Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I saw another post about Thai women being asked about dating Atheists.. Now marriage is more of a commitment while you can experiment when merely dating.
An Atheist as in someone who not only denies a god, but one who would actively stop you from practicing your belief.
Even if s/he does not stop you, would this be a fundamental issue for you?
I know a couple who have a loving marriage with 2 adult sons. She is deeply religious, and i believe it is partly the way she deals with her sadness about one son who has mental heath issues that are not getting resolved.
He is a cheerfully declared atheist.
Personally i will be equally uncomfortable with an atheist as I would be with one who is a fundamentalist. Between the two, the latter would be the most scary, because of the sexism involved in the strictly religious. They are just so matter of fact about it, like it is settled law.
the same perspective, same morals, and same expectations. Its not set in stone, but look at the household of your partner. That's what they are used to.
Statement of belief about god is secondary to them. I can hear all the more aggressive thinkers going off as I type this. To them I say ... whatever you say.
I saw another post about Thai women being asked about dating Atheists.. Now marriage is more of a commitment while you can experiment when merely dating.
An Atheist as in someone who not only denies a god, but one who would actively stop you from practicing your belief.
Even if s/he does not stop you, would this be a fundamental issue for you?
I know a couple who have a loving marriage with 2 adult sons. She is deeply religious, and i believe it is partly the way she deals with her sadness about one son who has mental heath issues that are not getting resolved.
He is a cheerfully declared atheist.
Personally i will be equally uncomfortable with an atheist as I would be with one who is a fundamentalist. Between the two, the latter would be the most scary, because of the sexism involved in the strictly religious. They are just so matter of fact about it, like it is settled law.
I know many atheists, and I have never known one to actively try to stop someone from practicing their belief. They may have actively stopped someone from trying to proselytize them, but they don't have a problem with a person believing whatever they wish. That's the beauty of being an atheist. I can't speak for all atheists, but I don't care what anyone believes as long as they don't hurt other living beings and they don't try to force their belief on me or others.
BTW, I didn't marry an atheist, but I ended up with one and so did he. Actually, I'm not really an atheist, but neither of us are the Christians who married over 40 years ago.
It might be. A marriage has be be give and take. Someone who feels that it's their obligation to convert you and save your soul is going to take your soul and consume it.
if you don't believe you have a soul, how can they possibly do that?
I saw another post about Thai women being asked about dating Atheists.. Now marriage is more of a commitment while you can experiment when merely dating.
I wouldn't be able to. I wouldn't be able to even date an atheist for dating to me is only in preparation for marriage. My life is centered on Jesus Christ. According to my religious beliefs to which I ascribe, marriage is primarily for the purpose of glorifying God. There would be way too much incompatibility between an atheist and I for us to marry. We would live completely different lives.
It might be. A marriage has be be give and take. Someone who feels that it's their obligation to convert you and save your soul is going to take your soul and consume it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
if you don't believe you have a soul, how can they possibly do that?
I take it that the second mention of the word "soul" in Transponder's quote was not meant to connotate one's religous inner person but rather the totality of one's thinking, persona, mental constructs, et al which constitute what we can informally called one's "soul".
Like I was once speaking to a psychology class at my alma mater (my undergraduate university) and the class was speaking about human jealousy and envy. I said to them that, as an example, I, as a male, had developed into a person who, over time, became someone who does not get jealous or envious or consternate if a woman chooses to not take me on as her love interest or life partner and even, in the end, chooses another man over me. I stated it as such:
"The way I think about it is that the female half of humanity, just like the male half of humanity, are all autonomous individuals, free spirits, free agents. I don't own their soul or beings. They don't owe me anything. They owe it to themselves to be true to themselves and do what's best for themselves with this one and only life they have to live and it is not my place to be consternate about it. Rather, I respect their personhood and their innate right to be selective and choosy (just as I and everyone else reserves the right for ourselves to be selective and choosy)."
