NationStates Jolt Archive

... If I was dressed I would have said fuck her and left, but for now I am asking for advice.

I advise you to get dressed.

I changed this letter to apply to your situation:


Dear Mom:

It is with great regret and sorrow that I'm writing you. I had to elope with my new girlfriend because I wanted to avoid a scene with you. I have been finding real passion with Stacy and she is so nice. But I knew you would not approve of her because of all her piercings, tattoos, tight motorcycle clothes and the fact that she is much older than I am. But it's not only the passion...Mom she's pregnant. Stacy said that we will be very happy. She owns a trailer in the woods and has a stack of firewood for the whole winter. We share a dream of having many more children.

Stacy has opened my eyes to the fact that marijuana doesn't really hurt anyone.We'll be growing it for ourselves and trading it with the other people that live nearby for cocaine and ecstasy. In the meantime we will pray that science will find a cure for AIDS so Stacy can get better. She deserves it. Don't worry Mom. I'm 16 and I know how to take care of myself. Someday I'm sure that we will be back to visit so that you can get to know your grandchildren.

Love,
Your Son


P.S. Mom, none of the above is true. I'm over at Tommy's house. I just wanted to remind you that there are worse things in life than not blindly following the Christian faith.

I love you.
Call me when it's safe to come home.

:(
Too many lines for a sig!
:( :(

I'm sure he probably insults it by eating cheap thirteen cent Raman noodles or something.

Sigworthy.

Do you get off on confrontation?
Don't most of the fun and memorable posters here do?

My problem is motivation, but I'm sure I'll find that in the next few years when my political footings are established :D

You came to the right place, boy howdy.

I dare you to find one society in the world that has a majority of non religious people.

Sweden

you don't have to respect their beliefs, you should have enough respect for them to follow their rules, if you do not, then perhaps you should move out.

So it's a choice between following any rule they set without question or living on the street?

Good thing my parents weren't inclined to set completely unreasonable rules

So a general should take advice from a private.

A child is a child. A child does not have the experience and wisdom of age.

A parent was 16 and understands that age. A parent has (hopefully) lived more than twice that many years and experienced the troubles and joys of those years.

Respect is not mutual. Respect is earned or lost every day. A parent has a lifetime to earn (or lose) and stockpile respect. A child of 16 has just began to even think about what respect might be. What little respect they deserve comes from studying hard and keeping their a-- out of trouble. The parent has had to do that for twice as long and built a family on top of it (and that is far more than a 16 year old can comprehend.)

Remember what you said today and you will know how green you were 10 years from now.

Personally, I think the world would be a much better place without generals and privates altogether.

And judging from the situation described by the OP, his mother doesn't exactly understand neither him nor his age very well, I have to say.
I respect people - no matter what their age might be - for thinking for themselves. I have no respect whatsoever for people who just put up with bad situations because it's what's expected of them. Thinking like that ruined half of my own life, and if it hadn't been for me standing up to my father and showing my mother that there are in fact other ways to live her life than just to shut up and take it all, my mother and brothers wouldn't be were they are today and be happy.

Age CAN bring experience, but more often than not it doesn't. And I'm saying that as a mid-30s person. I've met teenagers with more sense and understanding than most of the 30-year-olds I work with every day. And I'll still be saying that in 10 years time, believe me.

Ok so i am 16 and living with a zealot. My mom is a nutter. She has known me to be an agnostic for a year now but for awhile refused to accept it on the grounds that I was not acting like a normal 'evil' kid. (ive never even had a detention) So this morning when I wanted to stay home and relax instead of going to chuch it finally came to light that I wasn't a christian. Now I am restricted from doing anything that isn't 'christian' and reading my bible and going to church are a requirement for even living here. If I was dressed I would have said fuck her and left, but for now I am asking for advice.

Advice? Hm.. How old is your mother and are there stairs in your house?

NO. Everyone in a position of authority deserves respect until they do something to lose it. If a mother is a druggie or drunk or abuser then the right of respect is given up.
Obviously I object to the idea that ANYBODY can ever be in a position of authority without earning that place. But even if I agree with you for the sake of argument on that point, you've still gotten nowhere because a mother who is an authoritarian theocratic asshat has just as obviously given up any right she may have had to be respected by her child. She's acting like a spoilt child who throws a tantrum when she can't have her way, so she deserves to be treated like one.

Since she--undeservedly--enjoys the status of legal adulthood, her minor child is probably going to be best off humoring her and placating her until he can legally ditch her. I'd suggest spending the next couple of years writing a polite, thoughtful letter that explains to her in detail how her behavior ruined any shot at a respectful and mutually nurturing relationship. Deliver it to her on the day you move out, and then cut her out of your life. Whatever you do, don't ever let her be alone with any children you have in the future. I'd suggest not letting her see them at all, but that's probably too harsh for most people, so instead I'd just say that you should never leave children with her unsupervised.

There is a difference between doing something you find unpleasant for an employer than being forced to read the Bible and attend mass. At least for the employer it is only for that one assignment and the sooner you finish it the sooner you no longer are dealing with it . Further, believing in what you're doing doesn't stop you from gaining nothing. You still have a pay cheque coming out of it.

The kid stands to gain nothing from going to church and reading the bible if he truly doesn't believe it. If there is no desire; no belief, there is no incentive.

For the job you suck it up because you are aware of potential incentives.
More importantly: at the job, you have agreed to do a given set of tasks in exchange for pay. Presumably you sought out the job, and you have agreed to perform it.

The parent-child relationship has a much more severe power imbalance. A child cannot simply "quit" his family if they treat him unfairly, and go find a new family. A child has precious little bargaining power at all in the relationship. This is why it is so pathetic and dishonorable when a parent abuses their status. They are picking on somebody who is essentially helpless.

I have less respect for this type of parent than I have for schoolyard bullies. At least the bullies have the excuse of being children.

I think the fundamental problem is that you assume that children should learn to obey authority. I disagree completley.
Agreed.

If you want your child to be a perfect mark for any and all exploitative asshats in the world, please follow GL's parenting advice.

If, on the other hand, you want your kid to be stable, capable, and independent, don't teach your kid to be a blind automaton who reflexively kowtows to any perceived authority.

Agreed.

If you want your child to be a perfect mark for any and all exploitative asshats in the world, please follow GL's parenting advice.

If, on the other hand, you want your kid to be stable, capable, and independent, don't teach your kid to be a blind automaton who reflexively kowtows to any perceived authority.

Exactly.

There is nothing that says you can't question authority while still being courteous. Being taught about courtesy/civility doesn't make one exploitable, it helps one to be a functioning member of society.

So it's a choice between following any rule they set without question or living on the street?

Good thing my parents weren't inclined to set completely unreasonable rules
Speaking as somebody who left home as a teen...

Yes.

One thing I sorted out over time was that my parents' rules govern their home. It's their home, and when I am in their home I abide their rules. When I realized I could not abide by their rules, I left their home.

Let me tell you all a little something about leaving home at 15. It sucks.

It's not cool and romantic and exciting like those hip street kids in the movies make it seem. It's actually very boring and smelly. It's also kind of embarrassing if you plan to stay in school, because eventually one of your friends is going to notice that you shower in the gym every day before classes and you've only got the one pair of jeans.

Staying in your parents' home for a couple more years is probably going to be easier, in the physical sense. But you have to decide if it's worth it. You have to view it as a cost-benefit swap. Are you willing to "pay" for the physical comfort and ease of your lifestyle at home? The "payment" will be behavior. You will have to swallow your pride and follow rules that you think are fucking stupid. You will have to show your white underbelly in submission, even when your parents are doing something you think is fucking stupid.

In retrospect, my life would have been much easier if I'd done that. But I really and truly believe that my relationship with my parents would not have survived it. I would not have been able to mend things with them the way I have.

It's a shitty trade-off, really.

Everyone in a position of authority deserves respect until they do something to lose it.Nobody in a "position of authority" deserves respect until they do something to earn it. And authority that comes from a position but not the person is vain anyways.

Exactly.

There is nothing that says you can't question authority while still being courteous. Being taught about courtesy/civility doesn't make one exploitable, it helps one to be a functioning member of society.
One of the most useful and important lessons my mom ever taught me was the polite ways to say "no."

I was one of those goodie-two-shoes kids when I was small, and I would go along with just about anything in order to please people. This particularly was a problem in stores (odd as that may sound) because I simply couldn't bring myself to tell the sales people "no." I'd buy anything they suggested because I didn't want to say "no." (That would be rude!)

I also had a problem when I got my first jobs, because my boss could ask me to do literally anything and I would agree to do it. I stayed 4 hours overtime for no pay one time (and I was 14 when this happened, so it was also very illegal for them to do this). Mom was pissed, and immediately focused on getting me to assert myself. Learning how to say "no" with respect is an absolutely ESSENTIAL skill. At least in America.

Oh, and just to put this in the context of my earlier post: No, Mom's lesson didn't come back to bite her in the ass when I left home. I actually wasn't remotely polite about that.

16 is quite old enough to make an informative decision reguarding organized religion. The OP stated he was agnostic, not atheist. That to me shows thought was given to the decision. He's simply rejected his parents religion as having all the answers, not rejected the possibility of a higher power altogether.

