. I dunno. While I know that anyone can be a hypocrite and no one is perfect, i find this really frustrating. And one of the discussions we had before engaging in sex (I know this is super personal, but I just need advice from SOMEONE) that this couldn't be held against his as a reason not to raise his children catholic. Because lots of religious people have sex before they're married anyways.

I dunno. I just don't know how to approach him with any of this.

[garrethdsouza]

Morality comes from God? Ya that is their easily debunked authoritarian nonsense. It is the foundational stone of religion particularly abrahamic religions. The story of Abraham itself is telling on how they want you to blindly believe and obey authority and to not think for yourself nor question authority/religion.

God tells Abraham to kill his son and does not provide any reason. The right thing to do would have been to at least demand an explanation but nope, blindly obeying authority is the thing they want to instill. It is such a vile story and you can see why so many evil things were done before. Simply because the bible/God "said so"

Why is slavery OK/killing homosexuals/homophobia/subjugation of women OK? Because the bible/quran says so, that was the thinking of people in the past and to an extent today.

That is how it is characterised right? Doubt/questioning is always seen as a bad thing. Take the story of "doubting Thomas" for instance, a person who was just being intellectually honest is touted as the bad the guy in some sense.

There are many similar instances, like proverbs 3:5
"Trust in the lord with all your HEART and lean NOT on your own understanding;"

Do.Not.Think. Do.Not.Question.

The morality comes from God/authority argument , the authoritarian divine-command/deontological morality that has been talked elsewhere on this forum is easily dismissed and morally bankrupt. This article, though a bit of a read, is very good. I encourage you to read it. It addresses this issue well.

Basically if morality comes from authority then even the most heinous acts can be moral simply if the authority has permitted it and even the most harmless or beneficial acts can be immoral if the authority has forbidden it. Irrational. Morally bankrupt.

http://www.skeptic.ca/Biblical_Ethics.htm

An excerpt,

Plato asked Divine-Command moralists, are actions right because God commands them, or does God command them because they are right? If the latter is true, then actions are right indepen­dent of whether God commands them, and God is not needed to underwrite the authority of morality. But if the former is true, then God could make any action right simply by willing it or by ordering others to do it. This establishes that, if the authority of morality depends on God's will, then, in principle, anything is permitted.

This is basically euthyphros dilemma. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma

Regarding your location I'm sure there are local atheist groups online, eg on Facebook, where you're at.. Arizona?

[CXC0401]

Doubt/questioning is always seen as a bad thing. Take the story of "doubting Thomas" for instance, a person who was just being intellectually honest is touted as the bad the guy in some sense.

I never thought of that story like that... it's been so long since I've read the bible that I forgot what passages are in there.

There are many similar instances, like proverbs 3:5
"Trust in the lord with all your HEART and lean NOT on your own understanding;"

Do.Not.Think. Do.Not.Question.

I mean without being rude or calling them out I don't know how to get the point across that they behave more like sheeple than anything else.

Basically if morality comes from authority then even the most heinous acts can be moral simply if the authority has permitted it and even the most harmless or beneficial acts can be immoral if the authority has forbidden it. Irrational. Morally bankrupt.

I read through the article and it was very good, but I guess it's just tough because there is not really a clear HERE IS WHERE MORALITY COMES FROM argument. I would say it comes from evolution and the nature of animals that survive on a social culture, like most apes. I don't know if someone said it on here or I saw it in a documentary but we see evidence that monkeys and dolphins display altruistic behavior today, but according to religion only humans have souls, and thus morals. So there would be ABSOLUTELY no reason for animals without souls, i.e. everything else, to behave in a way that does not benefit them directly. But still there is a 'it is inherently written in our hearts' type of mentality.

Regarding your location I'm sure there are local atheist groups online, eg on Facebook, where you're at.. Arizona?

Which is why I came here No really I did look at some sites and stuff where there are meetings where I live... but the south side of town gets a bit sketchy. I would love to have sit down conversations with people, though, just because it's SO much easier than waiting on responses over days at a time, especially when I know I cannot get on all the time.