You see how I used the term "soul" in my addressing a class of students and faculty about this subject matter? I didn't mean "soul" in any religious, theological or spiritual sense but rather connotating the mental abilities of a living being: reason, character, feeling, consciousness, personality, memory, perception, thinking, etc.
With my provided explanation here, do you understand me (and, I gather, Transponder) in our use of the word "soul"? It is not meant in the way that you imply or think.
I take it that the second mention of the word "soul" in Transponder's quote was not meant to connotate one's religous inner person but rather the totality of one's thinking, persona, mental constructs, et al which constitute what we can informally called one's "soul". Like I was once speaking to a psychology class at my alma mater (my undergraduate university) and the class was speaking about human jealousy and envy. I said to them that, as an example, I, as a male, had developd into a person who. over time, became someone who does not get jealous or envious or consternate if a woman chooses to not take me on as her love interest or life partner and even, in the end, chooses another man over me. I stated it as such: The way I think about it is that the female half of humanity, just like the male half of humanity, are all autonomous individuals, free spirits, free agents. I don't own their soul or beings. They don't owe me anything. They owe it to themselves to be true to themselves and do what's best for themselves with this one and only life they have to live and it is not my place to be consternate about it. Rather, I respect their personhood and their innate right to be selective and choosy (just as I and everyone else reserves the right for ourselves to be selective and choosy." You see how I used the term "soul" in my addressing a class of students and faculty about this subject matter? I didn't mean "soul" in any religious, theological or spiritual sense but rather connotating the mental abilities of a living being: reason, character, feeling, consciousness, personality, memory, perception, thinking, etc. With my provided explanation here, do you understand me (and, I gather, Transponder) in our use of the word "soul"? It is not meant in the way that you imply or think.
I'm not implying or thinking anything. He made the statement. I asked him a simple question about what he said.
Interestingly, there is a friend of my family (my parents), being former neighbors, and this female family friend is very religious (a lifelong devout Episcopalian and one who regularly attends church and always has) and yet, many years ago, she married a Jewish man and had children with him (all grown adults now) and is still with him. I was never informed by my mother that her Jewish-born husband was religious in any sense of the word "religious" (neither Jewish nor Christian of whatever type nor anything else). So, if her faith and practice is truly so important to her and to how she defines herself, then why oh why did she allow herself to marry someone who doesn't share her faith and practice???????
As another example: A first cousin of mine (a male cousin) married a Puerto Rican woman who is very, very devoutly Catholic and regularly attends church all her life (and she is a devout political conservative and a Republican . . . even a present-day Trump supporter). Yet she married my male first cousin who is of Jewish background and rearing and he married her and he doesn't share her faith or religious practices at all. I'd wondered to myself "Why would they marry one another, have children together, and spend a life together when they are so diametrically different in this regard?" In 2008 or 2009, my older brother was with them and she was addressing someone else about marriage and relationships and said out loud (with her husband being there alongside her) the following: "You know, if I had to do it all over again, I would have not ever married him. He never goes to church with me and doesn't share my beliefs and practices." And he, being right there, said "Really?!!???" Like this was some brand new thing conveyed to him after all these many years (decades). One would think that he should have found a woman who wasn't so religiously committed and devout. But then I more wonder about her in particular. I'd like to ask her "So, if your subscription to your Catholic faith, beliefs and practices is and has always been so very, very central to who you are, then why oh why did you marry him? There are many many many many many more Catholic males in the world than Jewish males. There are so many many many other eligible men you could have availed yourself of that you would have been compatible with. So why did you do this? It took you so many years (decades) to come to this conclusion that, in your own mind, it was a mistake to marry him (based on what you said)???"
All of these stories shared here by myself about these mentioned persons are all rather perplexing to me. Did they each really not have the insight and forethought back then to make another choice in marriage other than the choice(s) that they each made for a marriage partner?
Last edited by UsAll; 08-19-2020 at 09:21 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