I wonder if GL's response would have been the same if the OP had stated a desire to convert to a christian religion from some other sect.

Or if he had stated a desire to assert himself reguarding some other personal belief, such as converting to a strictly vegetarian diet.

The magic age of 18 for most legal aspects of adulthood doesn't apply to personal beliefs.

Sweden

And Japan, if I remember correctly.

Bide your time and hold on to the fact that at some point in your life you get to put her into a home.

So it's a choice between following any rule they set without question or living on the street?

Good thing my parents weren't inclined to set completely unreasonable rules

I didn't say he couldn't question it, I said he should try to be respectful. He was given advice to do drugs, have sex, tell his mom to fuck off, cause a scene in church, and basically be an asshole, I said doing all of that probably wouldn't help his case that he shouldn't have to go to church. I said that telling his mom to fuck off probably won't make her a happy accepting person and it probably won't cause her to leave him alone. If his goal is for her to accept his religious choice or at the very least stop treating him like a child, maybe he should act like a responsible civil person. There is no reason he can't tell her in a respectful way that he does not believe what she does, there is no reason he can't go to church and be respectful of their beliefs without participating, there is no reason he can't live in her house and treat her with kindness and courtesy all the while disagreeing with her.

Again, I don't think the mom is right in this situation, but just because she is wrong doesn't mean he has to be too.

I didn't say he couldn't question it, I said he should try to be respectful. He was given advice to do drugs, have sex, tell his mom to fuck off, cause a scene in church, and basically be an asshole, I said doing all of that probably wouldn't help his case that he shouldn't have to go to church. I said that telling his mom to fuck off probably won't make her a happy accepting person and it probably won't cause her to leave him alone. If his goal is for her to accept his religious choice or at the very least stop treating him like a child, maybe he should act like a responsible civil person. There is no reason he can't tell her in a respectful way that he does not believe what she does, there is no reason he can't go to church and be respectful of their beliefs without participating, there is no reason he can't live in her house and treat her with kindness and courtesy all the while disagreeing with her.

Again, I don't think the mom is right in this situation, but just because she is wrong doesn't mean he has to be too.

In that case, what exactly did you think was wrong with my proposition of following his mothers orders and go to church, but without participating in anything, and to offer an explanation for why he's doing that when asked for one?
The way I see it his mother doesn't want to hear any of his reasons right now, so demonstrating to her that he does in fact have an issue other than being to lazy to get up on a Sunday morning might in fact actually make her ask him. Who knows, she might even listen. Although I don't have much hope there, but who knows?

One of the most useful and important lessons my mom ever taught me was the polite ways to say "no."

I was one of those goodie-two-shoes kids when I was small, and I would go along with just about anything in order to please people. This particularly was a problem in stores (odd as that may sound) because I simply couldn't bring myself to tell the sales people "no." I'd buy anything they suggested because I didn't want to say "no." (That would be rude!)

I also had a problem when I got my first jobs, because my boss could ask me to do literally anything and I would agree to do it. I stayed 4 hours overtime for no pay one time (and I was 14 when this happened, so it was also very illegal for them to do this). Mom was pissed, and immediately focused on getting me to assert myself. Learning how to say "no" with respect is an absolutely ESSENTIAL skill. At least in America.

Oh, and just to put this in the context of my earlier post: No, Mom's lesson didn't come back to bite her in the ass when I left home. I actually wasn't remotely polite about that.

I doubt she noticed. She was probably already dialing everyone on the block for a "Bottle's out of the house Party!" :D

In that case, what exactly did you think was wrong with my proposition of following his mothers orders and go to church, but without participating in anything, and to offer an explanation for why he's doing that when asked for one?
The way I see it his mother doesn't want to hear any of his reasons right now, so demonstrating to her that he does in fact have an issue other than being to lazy to get up on a Sunday morning might in fact actually make her ask him. Who knows, she might even listen. Although I don't have much hope there, but who knows?

I don't really have too much of a problem with it, I guess. It depends on how it's handled. If he makes a scene by not participating it's a problem for me, but if he were to stand while they stand and sit when they sit, but just not sing or pray or whatever it's not a big deal, but if he is going to be distracting, it's not very courteous.

I don't really have too much of a problem with it, I guess. It depends on how it's handled. If he makes a scene by not participating it's a problem for me, but if he were to stand while they stand and sit when they sit, but just not sing or pray or whatever it's not a big deal, but if he is going to be distracting, it's not very courteous.

Just sitting there doing nothing can hardly be called distracting, can it?
I never advocated yelling profanities at the priest and taking a dump in front of the altar or anything ;)
"Passive resistance" was the expression used by someone, and I agree with that.

Sure, it would be nice if there wasn't a problem. But there is one, he does have a problem with his mother forcing him to do things that go against his beliefs and that he disagrees with. Keeping silent about it won't magic the problem away, it'll find a way out. And the longer it's kept silent, the bigger it becomes in my experience.
What he and his mother need is a good talk to sort things out, but currently she sounds way too emotional and irrational for that (and I wouldn't be surprised if he was, too). So letting the situation calm down a bit by reaching a compromise, but still making sure that it's obvious he's protesting the treatment might provide a basis for dialogue.

I doubt she noticed. She was probably already dialing everyone on the block for a "Bottle's out of the house Party!" :D
I certainly have my suspicions. My dad turned my old room into his new office mighty fast...;)

Just sitting there doing nothing can hardly be called distracting, can it?
I never advocated yelling profanities at the priest and taking a dump in front of the altar or anything ;)
"Passive resistance" was the expression used by someone, and I agree with that.

Sure, it would be nice if there wasn't a problem. But there is one, he does have a problem with his mother forcing him to do things that go against his beliefs and that he disagrees with. Keeping silent about it won't magic the problem away, it'll find a way out. And the longer it's kept silent, the bigger it becomes in my experience.
What he and his mother need is a good talk to sort things out, but currently she sounds way too emotional and irrational for that (and I wouldn't be surprised if he was, too). So letting the situation calm down a bit by reaching a compromise, but still making sure that it's obvious he's protesting the treatment might provide a basis for dialogue.

I think you and I are nearly on the same page. ;)

After re-reading CW's post about passive resistance, I thought of a strange way of exhibiting this passive resistance that would probably irk his mother without actually disrupting the service.

She said he had to go to church, right? Nothing about going in? What if upon arriving he decided that since he was now at church, he was going to sit (calmly) on the steps outside until service was over? After all, he's still at church, right? There was no mention about him having to go inside.

After re-reading CW's post about passive resistance, I thought of a strange way of exhibiting this passive resistance that would probably irk his mother without actually disrupting the service.

She said he had to go to church, right? Nothing about going in? What if upon arriving he decided that since he was now at church, he was going to sit (calmly) on the steps outside until service was over? After all, he's still at church, right? There was no mention about him having to go inside.

Nah, I think it might be better to avoid being childish. He'd just be playing into his mother's hands that way. ;)

Nah, I think it might be better to avoid being childish. He'd just be playing into his mother's hands that way. ;)

True this. ;) But still, it is a technicality, as she said he had to go to church but nothing about going inside.

True this. ;) But still, it is a technicality, as she said he had to go to church but nothing about going inside.

I think it might be more effective to just bring a book and spend the time quietly reading.

To the OP, look I think you might be overreacting. I used to be in a similar situation to you, see I used to be Muslim and when I lost faith my parents were extremely upset initially. They never forced me to pray or anything against my will but we did constantly exchange harsh words with one another. At one point I decided that enough was enough, I sat them down and explained to them calmly that I didn't mean them any disrespect by my apostasy but at the same time, I thought it was stupid to beleive in things on the basis of faith rather than evidence, that I disliked certan aspects of Islam and finally, that it was arrogant to think that out of all the faiths that have ever existed that we just happened to be born and raised in the right one. I made sure I explained my stance courteously and respectfully, and after that they've come to respect the fact that I have the right to make my own decisions and use my mind to come to my own conclusions. I've never had any problems with them since and I have a wonderful relationship with them.

I know it can be very appealing to respond aggresively to every arrogant demand and remark your Mom makes, I admit I succumbed a few times but I can also tell you from experience that it's completely counterproductive. To a certain extent you have to be able to sympathise with them, see my parents and I come from a country where religion is forced on us, thats right if your'e a citizen of the Maldives you are required to be a Muslim, so growing up in that culture they were never taught to question and analyse their beleifs, so I thought it was understandable that they would be upset because from their perspective I'm sort for betraying their entire culture. Now, for whatever reason I'll just guess that you're from the U.S, and at least legally you have freedom of religion so maybe in your case I'm guessing that your parents just grew up in a religious household. You have to understand that they've beleived what they beleive for a very long time now and are probably less open to new ways of thinking as opposed to someone your age. Their faith is important to them, and they think that if they don't pass on their beleif system that they've failed as parents, once again this is from experience with parents, couple that with the fact that they beleive in hell and desperately don't want their son to go there you can expect them to be at least mildy upset with your decision. Basically what I'm trying to say is that try to understand it from your parents point of view as well instead of dismissing them as zealots. Find a courteous, productive way of communicating with them in justifying your new beleifs ad help them become more comfortable with it. Also, consider the fact that all your parents want to do is you to give up 2 hours of your Sunday, be thankful that their not Muslim because ramadans just around the corner lol. (My parents actually don't mind me not fasting but my super religious Aunt, who doesnt know I'm an apostate is staying over for the month:( ).