[brimstoneSalad]

I read through the article and it was very good, but I guess it's just tough because there is not really a clear HERE IS WHERE MORALITY COMES FROM argument.

And then it comes back to veganism.
Secular morality can not be substantiated except by applying it consistently to all sentient beings (to the extent they are sentient).
It comes down to respecting the interests of others to live, be happy, etc. regardless of race, creed, or arbitrary species boundaries. Essentially being altruistic.

Vegan atheists are the greatest threat to religion, because we can make a sound argument for morality without a god, and prove we can follow through.
Dawkins can talk the talk about animals being sentient and it being wrong to harm them, and vegans being better people, but he doesn't walk the walk, so religious people can just point at him and say: "Look, this is what Atheism does. He knows the right thing to do, but he won't do it because he can't be bothered. Without god and the threat of hell, people will be hedonists."

I would say it comes from evolution and the nature of animals that survive on a social culture, like most apes.

That would be an appeal to nature fallacy, as I'm sure he'd tell you.
Morality is conceptual and philosophical in nature; it exists regardless of our biology.

Of course, some other intelligent and social animals also have a general concept of morality; we can be either biologically wired or socially conditioned to value moral altruistic behavior. This is incidental, though, and doesn't support or justify the concept of morality in itself. Morality has to stand on its own in philosophy, not lean on appeals to nature or instinct.

[Mateo3112]

My father is a christian, my mother is not. They rarely talk about religion though, so that might be the answer.

[CXC0401]

My father is a christian, my mother is not. They rarely talk about religion though, so that might be the answer.

And, if I may ask, how were you raised? And have you talked with your mother about how this worked out for her?

[CXC0401]

That would be an appeal to nature fallacy, as I'm sure he'd tell you.
Morality is conceptual and philosophical in nature; it exists regardless of our biology.

Of course, some other intelligent and social animals also have a general concept of morality; we can be either biologically wired or socially conditioned to value moral altruistic behavior. This is incidental, though, and doesn't support or justify the concept of morality in itself. Morality has to stand on its own in philosophy, not lean on appeals to nature or instinct.

Which, again, is why I hate debating with him. I just don't want to make any mistakes in my logic that allows him to 'win' the debate in a scoring sense, but have no further understanding of my position in any of this.

And while I understand that it actually makes no headway in where it comes from, and is a fallacy, I just don't think it can be ignored either. I think some people think if we were all atheist we would run around killing people for sh!ts and giggles (or eating babies... even though I don't know how that phrase was coined). But that's not how nature works in the first place.

[brimstoneSalad]

And while I understand that it actually makes no headway in where it comes from, and is a fallacy, I just don't think it can be ignored either. I think some people think if we were all atheist we would run around killing people for sh!ts and giggles (or eating babies... even though I don't know how that phrase was coined).

It's actually an empirical argument, not a fallacy.

And objectively speaking most people actually do a lot worse than eating babies. E.g. eating fully grown pigs, which scientifically speaking, are more intelligent and sentient than babies (because babies' brains are not fully formed yet).

Any atheist who eats pigs, knowing this fact, might as well be eating babies for as moral as it is.
The difference for theists is that they believe only humans have souls, so they are ignorant of these facts (They "know not what they do").

Important question in philosophy: Is knowingly doing a bad thing worse than unknowingly doing it?
Surely, in the least, it's more appropriate to label the person who knowingly does wrong as evil than the one who does it in ignorance (although ignorance itself can be a form of evil).

So the argument "We should promote religion as true, whether or not it is actually true, because the results are more moral than atheism." can actually be very compelling.
It's a very good argument: The best argument theists make.

Dawkins himself is evidence that atheists can't be bothered to even abstain from actions they know are evil (e.g. supporting animal cruelty by being consumers of animal products when it's not necessary).
It's only atheists who are vegan who really threaten religion, because they are logically and consistently following where secular ethics lead.

[ari]

yes !
of course