I think it might be more effective to just bring a book and spend the time quietly reading.
I've got a book by Christopher Hitchens that would certainly be worth bringing along...

I've got a book by Christopher Hitchens that would certainly be worth bringing along...

I was going to suggest Dawkins, it would fit the occasion so well :D

Hey, my mom is still off the the deep-end when it comes to what she believes about Christianity. I had to deal with it all the way till my 3rd year of college when I finally told her that some of her ideas were wrong. At that point she disowned me. Rather extreme reaction on her part. And i still don't agree with her on a lot of issues, course she hasn't talked to me in about 2 years. Didn't even come to my wedding (to a Christian). btw I am a Christian now. I went through agnosticism, and found it wanting. Honestly, when it comes to agnosticism, you are either one of two kinds of agnostics. You are either searching to find out if there is a God, or you are there because you can't disprove God, but you don't want Gd to be real. now maybe I made the box too small... if so, C'est la vie. Now i know that my mom will not listen to reason, have tried that, maybe yours won't either. But that is a good place to start, and honestly, maybe something will make sense the other way around too.

Life has no other discipline to impose, if we would but realize it, than to accept life unquestioningly. Everything we shut our eyes to, everything we run away from, everything we deny, denigrate, or despise, serves to defeat us in the end. What seems nasty, painful, evil, can become a source of beauty, joy, and strength, if faced with an open mind. Every moment is a golden one for him who has the vision to recognize it as such.
Henry Miller (1891 - 1980)

I was going to suggest Dawkins, it would fit the occasion so well :D

The End of Faith (http://www.samharris.org/site/book_end_of_faith) works well too. Or fail that, a Harry Potter book would work well...

And Japan, if I remember correctly.
Let it be known that the UK now fits this catagory.

Back in Ye olde days, you had the village atheist. Now it's the village believer.

Sweden

CIA Factbook

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sw.html#People
Religions:


Definition Field Listing
Lutheran 87%, other (includes Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist) 13%

I didn't say he couldn't question it, I said he should try to be respectful. He was given advice to do drugs, have sex, tell his mom to fuck off, cause a scene in church, and basically be an asshole, I said doing all of that probably wouldn't help his case that he shouldn't have to go to church. I said that telling his mom to fuck off probably won't make her a happy accepting person and it probably won't cause her to leave him alone. If his goal is for her to accept his religious choice or at the very least stop treating him like a child, maybe he should act like a responsible civil person. There is no reason he can't tell her in a respectful way that he does not believe what she does, there is no reason he can't go to church and be respectful of their beliefs without participating, there is no reason he can't live in her house and treat her with kindness and courtesy all the while disagreeing with her.

Again, I don't think the mom is right in this situation, but just because she is wrong doesn't mean he has to be too.

I'm sorry? Standing up for yourself, having casual sex and, god forbid, taking recreational drugs, make one an asshole? That makes pretty much most young people I know assholes....:rolleyes:

Ever heard of the 21st century? Try visiting at some point, it's a ball.

CIA Factbook

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sw.html#People
Religions:


Definition Field Listing
Lutheran 87%, other (includes Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist) 13%

And actively practising of those who identify themselves as part of a certain religious group? It's easy to quote statistics...


But those stats don't take into account the percentage that actively practice versus those who merely associate themselves with a certain religion without being active.

I dare you to find one society in the world that has a majority of non religious people.

Netherlands (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nl.html#People)
Religions: Roman Catholic 31%, Dutch Reformed 13%, Calvinist 7%, Muslim 5.5%, other 2.5%, none 41% (2002)

China (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html#People)
Religions: Daoist (Taoist), Buddhist, Christian 3%-4%, Muslim 1%-2%
note: officially atheist (2002 est.)

Russia (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rs.html#People)
Religions: Russian Orthodox 15-20%, Muslim 10-15%, other Christian 2% (2006 est.)
note: estimates are of practicing worshipers; Russia has large populations of non-practicing believers and non-believers, a legacy of over seven decades of Soviet rule

I found two. I'm sure I can find more.

EDIT - Make that three. I'm still looking.

Just sitting there doing nothing can hardly be called distracting, can it?
I never advocated yelling profanities at the priest and taking a dump in front of the altar or anything ;)
"Passive resistance" was the expression used by someone, and I agree with that.

Sure, it would be nice if there wasn't a problem. But there is one, he does have a problem with his mother forcing him to do things that go against his beliefs and that he disagrees with. Keeping silent about it won't magic the problem away, it'll find a way out. And the longer it's kept silent, the bigger it becomes in my experience.
What he and his mother need is a good talk to sort things out, but currently she sounds way too emotional and irrational for that (and I wouldn't be surprised if he was, too). So letting the situation calm down a bit by reaching a compromise, but still making sure that it's obvious he's protesting the treatment might provide a basis for dialogue.

This is a good suggestion in the fact that it will become obvious to everyone in the church that he is just a teen having a temper tantrum. I'll bet this happens with several teens every year. They will all nod an understanding look to the mother.

CIA Factbook

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sw.html#People
Religions:


Definition Field Listing
Lutheran 87%, other (includes Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist) 13%

Percentage of the religious that are Lutheran. Unless you are saying that Sweden is 100% religious

Fail

And Japan, if I remember correctly.
CIA Factbook


https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html


Religions:
Definition Field Listing
observe both Shinto and Buddhist 84%, other 16% (including Christian 0.7%)

CIA Factbook


https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html


Religions:
Definition Field Listing
observe both Shinto and Buddhist 84%, other 16% (including Christian 0.7%)

You never did say Atheist, you said non-religious. Which isn't the same thing.

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

46 to 85% of Swedish folk claim to have no religion.
51.8% of Japanese folk claim to have no religion.

CIA Factbook


https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html


Religions:
Definition Field Listing
observe both Shinto and Buddhist 84%, other 16% (including Christian 0.7%)

Hmmm so you're going to ignore the fact that it is giving a breakdown of what religious people believe in rather than what the population believes in

This is a good suggestion in the fact that it will become obvious to everyone in the church that he is just a teen having a temper tantrum. I'll bet this happens with several teens every year. They will all nod an understanding look to the mother.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but do you really think a surly agnostic teenager is interested in currying favor from his rabidly-religious authoritarian mother's church friends?

My general rule is that if the Church ladies are looking at me with disapproval then I'm probably making a good choice. :D

And actively practising of those who identify themselves as part of a certain religious group? It's easy to quote statistics...


But those stats don't take into account the percentage that actively practice versus those who merely associate themselves with a certain religion without being active.



Netherlands (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nl.html#People)
Religions: Roman Catholic 31%, Dutch Reformed 13%, Calvinist 7%, Muslim 5.5%, other 2.5%, none 41% (2002)

China (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html#People)
Religions: Daoist (Taoist), Buddhist, Christian 3%-4%, Muslim 1%-2%
note: officially atheist (2002 est.)

Russia (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rs.html#People)
Religions: Russian Orthodox 15-20%, Muslim 10-15%, other Christian 2% (2006 est.)
note: estimates are of practicing worshipers; Russia has large populations of non-practicing believers and non-believers, a legacy of over seven decades of Soviet rule

I found two. I'm sure I can find more.

EDIT - Make that three. I'm still looking.
Being active (showing up once per week) doesn't matter. Religion is still a part of the belief system of over half.

If you add up the totals the only one you have a possibility of is China. Since it is illegal to belong to a religion in China it would be hard to find out what the total is. The Catholic church won't even say how many Cardinals are there since they would be killed. If China changes it's legal position, I'll bet over half are religious.

Ok so i am 16 and living with a zealot. My mom is a nutter. She has known me to be an agnostic for a year now but for awhile refused to accept it on the grounds that I was not acting like a normal 'evil' kid. (ive never even had a detention) So this morning when I wanted to stay home and relax instead of going to chuch it finally came to light that I wasn't a christian. Now I am restricted from doing anything that isn't 'christian' and reading my bible and going to church are a requirement for even living here. If I was dressed I would have said fuck her and left, but for now I am asking for advice.

Just remember, zealot organisations have a high spit out rate, it'll be a while but eventually your parents will mellow out. My father was a hardcore catholic, church every sunday, holy days of obligation etc. etc. Now, he is alot more mellow.

If I was in your shoes, be a good boy, suck it up, read your bible and be a goodie two shoes; it worked for me, and I have a great relationship with my parents.

Hmmm so you're going to ignore the fact that it is giving a breakdown of what religious people believe in rather than what the population believes in

Show me a source that backs up your belief.

I can walk around my rural town and find at least half that don't get out of bed on Sunday. But, when it comes time for a funeral, wedding, etc. they acknowledge a religious preference. Haven't been to a nonreligious funeral yet. And I doubt if there are many nonreligious funerals in Sweden.

Being active (showing up once per week) doesn't matter. Religion is still a part of the belief system of over half.

If you add up the totals the only one you have a possibility of is China. Since it is illegal to belong to a religion in China it would be hard to find out what the total is. The Catholic church won't even say how many Cardinals are there since they would be killed. If China changes it's legal position, I'll bet over half are religious.

Religion is not an active part though if people don't actively practice. It only becomes truly part of the belief system when people actively practice.

Further, China (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6987169.stm) does permit Catholicism to exist in its country and people are permitted to practice. But there are strict rules in place regarding it but that doesn't change that China does permit it.

Show me a source that backs up your belief.

I can walk around my rural town and find at least half that don't get out of bed on Sunday. But, when it comes time for a funeral, wedding, etc. they acknowledge a religious preference. Haven't been to a nonreligious funeral yet. And I doubt if there are many nonreligious funerals in Sweden.

Look to Deus Malums post on Swedens religious make-up.

So we're simply going by personal experience. I've been to several non-religious weddings and 3 non-religious funerals. More than i've been to religious events of the same kind

Not to put too fine a point on it, but do you really think a surly agnostic teenager is interested in currying favor from his rabidly-religious authoritarian mother's church friends?

My general rule is that if the Church ladies are looking at me with disapproval then I'm probably making a good choice. :D

No, I have no illusions that a spoiled punk will give a d--- about the ladies of the church. But they have had rebellious sons with hormone rages also. They will totally understand what is happening. And they will know that time and experience will cure this problem.

Actually, (if you don't tell Smunkee) the mother's problem is she didn't spank his b--- between 1 and 6. He was never civilized so will always have a few problems with society.

Lutheran 87%, other (includes Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist) 13%What do these numbers represent? Church membership or actual belief?

What do these numbers represent? Church membership or actual belief?

Why would you belong to a church if you had absolutely no belief? They night not be bible thumpers but they have acknowledged at least a minimal belief. That (even minimal) belief permeates the culture. And the culture permeates every aspect of living.

Let it be known that the UK now fits this catagory.

Back in Ye olde days, you had the village atheist. Now it's the village believer.



https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html
Religions:
Definition Field Listing
Christian (Anglican, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist) 71.6%, Muslim 2.7%, Hindu 1%, other 1.6%, unspecified or none 23.1% (2001 census)


Well, at least you're 23% correct. That's closer than anyplace other than China.

No, I have no illusions that a spoiled punk will give a d--- about the ladies of the church. But they have had rebellious sons with hormone rages also. They will totally understand what is happening. And they will know that time and experience will cure this problem.

Actually, (if you don't tell Smunkee) the mother's problem is she didn't spank his b--- between 1 and 6. He was never civilized so will always have a few problems with society.

Chances are they probably didn't have sons, they might have had daughters and chances are they probably had a different experience or they don't actually talk about it in front of others.

You speak of a person's agnosticism as if it's a "problem". That's quite harsh and intolerant. What it shows is despite the fact that you claim you have age, wisdom and experience, you have failed to learn tolerance for other people's beliefs and learn that not everyone thinks like their parents.

Additionally spanking doesn't solve most problems. It's only effective when other channels have been exhausted. Further, the boy could have been well behaved between the ages of 1-6, not displaying behaviour worthy of a slap on the ass.

Why would you belong to a church if you had absolutely no belief? They night not be bible thumpers but they have acknowledged at least a minimal belief. That (even minimal) belief permeates the culture. And the culture permeates every aspect of living.
Actually, I know lots of people who attend church regularly despite being atheist. My partner, for instance, continues to visit the church he attended as a child, because the people there are nice and he likes to keep in touch with them. My aunt and uncle, atheists for as long as I can remember, regularly attend a church in their area because it's basically the social hub of their small community. I also have friends who belonged to churches because the churches were the only places close by where they could get free daycare and nursing attention for their kids.

Heck, I sometimes go to a temple in my area because I like the singing. I also have gone to confession a couple of times because it's nice to chat with somebody who has an outside perspective.

There are lots of perfectly pragmatic reasons to attend a church even if you don't believe in their religion.

No, I have no illusions that a spoiled punk will give a d--- about the ladies of the church. But they have had rebellious sons with hormone rages also. They will totally understand what is happening. And they will know that time and experience will cure this problem.

Church ladies often "know" a lot of things that don't really mesh with reality.

Statistically speaking, kids are more likely than ever to abandon their parents' faith, and far more so the more rabidly religious their parents are. If those Church ladies encourage his mother to keep treating her kid the way she is treating him, they're only increasing the odds that the relationship between mother and son will be irreparably damaged. I think that would be a bummer, so I hope that doesn't happen.


Actually, (if you don't tell Smunkee) the mother's problem is she didn't spank his b--- between 1 and 6. He was never civilized so will always have a few problems with society.
Meh. I've never seen any correlation between spanking and good behavior. Plenty of kids who are spanked turn out to be punks, and plenty who aren't are fine. And vice versa. What matters is how and why discipline is enforced. If the OP's reports are at all accurate, then it sounds like it wouldn't have made the least bit of difference if his mother had spanked him. Her failures as a parent would still remain no matter how hard she hit her kids, and her kids would still be just as likely to spot those flaws as they grew up.

Religion is not an active part though if people don't actively practice. It only becomes truly part of the belief system when people actively practice.

Further, China (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6987169.stm) does permit Catholicism to exist in its country and people are permitted to practice. But there are strict rules in place regarding it but that doesn't change that China does permit it.

The rules are such that most can't acknowledge their belief. It is mostly allowed for the very old. And any acknowledgment will hinder a person in society. It would be hard to take a poll and find a true answer.

Before the breakup of the Soviet Union, religion was far more tolerated than it is in China today. But it was officially only a small fraction of the population that were believers. As soon as the breakup took place, suddenly the majority of Russians were religious. I would wager the farm that if China withdrew its restrictions a majority would suddenly acknowledge a religion of some kind.

Additionally spanking doesn't solve most problems. It's only effective when other channels have been exhausted. Further, the boy could have been well behaved between the ages of 1-6, not displaying behaviour worthy of a slap on the ass.
Also a good point.

As I've mentioned, I was Perfect Child when I was small. Didn't stop me from clashing with my parents when I got older.

You speak of a person's agnosticism as if it's a "problem".

I never said that at all. Like most thinking people, I went through that phase. Maybe still going through it. The religion of youth is far different than the religion of an adult. That switch-over is very difficult.

This thread is about how a son should treat his mother. I am arguing that she should be treated with the respect and honor and authority she deserves. It matters not what a son believes. If the mother isn't evil she is to be treated properly.

Yootopia, I know it's hard for you to accept this is your perfect world view, but sometimes when you fighting for a cause like to free your land from occupation, you have to do things you normally wouldn't.
...

The Gaza strip isn't under occupation, and the Palestinians in the West Bank are largely self-administrating, and the larger population zones are completely run by the PA, sorry to really piss over that particular argument for you.
So yes that means killing people, even civilians, to force the occupying into withdrawing. I know this is ugly given the perfect world you live in, where everyone is happy and likes each other, but the reality for the Palestinians is that they live with the daily consequence of the occupation, they pay it - not you in your home. They wouldn't fight if there wasn't a reason.
Have you ever actually spoken to anyone Palestinian? Or will this be like the whole "oh yeah, everyone in Russia loved the USSR" thing, where you're going on what you think people should think?

They'll tell you that, actually, they wished that people like Hamas wouldn't fire rockets over the border (although I know full well that Hamas hardly ever does this, because they're a lovely group of people as I'm sure you'll 'prove'), because it doesn't help anything.

I have quite a lot of friends from Palestine that I chat to, and most of them would just prefer to have the Palestine that the general public wants, which is one where people can live like they do in Lebanon - fairly free lives, without too much religious interference, and with much more in the way of being able to start up businesses without having them shut down due to power outages in reltalitory airstrikes.

Israel makes mistakes. I don't agree with it taking out civilian infrastructure, nor do I generally agree with its assassination of the leaders of Palestinian political parties who displease them.

But then people like Hamas and Islamic Jihad aren't helping anything.

I never said that at all. Like most thinking people, I went through that phase. Maybe still going through it. The religion of youth is far different than the religion of an adult. That switch-over is very difficult.

I would beg to differ as there are striking similarities.

One would find themselves questioning their beliefs due to circumstances that arise causing them to wonder if they've made the right choice, if they had the power to make the choice at all.

The switch-over is only difficult when there are interfering factors at any age. The switch-over can be difficult when there is lacking knowledge.

You seem to have this perception that youths are unable to make a decision until they reach the magical age of 18, as if it suddenly permits them the knowledge, wisdom and experience to make their own religious choices.

My best friend made the choice to convert to Islam as a teenager and nearly 9 years later he's still a Muslim. He made the choice without his parents approval; he did it after doing his research as a teenager and talking to those who practice. He explored his options before converting. If he had been unable to explore other options; pick his own religion, I think he would have wound up more like me rather than picking a religion in the end.

I abandoned religion and theism entirely because I couldn't stand it. But strangely it was my father who played a role in my choosing to abandon religion entirely because he would tell me about how religion was forced on him by his parents.

In both cases as youths we made our own informed choices. We both did our own research.

This thread is about how a son should treat his mother. I am arguing that she should be treated with the respect and honor and authority she deserves. It matters not what a son believes. If the mother isn't evil she is to be treated properly.

You can treat someone right, respect their beliefs and still stand your ground.

Respecting their beliefs does not mean abandoning yours in order to placate your parents. You can respect their beliefs while not being apart of that belief system.

A child can still treat their parents right even if they refuse to do something.

If he refuses to go to church, he is not disrespecting his parents as he has not actually insulted their beliefs. If he had actually belittled their beliefs instead of telling his mother that he was agnostic there would be a real problem.

You can treat someone right, respect their beliefs and still stand your ground.

Respecting their beliefs does not mean abandoning yours in order to placate your parents. You can respect their beliefs while not being apart of that belief system.

Yes, yes, and more yes.

One thing that really gets under my skin is how often I hear people talk about how people should be "respecting their beliefs," when what they really want is for everybody to SHARE their beliefs.

If a young man honestly and politely informs his mother that he does not share her religious beliefs and does not wish to attend church, he's not disrespecting her in any way. If she compels him to attend, despite his voiced feelings on the subject, then it would be profoundly disrespectful (not to mention totally unrealistic) of her to expect anything other than grudging compliance. Personally, I think he'd be showing more respect if he simply refused to humor her and declined to go to church, instead of going along and snoring through services.

Yes, yes, and more yes.

One thing that really gets under my skin is how often I hear people talk about how people should be "respecting their beliefs," when what they really want is for everybody to SHARE their beliefs.

If a young man honestly and politely informs his mother that he does not share her religious beliefs and does not wish to attend church, he's not disrespecting her in any way. If she compels him to attend, despite his voiced feelings on the subject, then it would be profoundly disrespectful (not to mention totally unrealistic) of her to expect anything other than grudging compliance. Personally, I think he'd be showing more respect if he simply refused to humor her and declined to go to church, instead of going along and snoring through services.

In this vein, I'm going to repeat something I said earlier about "tolerance". To those who would say we must be "tolerant" of their views fundamentally misunderstands what tolerance means. To tolerate means only to allow without prohibiting or opposing. In a free society, tolerance of ones views means only that another does not seek to prohibit the free expression of those views.

I can be said to tolerate the views of people like, say, Fred Phelps because I do not seek to prohibit the vocalization of his viewpoints. As much as I abhore what he stands for, I would rather live in a society where he is free to speak his hate, than one where he is not.

That is all tolerance means, and that is all that is required of me to be tolerant of ones beliefs. That I do not seek to prohibit or oppose the expression of those beliefs.

The idea that somehow, under the mantle of "tolerance", I must respect, honor, agree with, or remain silent in my disagreement, of others viewpoints is absurd. I don't have to respect, agree, or understand your position in order to tolerate it, I need only not seek to prohibit your free exercise thereof.

Likewise while I tolerate your viewpoint, I am also free to vocalize, to the fullest extent, my disrespect, disbelief, and disagreement with those beliefs. Those who would scream that if I dare to disparage or voice my disapproval of their beliefs that I am being "intolerant" not only fundamentally misunderstand the term, they are guilty of the very thing they say they are opposing. For they are the ones who wish to have free reign to speak their beliefs, but would quash any opposition against them.

Tolerance demands only that I respect your right to express your beliefs. It does not demand that I remain silent in the face of beliefs I disagree with. I tolerate all beliefs, I make no efforts to prohibit you from believing them, or from expressing them. But to say that tolerance requires I can not exercise the very rights that I recognize you hold is, at its very core, the height of intolerance.

If free society demands that I tolerate your opposing views, and your right to express those views, it likewise requires that you tolerate mine. Any attempts therefore to try to force, coerce, or shame me into not voicing them due to my supposed "intolerance" renders you the only intolerant one amongst us.

You seem to have this perception that youths are unable to make a decision until they reach the magical age of 18, as if it suddenly permits them the knowledge, wisdom and experience to make their own religious choices.


There is certainly nothing magical about 18. I was one of those that campaigned to change things from 21 to 18. That was a mistake on my part. A mistake I made because I was "wise" at 18.

Development is a slow process. It is also different for everyone. But those who are 16 and have the experience to even think more than superficially about religion are few and far between. In fact there are few at 25 that have that background. And there are the followers of certain TV ministers that have never really considered their beliefs at 95. But as each year passes, if an effort is made, more knowledge is gained.

The argument of the passion of youth goes back to the beginnings of the human animal. It serves a purpose in society because it demands that the elders consider their traditions and justify their stand. Aristotle spent a great deal of time with this in "Rhetoric". Without the passion of youth there would be no social advancement in society. Without the passion of youth the civil rights era would never have happened. The women's liberation movement would never have happened. And the advancement of gay rights wouldn't be considered.

Yet this passion needs to be tempered. That tempering takes place as the elders (Aristotle calls it "Prime of Life") question the stand that is put forth by the youth and filter it through the experience of age.

In this case the passion of youth has put forth a new idea. The wisdom and experience of the Prime of Life acknowledged that passion and made a decision. Until that youth enters the Prime of Life he has no power or right to do anything beyond putting forth new ideas and having them evaluated. This has been the way since the beginning of the human animal. It isn't going to change this year.

.

The argument of the passion of youth goes back to the beginnings of the human animal. It serves a purpose in society because it demands that the elders consider their traditions and justify their stand.

This can be done with demanding a child attend church while they lack belief?

I'm sorry? Standing up for yourself, having casual sex and, god forbid, taking recreational drugs, make one an asshole? That makes pretty much most young people I know assholes....:rolleyes:

Ever heard of the 21st century? Try visiting at some point, it's a ball.

telling your mom to fuck off, having sex for the sole purpose of bothering her, and doing drugs to "scare" her are the makings of an asshole yes.

telling your mom to fuck off, having sex for the sole purpose of bothering her, and doing drugs to "scare" her are the makings of an asshole yes.

Nope. Originally you simply suggested that simply doing said things was assholish; the quote I posted from you mentioned at no point doing said things to scare the OP's mother, only that doing them conferred the title asshole upon him. I refuse to accept that is valid at all.

In any case, she's being far more of an asshole imposing an anachronistic, socially regressive religion upon her son.

Nope. Originally you simply suggested that simply doing said things was assholish; the quote I posted from you mentioned at no point doing said things to scare the OP's mother, only that doing them conferred the title asshole upon him. I refuse to accept that is valid at all.

In any case, she's being far more of an asshole imposing an anachronistic, socially regressive religion upon her son.

and again I didn't say she was right, I only said that just because she is wrong doesn't mean he has to be too.

and yes, doing things for the sole purpose of pissing someone else off is assholeish.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html
Religions:
Definition Field Listing
Christian (Anglican, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist) 71.6%, Muslim 2.7%, Hindu 1%, other 1.6%, unspecified or none 23.1% (2001 census)


Well, at least you're 23% correct. That's closer than anyplace other than China.

Not to shit in your custard or anything... but census figures are not necessarily a good way to determine how many "believers" there are.

and yes, doing things for the sole purpose of pissing someone else off is assholeish.

Agreed. And it's hardly going to be the 'mark of maurity' that shows you've graduated to a point where you can make your own, 'adult' decisions.

So... it's double-fail.

and again I didn't say she was right, I only said that just because she is wrong doesn't mean he has to be too.

Actually, sometimes, yes, you do. Some people don't learn any other way.

In any case, she's being far more of an asshole imposing an anachronistic, socially regressive religion upon her son.

Personally, I have big problems with raising children to 'believe' anything... any given religion, or that religion must be false.

However... if the mother thinks she's doing the best thing for her child.... she might be wrong, she is undervaluing his (it was a 'he', right) input... but I'm not sure you can realistically claim she is being 'an asshole'.

Actually, I know lots of people who attend church regularly despite being atheist. My partner, for instance, continues to visit the church he attended as a child, because the people there are nice and he likes to keep in touch with them. My aunt and uncle, atheists for as long as I can remember, regularly attend a church in their area because it's basically the social hub of their small community. I also have friends who belonged to churches because the churches were the only places close by where they could get free daycare and nursing attention for their kids.

Heck, I sometimes go to a temple in my area because I like the singing. I also have gone to confession a couple of times because it's nice to chat with somebody who has an outside perspective.

There are lots of perfectly pragmatic reasons to attend a church even if you don't believe in their religion.Maybe one reason is your mother asked you to.

This can be done with demanding a child attend church while they lack belief?

The mother has heard the cry of passion from the youth, evaluated it, and made a decision that the passion of the youth was not properly directed at this time. The youth can continue to put forth ideas and they will be continually evaluated, but until the youth proves his point to those in the position of making decisions he must follow the decision made. That's the way civilization has made decisions since the human animal came into being.

And the youth have always thought it was unfair. :(

Agreed. And it's hardly going to be the 'mark of maurity' that shows you've graduated to a point where you can make your own, 'adult' decisions.

So... it's double-fail.

and that's the whole thing I have been trying to say this whole time.

No, I have no illusions that a spoiled punk will give a d--- about the ladies of the church. But they have had rebellious sons with hormone rages also. They will totally understand what is happening. And they will know that time and experience will cure this problem.

Actually, (if you don't tell Smunkee) the mother's problem is she didn't spank his b--- between 1 and 6. He was never civilized so will always have a few problems with society.

I was thinking the opposite actually: if his mother had been taught as a child that bullying was wrong then this situation would never have occurred.

Based on less than six lines of text you have decided that this guy is ignorant, irresponsible, and now a 'spoiled punk'. You have been nothing but judgemental towards him in this thread and your only advice seems to be to blindly do what he's told. The most important aspect of growing up isn't learning to do what you're told: it's learning when to do what you're told and when to tell people to shove it. If I had a sixteen year old son or daughter and I forbade them to go to church, read the Bible or do anything connected to Christianity, without giving them good reasons, I'd actually be rather disappointed if they obeyed. If I was in his situation then I'd just take a book along (not an openly atheist one, but certainly not a religious one either) and read quietly; if sitting quietly causes disruption (which it shouldn't) then it's her own damn fault for making him come along in the first place.

So in the military you are taught to march. Now when in battle do you see soldiers marching? But is it a worthless activity? Apparently not since there isn't an army in the world that doesn't teach every soldier to march.

The point is self discipline and taking orders from those in authority are the basics of any society. It matters not one iota if those orders have no see able value. It is the act of doing that is important.

I think you need to do more study if you think religion is an anachronism anywhere in the world. I dare you to find one society in the world that has a majority of non religious people.

While you may believe that this is the mother's thinking of why he should attend, I don't agree. She's forcing him to go to church because she believes he'll go to hell. This mom may want to teach him authority, but you don't know that. There are other ways to obey authority without going to church. My parents leave me a few chores to get done while they're out on their knees doing nothing. This kids mom sounds like he just wants him to go to church so he avoids hell rather than obey authority, since that's the nonsense she believes... :\

Why would you belong to a church if you had absolutely no belief? They night not be bible thumpers but they have acknowledged at least a minimal belief. That (even minimal) belief permeates the culture. And the culture permeates every aspect of living.

In the UK the majority of people don't believe in god and consider religion to do more harm than good, but 70% of the population still describe themselves as Christian. Cultural 'belief' doesn't mean anything.

In the UK the majority of people don't believe in god and consider religion to do more harm than good, but 70% of the population still describe themselves as Christian. Cultural 'belief' doesn't mean anything.
And that's funny because we've got a country proclaiming to not believe in a god, but still labeled as christians, and We've got China over here who's declared everyone a atheist no matter what they themselves believe... Or was that Russia? All I know, is that ONE of those big countries do that... I need to gb2 Geography. Oh wait, that's right, it's been removed from the curriculum and slammed into history to make "Social Studies"

I never said that at all. Like most thinking people, I went through that phase. Maybe still going through it. The religion of youth is far different than the religion of an adult. That switch-over is very difficult.

This thread is about how a son should treat his mother. I am arguing that she should be treated with the respect and honor and authority she deserves. It matters not what a son believes. If the mother isn't evil she is to be treated properly.

Respect =/= Blind Obedience. It's possible to respectfully tell somebody that you won't do what they've asked, and if they push you without good reason then they're the ones who are being disrespectful.

and that's the whole thing I have been trying to say this whole time.

And, as so often before, you are right this time.

Spite makes you an asshole. 'Acting up' makes you an asshole. And both are immature responses. Simple as.

The mother has heard the cry of passion from the youth, evaluated it, and made a decision that the passion of the youth was not properly directed at this time. The youth can continue to put forth ideas and they will be continually evaluated, but until the youth proves his point to those in the position of making decisions he must follow the decision made. That's the way civilization has made decisions since the human animal came into being.

And the youth have always thought it was unfair. :(

Spare us the melodramatics; age has no inherent contribution to wisdom, some people seem to get more foolish the older they get. Anyone who feels that an appeal to age is a valid argument is not somebody that I'd trust to make decisions for me.

I was thinking the opposite actually: if his mother had been taught as a child that bullying was wrong then this situation would never have occurred.

Based on less than six lines of text you have decided that this guy is ignorant, irresponsible, and now a 'spoiled punk'. You have been nothing but judgemental towards him in this thread and your only advice seems to be to blindly do what he's told. The most important aspect of growing up isn't learning to do what you're told: it's learning when to do what you're told and when to tell people to shove it. If I had a sixteen year old son or daughter and I forbade them to go to church, read the Bible or do anything connected to Christianity, without giving them good reasons, I'd actually be rather disappointed if they obeyed. If I was in his situation then I'd just take a book along (not an openly atheist one, but certainly not a religious one either) and read quietly; if sitting quietly causes disruption (which it shouldn't) then it's her own damn fault for making him come along in the first place.

Six lines? This has been going for 20+ pages.

Christian Zealots
Ok so i am 16 and living with a zealot. My mom is a nutter. She has known me to be an agnostic for a year now but for awhile refused to accept it on the grounds that I was not acting like a normal 'evil' kid. (ive never even had a detention) So this morning when I wanted to stay home and relax instead of going to chuch it finally came to light that I wasn't a christian. Now I am restricted from doing anything that isn't 'christian' and reading my bible and going to church are a requirement for even living here. If I was dressed I would have said fuck her and left, but for now I am asking for advice.

And if it were only the first six lines the evaluation wouldn't be that difficult. Let's see---16----the smartest age anyone will ever be after that you realize how much you don't know.

His mother has never harmed him. Isn't running around doing drugs or drinking. In fact there is not one thing the mother is said to be doing wrong.

He is insulting to his mother (the one person on earth that a person shouldn't insult without reason) "My mom is a nutter."

The kid didn't want to do something productive, "I wanted to stay home and relax".

He can't even get his lazy b--- up and get dressed. "If I was dressed"

And does this mean that mother is providing him with food, clothing, shelter, and the other necessities of life? "a requirement for even living here"

So how does a son talk with a mother that has in no way abused him? "fuck her"

The mother asks him to spend a couple hours a week and what is the reaction? "I am asking for advice" From who? Someone that understands his mother and her position or a board dominated by teenagers?

Gee, I can't for the life of me see why anyone would think there was a problem with this kid's attitude:rolleyes: "You have been nothing but judgemental " (by the way you spelled it wrong)

Respect =/= Blind Obedience. It's possible to respectfully tell somebody that you won't do what they've asked, and if they push you without good reason then they're the ones who are being disrespectful.

The mother has good reason.

The mother has good reason.

I want you to believe what I believe is not a good reason.

Six lines? This has been going for 20+ pages.



And if it were only the first six lines the evaluation wouldn't be that difficult. Let's see---16----the smartest age anyone will ever be after that you realize how much you don't know.

His mother has never harmed him. Isn't running around doing drugs or drinking. In fact there is not one thing the mother is said to be doing wrong.

He is insulting to his mother (the one person on earth that a person shouldn't insult without reason) "My mom is a nutter."

The kid didn't want to do something productive, "I wanted to stay home and relax".

He can't even get his lazy b--- up and get dressed. "If I was dressed"

And does this mean that mother is providing him with food, clothing, shelter, and the other necessities of life? "a requirement for even living here"

So how does a son talk with a mother that has in no way abused him? "fuck her"

The mother asks him to spend a couple hours a week and what is the reaction? "I am asking for advice" From who? Someone that understands his mother and her position or a board dominated by teenagers?

Gee, I can't for the life of me see why anyone would think there was a problem with this kid's attitude:rolleyes: "You have been nothing but judgemental " (by the way you spelled it wrong)

Just a couple of things:

1) "... running around doing drugs or drinking" does not set the ultimate boundaries on what is 'right' or 'wrong'. Some might say that suppressing an individual's 'right' to free expression of religion (or lack of a religion) is 'wrong'.

2) "...stay[ing] home and relax[ing]..." could be considered constructive. If I've had a hell of a week, a bit of R&R is what enables me to get back into the swing.

3) You choose to phrase it as "...The mother asks him to spend a couple hours a week". Is it really fair to describe it as 'asking', when there is only one acceptable response, and you'll be punished for going outside of those boundaries?

4) Also - "...a couple of hours a week..." is no big deal.. nothing worth fighting about, right? I have some Wiccan friends. I've considered getting to know their religion a bit better... would you come to coven meetings with me? It'll only be a couple of hours a week.

...but for now I am asking for advice.
Someone may have already beat me to the punch, but my advice is to not take seriously any advice you are given on the Internet.

Six lines? This has been going for 20+ pages.

He hasn't posted anything since the OP...

And if it were only the first six lines the evaluation wouldn't be that difficult. Let's see---16----the smartest age anyone will ever be after that you realize how much you don't know.

More silly age arguments. I say again: I wouldn't trust anyone who thought that an appeal to age was a valid argument to make decisions on my behalf.

[QUOTE=Good Lifes;13044041]His mother has never harmed him. Isn't running around doing drugs or drinking. In fact there is not one thing the mother is said to be doing wrong.

Apart from describing his as 'evil' because of his beliefs and trying to control his life? No, I can't see any problems here...

He is insulting to his mother (the one person on earth that a person shouldn't insult without reason) "My mom is a nutter."

If what he's said is true then he's got a damn good reason.

The kid didn't want to do something productive, "I wanted to stay home and relax".

Going to Church isn't productive, relaxing is. Try living for a few months without any time to relax and see what happens.

He can't even get his lazy b--- up and get dressed. "If I was dressed"

And does this mean that mother is providing him with food, clothing, shelter, and the other necessities of life? "a requirement for even living here"

Food, clothing and shelter are the minimum that a parent should provide for their child. Love and at least a pretence of respect would be nice as well...

So how does a son talk with a mother that has in no way abused him? "fuck her"

Actually he didn't say that, try reading the post again.

"If I was dressed I would have said fuck her and left, but for now I am asking for advice."

The mother asks him to spend a couple hours a week and what is the reaction? "I am asking for advice" From who? Someone that understands his mother and her position or a board dominated by teenagers?

His mother asks, he declines, she tries to force him. Yet again you try to denigrate people based on age, despite the fact that most people here are at least 18.

Gee, I can't for the life of me see why anyone would think there was a problem with this kid's attitude:rolleyes: "You have been nothing but judgemental "

You have.

(by the way you spelled it wrong)

If you're going to try to score cheap points by pointing out typos then at least try to pick 'typos' which are actually spelt wrong. "Judgemental" is the correct spelling. I'm tempted to point out your atrocious use of grammar but I prefer to debate the issue.

The mother has good reason.

You know her do you? The only reason that the OP gives is because she thinks he's "evil" for being an agnostic, do you consider that to be a good reason?

Personally, I have big problems with raising children to 'believe' anything... any given religion, or that religion must be false.

However... if the mother thinks she's doing the best thing for her child.... she might be wrong, she is undervaluing his (it was a 'he', right) input... but I'm not sure you can realistically claim she is being 'an asshole'.

Yes I can. Any reasonable person appreciates that what she is doing will only further demonify christianity to the OP, hence she must appreciate as much, and is thus ordering her son either out of spite, or delusion.

There is certainly nothing magical about 18. I was one of those that campaigned to change things from 21 to 18. That was a mistake on my part. A mistake I made because I was "wise" at 18.

Ah, but there is wisdom in every age group.

Development is a slow process. It is also different for everyone. But those who are 16 and have the experience to even think more than superficially about religion are few and far between.

That's why you challenge people's beliefs when they make a declaration. You ask them questions, have them think about what they are saying. They are capable of thought at that age and should be able to say why they believe something and validate it with a reason and not "just because".

In fact there are few at 25 that have that background. And there are the followers of certain TV ministers that have never really considered their beliefs at 95. But as each year passes, if an effort is made, more knowledge is gained.

But is that knowledge accurate knowledge?

Yet this passion needs to be tempered. That tempering takes place as the elders (Aristotle calls it "Prime of Life") question the stand that is put forth by the youth and filter it through the experience of age.

There is nothing wrong with passion.

Often we get stuck in a rut and progress becomes stagnant because people become comfortable with the status quo and seek to quash the passion that fuels change and progress.

In this case the passion of youth has put forth a new idea. The wisdom and experience of the Prime of Life acknowledged that passion and made a decision. Until that youth enters the Prime of Life he has no power or right to do anything beyond putting forth new ideas and having them evaluated. This has been the way since the beginning of the human animal. It isn't going to change this year.

And what is that prime? Again, just some arbitrary magical number.

I do agree however that all ideas should be put forth and evaluated for their merits and shortcomings. There is nothing wrong with that. But restricting people because they lack some form of age based wisdom is just purely asinine.

The mother has heard the cry of passion from the youth, evaluated it, and made a decision that the passion of the youth was not properly directed at this time. The youth can continue to put forth ideas and they will be continually evaluated, but until the youth proves his point to those in the position of making decisions he must follow the decision made. That's the way civilization has made decisions since the human animal came into being.

And the youth have always thought it was unfair. :(

But how can one learn if one cannot fail, if one cannot make mistakes from bad decisions? My Baba explained it like this to mean that one cannot learn if one does not make mistakes. A person learns and gains wisdom by making mistakes because if you don't make a mistake, you cannot learn and you cannot gain experience.

There comes a time when the parent has to while the child is still living at home decide that the child should start to make decisions while the parent can still provide a safety net in the event that the decision backfires.

The process should be gradual because if the parent doesn't let the child make decisions young the child will be unprepared to make decisions as an adult.

And if it were only the first six lines the evaluation wouldn't be that difficult. Let's see---16----the smartest age anyone will ever be after that you realize how much you don't know.

I doubt that. Everyone is different, as you've said before. So 16 won't necessarily be everyone's "smart" age.

His mother has never harmed him. Isn't running around doing drugs or drinking. In fact there is not one thing the mother is said to be doing wrong.

He is insulting to his mother (the one person on earth that a person shouldn't insult without reason) "My mom is a nutter."

Harm is more than physical, it is also psychological and emotional.

A parent can verbally harm their child by telling the child the child is "evil" because the child has decided that religion doesn't fit them right.

He may have insulted her but calling her a "nutter" is hardly one of the worse things he could have called it. It's like saying, "my mother is crazy".

The kid didn't want to do something productive, "I wanted to stay home and relax".

And relaxing can even mean reading a book or catching up on sleep he may have lost during the week.

He can't even get his lazy b--- up and get dressed. "If I was dressed"

I'm sure there are days when you can't get your lazy butt up and get dressed, or feel like it. We all have days like that. It's not a bad thing necessarily.

And does this mean that mother is providing him with food, clothing, shelter, and the other necessities of life? "a requirement for even living here"

So how does a son talk with a mother that has in no way abused him? "fuck her"

Abuse isn't just physical, it's verbal/non-verbal (psychological and/or emotional) as well.

The mother asks him to spend a couple hours a week and what is the reaction? "I am asking for advice"

And asking for advice is the sign of someone learning that they don't have all of life's answers and recognised that some times a neutral third party response may shed light on their situation.

From who? Someone that understands his mother and her position or a board dominated by teenagers?

Most of the answers here have not come from teenagers though but from adults who live on their own and have been through the era that is the teenage years.

Gee, I can't for the life of me see why anyone would think there was a problem with this kid's attitude:rolleyes: "You have been nothing but judgemental " (by the way you spelled it wrong)

Every kid has a damn attitude problem. I know I did, and most of the people here did. But we also know we've come to mellow out over the years and that someone at the age of 16 needs to speak to someone who won't be judgemental. He has his parents to be judgemental; he has the church and his teachers for that.

We only know part of the story so it doesn't pay to be judgemental. We should try and help him by taking what we have and not looking for what is missing on which to bank our advice, suggestions.

No, I have no illusions that a spoiled punk will give a d--- about the ladies of the church. But they have had rebellious sons with hormone rages also. They will totally understand what is happening. And they will know that time and experience will cure this problem.

Actually, (if you don't tell Smunkee) the mother's problem is she didn't spank his b--- between 1 and 6. He was never civilized so will always have a few problems with society.

Ok, now you are being completley unreasonable. First you describe sitting quietly in church as "a teen having a temper tantrum". I don't know what you think a temper tantrum is, but this is far removed from it "Those damn kids, sitting quietly in our church, disprupting everyone. Why can't he pray like a good christian child." then you describe him as a "spoiled punk" for what? For not wanting to wholeheartedley accept his parents beliefs? And you describe being agnostic as a "hormone rage". Yes, everyone knows that all good, logical, people automically are christians, and only rebellious children with constant hormone rages would ever prescribe to a belief as evil as agnosticicsm. And of course, time and experience turns everyone christian. As Christianity is the only right and logical religion, and it's truth is patently obvious, experience will completley cure the "problem" of agnosticism. And finally, knowing nothinh about his childhood, you make a baseless assumption based on a gross misunderstanding. You don't know that he was never spanked, and spanking does not neccisarily create good children, and the absence of it create The Sex Pistols. You claim he "was never civilized". All civilized people are christians? All civilized people obey their parents immediatley and without question? Pah! And finally "he will always have a few problems with society". Well guess what? So do I. And so should everyone. If no one has any problems with society, society will remain static and never grow. Plus, society right now has an incredibly stupid and nonsensical code of "morals" pertaining to nudity, sexuality, and many other things. Plus, no system other than society has ever been as effective at repressing question of it's rules.

There is a reason why the age for being a legal adult (in the US) is 18...

Sixteen year olds know NOTHING of the real world, they make poor choices and live "in the now"...

It is a parents responsibility... nay... DUTY, to oppress their children... I don't mean in a tyrannical sense either...

Those who have lax parents often don't go far... I've seen it many times, and they always blame society for their ills...

As Mark Twain said... “When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished by how much he'd learned in seven years.”

Read between the lines on this one, I have a feeling teenages will take this a literal statement...

There is a reason why the age for being a legal adult (in the US) is 18...

Sixteen year olds know NOTHING of the real world, they make poor choices and live "in the now"...

It is a parents responsibility... nay... DUTY, to oppress their children... I don't mean in a tyrannical sense either...

Those who have lax parents often don't go far... I've seen it many times, and they always blame society for their ills...

As Mark Twain said... “When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished by how much he'd learned in seven years.”

Read between the lines on this one, I have a feeling teenages will take this a literal statement...

Yes, because everyone knows teenagers take everything literally, and are far too stupid to ever understand anything. I also like how you stereotype all teenagers as making poor choices and living in the now. Tell me, do you consider becoming agnostic to be a poor choice made from lack of experience?

Why would you belong to a church if you had absolutely no belief?Because membership in a church comes with getting baptized in one of them as an infant, and most folks are just too lazy later on for the paperwork to get out of the respective church.

No, I have no illusions that a spoiled punk will give a d--- about the ladies of the church. But they have had rebellious sons with hormone rages also. They will totally understand what is happening. And they will know that time and experience will cure this problem.

Actually, (if you don't tell Smunkee) the mother's problem is she didn't spank his b--- between 1 and 6. He was never civilized so will always have a few problems with society.

Stop censoring your words like a 6th grade douche.

Because membership in a church comes with getting baptized in one of them as an infant, and most folks are just too lazy later on for the paperwork to get out of the respective church.

I totally agree with you on all of your points, and I do believe that the religions of the world are regressive and dangerous, but I need to ask, if you were truly nonreligious wouldn't you agree with me that baptism is useless, since no one can be a member of a religion of they can't think about it? Baptizing an infant doesn't change their mind or anything. They have to grow into it.

Like I said, I'm against religion being forced on people, but baptism is pretty useless either way.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html
Religions:
Definition Field Listing
Christian (Anglican, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist) 71.6%, Muslim 2.7%, Hindu 1%, other 1.6%, unspecified or none 23.1% (2001 census)


Well, at least you're 23% correct. That's closer than anyplace other than China.


The levels of agnosticism/atheism/no opinons/ are closer to mid 40% in this country. I don't buy into statistics skewed by the government.

The levels of agnosticism/atheism/no opinons/ are closer to mid 40% in this country. I don't buy into statistics skewed by the government.

I wouldn't say that, but I think the level of people practicing religion is much lower. I remember a New Yorker article that said only 7% of the population regularly attended church, which may be a better indicator of how religious people really are.

Yes I can. Any reasonable person appreciates that what she is doing will only further demonify christianity to the OP, hence she must appreciate as much, and is thus ordering her son either out of spite, or delusion.

Rubbish. I'm an atheist, and even I don't believe you.

Stop censoring your words like a 6th grade douche.
Maybe you've stumbled onto his little secret?

with me that baptism is useless, Baptizing an infant doesn't change their mind or anything. They have to grow into it.

Like I said, I'm against religion being forced on people, but baptism is pretty useless either way.

This is a little off the subject. But, most denominations that have infant baptism do it for two reasons.

1. Baptism is believed to be required for entrance into heaven. Not the only requirement but a necessary requirement. Some even baptize babies that might have health problems as they exit the womb. (personally, I don't think baptism is a requirement, especially not for infants)

2. It is a ceremony (like a wedding) where the parents (and others) make a promise to raise the child as a Christian. If the parents don't keep the promise the sin of the disbelief of the child is upon them until the child is old enough to be responsible for their own sin. That age of responsibility differs from one group to another. Some set a specific age while others say that it varies between people so there is no set age. As with marriage, some people take the promise seriously and some take it only as a suggestion.

do what your mom says, try to be respectful, move out when you can and live your own life at that point.

I don't see the big issue here.
What about the dishonesty of going to church despite not being religious?



Anyway... Forbeston, I would agree with others to SOME extent in that you should try to be somewhat diplomatic in your approach, (to be fair, I admit that I slightly dilute my own opinions sometimes in talking to my dad about religion) but don't give in to unreasonable things like having going to church be a requirement for living there, if they'd actually go so far as to kick you out (for resisting their attempts to force their cultural beliefs on you) then they are the ones who are wrong, and parents need to be reminded of how they can be wrong before it causes problems elsewhere; back when I was noticing things that later turned out to be symptoms of type 1 diabetes, I probably should've been more vocal about them than I was; with the tiredness part my parents were saying it was because I wasn't exercizing enough but I couldn't help but think it was caused by something else and it turns out said lack of exercise was more so because of the tiredness which in turn had more to do with the untreated diabetes, and how the skin on my hands tore open on its own, my dad was saying it was because I was washing my hands so much, but again it turned out to have to do more with the diabetes (it didn't happen to near as much an extent after diagnosis) and it was months before we found out; I ended up in ketoacidosis and my dad himself says he won't forget the day I was leaning against him trying to walk across that hospital parking lot, struggling while breathing heavily while feeling like I was suffocating, and just a few minutes later the nurses saying about me "the next hour will tell the tale of whether he lives or dies"; not saying the exact same thing would necessarily happen to you, but some kind of perhaps even non-medical equivalent of it could if your parents aren't reminded in an easier way that it's not like their age doesn't prove that they would be more right than you...

The levels of agnosticism/atheism/no opinons/ are closer to mid 40% in this country. I don't buy into statistics skewed by the government.
here you go...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/Europe_belief_in_god.png

Yes I can. Any reasonable person appreciates that what she is doing will only further demonify christianity to the OP, hence she must appreciate as much, and is thus ordering her son either out of spite, or delusion.
I dunno. I think it's entirely possible that she has convinced herself she's doing the right thing by her kid.

Doesn't change the fact that she's being an asshole.

You can act like an asshole even if you have the best of intentions.

Perhaps it would be best to look on this case as a good learning experience for a budding agnostic. If he remains agnostic, he is going to face a lifetime of people behaving with the same kind of rudeness and disrespect that his mother is showing, and he's going to have to listen to them tell him about how virtuous and moral they are while they do it.

He's going to have to learn how to hold his temper in the face of such disrespect. He will probably have at least one professor or boss or superior who will treat him this way, and he'll probably have to hold his tongue and put up with it at least once in his lifetime. Most of us have found ourselves in situations like that at one time or another.

He also has to learn to find the balance between getting along to get along, while also sticking up for yourself and refusing to let godders abuse you.

In a perverse way, I guess his mother could be said to be teaching him a valuable lesson about adulthood. That being, people in authority are sometimes assholes, and you have to figure out the most productive way to deal with their assholery. The teenager in you will always want to tell them where they can stick it, but the grown up in you must be careful to judge whether that is a good response in the long run.

Maybe one reason is your mother asked you to.
If my mother asked me to try something, I would consider it respectful to at least give it a shot.

If I tried it and didn't like it, it would be respectful for me to be honest with her.

As a matter of fact, my mother once DID fight with me about attending church. She wanted me to get a thorough education in various religions, so on Saturdays or Sundays we'd visit different churches and temples and so forth.

She had a very good time at a UU church, and wanted to keep going back. I found it boring as snot and wasn't remotely interested. She initially tried to badger me into going, until I got through to her that I was getting nothing out of the experience. I had only been going because she made me.

She realized that making me go accomplished only one thing: it made her feel good, at the expense of me feeling good.

Since my mother is not (and has never been) an asshole, she concluded that it was better I not attend with her. We found better activities for me to fill my time with.

I dunno. I think it's entirely possible that she has convinced herself she's doing the right thing by her kid.

Doesn't change the fact that she's being an asshole.

You can act like an asshole even if you have the best of intentions.

Perhaps it would be best to look on this case as a good learning experience for a budding agnostic. If he remains agnostic, he is going to face a lifetime of people behaving with the same kind of rudeness and disrespect that his mother is showing, and he's going to have to listen to them tell him about how virtuous and moral they are while they do it.

He's going to have to learn how to hold his temper in the face of such disrespect. He will probably have at least one professor or boss or superior who will treat him this way, and he'll probably have to hold his tongue and put up with it at least once in his lifetime. Most of us have found ourselves in situations like that at one time or another.

He also has to learn to find the balance between getting along to get along, while also sticking up for yourself and refusing to let godders abuse you.

In a perverse way, I guess his mother could be said to be teaching him a valuable lesson about adulthood. That being, people in authority are sometimes assholes, and you have to figure out the most productive way to deal with their assholery. The teenager in you will always want to tell them where they can stick it, but the grown up in you must be careful to judge whether that is a good response in the long run.
thank you Bottle. :) I knew I was right.

Someone may have already beat me to the punch, but my advice is to not take seriously any advice you are given on the Internet.

Seriously?

I actually bothered to read all 24. Heated tempers going... ...

I've often wondered what its like being hot-tempered and irrational, I sometimes think I'm too much into thinking for my own good, but there I go again.

But seriously, advice? Not as if you'll listen/read; if what I understand by irrational is anything to go by. OP? OP??

*no answer*

Sigh...

PS:
High emotions indeed *grasping motion* I wish I could get that riled up... =(

I can write as if with emotion, but I don't even understand it.

I actually bothered to read all 24. Heated tempers going... ...

I've often wondered what its like being hot-tempered and irrational, I sometimes think I'm too much into thinking for my own good, but there I go again.

But seriously, advice? Not as if you'll listen/read; if what I understand by irrational is anything to go by. OP? OP??

*no answer*

Sigh...

PS:
High emotions indeed *grasping motion* I wish I could get that riled up... =(

I can write as if with emotion, but I don't even understand it.
Be careful not to leap to assumptions on the net, though. I've often been told by people that I should "settle down" or "be less emotional" about my posting, when I wasn't actually feeling riled up at all when I posted. Some of us just like to curse and use rough-edged styles of speaking. :D