Atheist parents worry about daughter who turned to religion

[rug]

February 20, 2017 12:47 PM
By Amy Dickinson

DEAR AMY: My husband and I raised two great kids. Our son is now 30 and our daughter 28. Both of them finished college with high honors and with business degrees. They both got nice jobs in their professions. We are atheists, but at 18 our daughter starting dating a pastor’s son. His family and church started grooming her with their beliefs, so she would fit nicely into their family belief system and eventually marry. After going off to college, that relationship ended, and she got serious with another pastor’s son. Again this fellow and his family groomed her to believe, get baptized, and go on mission trips to South American countries with the intent of her marrying into their family. Well, he dumped her. She quit her job, moved out west and joined an evangelical Christian group. She pays them to live on their campus while they teach her about the Bible and Jesus. She raises funds for them by asking others for money to support her. She has been leading this extreme religious life for three years now with no intention to quit and get a paying job. She has rejected our traditional life, and seldom visits. Her professional clothes hang in our closets and her stuff is in the basement. Her medical care is paid for by the state since she lives under the poverty level. We are very sad about her decisions. We worry for her safety and her future. We grieve the loss of our beautiful daughter. We miss the way our family used to be. Now we have nothing in common with her. Any suggestions on how to cope?

Atheist Mom and Dad

DEAR MOM AND DAD: Some religious groups operate as more or less closed systems, and their adherents turn away from their previous lives in order to operate within the system. I can understand why this is such a loss for you.

You should keep the door open to a relationship with your daughter, regardless of where she is or what she believes. You are going to need to continue to grieve this loss, while accepting her choice and her freedom to make it. Continue to emotionally support her, while not supporting the group or cause.

Visit her. Don’t pressure her or force an ultimatum. Don’t dwell on the life and belief system she has rejected. Focus on your own acceptance, and make sure she knows you are always in her corner, no matter what.

Research the group she is in and see if you can connect with ex-members or family members of current members. Communicating with other parents will help.

http://www.newsday.com/lifestyle/columnists/ask-amy/atheist-parents-worry-about-daughter-who-turned-to-religion-1.13150222

Man bites dog.

[vlyons]

1. She has been captured by a cult.

Cults isolate people from their family and friends to better control them and make them dependent. There's really not much you can do, except kidnap her and try to get her into some sort of cult intervention. But kidnapping is criminal. She is a grown woman and makes her own decisions, and must live with the consequences.

If she has children, you might talk to an attorney to get custody. Otherwise, the advice to research this particular cult and try to meet some ex-members is a good idea. Try to find out if this cult is into polgamy and/or sexual abuse. DON'T GIVE HER MONEY! She will just give most or all of it to the cult.

You can write her fond loving letters and include pictures of your family and some of her former friends and their families.

[guillaumeb]

2. The mother reveals her bias. Perhaps unconsciously, but it it there.

Consider the words used just in the excerpt provided:
Forst:

His family and church started grooming her with their beliefs, so she would fit nicely into their family belief system and eventually marry.

Grooming her with their beliefs? In the same way that the parents groomed the daughter in their non-theistic beliefs?

Second:

She has been leading this extreme religious life for three years now with no intention to quit and get a paying job

What is extreme about a religious life? Are clergy examples of people leading an extreme religious life?

Some non-theists will expound at great length about the intolerance that they claim is practiced by theists. Does this make non-theistic intolerance somehow acceptable?

[edhopper]

3. talk about

showing bias.

You post certainly does.

[guillaumeb]

15. I admit that I am biased against parents

who indoctrinated their children and late complain that the indoctrination did not succeed, at the same time that the parents complain about a different indoctrination.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. There's nothing about them indoctrinating her. They don't say anything about teaching her anything

about religion or about atheism. You just assume they did, because you don't like them.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. What's "extreme" is her paying to be indoctrinated, and to raise funds for them

They are using her. She is not 'clergy'. Her life is now dedicated to getting money for an organisation that just takes money from vulnerable people like her.

It's quite telling where your sympathies are. You conjure up some claim of "non-theistic intolerance", when this is about parents devastated at how their daughter is being used by an organisation.

[guillaumeb]

13. Well, the daughter did not literally pay for being indoctrinated by her parents.

Unless they charged her rent.

Are the parents devastated about the theism, or about the daughter paying money?

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. That's the point - the "they" in my post was the evangelicals

who did charge her rent while indoctrinating her.

[guillaumeb]

24. Do you object to rent sharing?

Millions of college students pay for board while they are taught/indoctrinated.

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Not really 'man bites dog' - cults are usually religious, so this is the norm (nt)

[rug]

6. Parents fretting about their children becoming atheists has been the stereotypical norm.

That's the dog bites man story.

This one is the man bites dog story.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. This is parents fretting about children throwing away their qualifications and career

to join a closed group which exists to get itself money, and cutting herself off from them

"We worry for her safety and her future. We grieve the loss of our beautiful daughter. We miss the way our family used to be."

Notice that she didn't end up with either of the pastor's sons - they just dumped her. It's the cult that's the problem, not just becoming a Christian.

[rug]

8. The facts stated are uncorroborated.

Much as religious parents have fretted about their atheist children becoming immoral are overwhelmingly uncorroborated.

Atheist parents fretting about their child becoming religious is just as likely.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Oh,sure, rubbish your own OP. Claim that it could all be made up, because we don't know

if they're telling the truth. OK, we'll assume from now on that anything you post with just one link is uncorroborated and should not have any attention paid to it.

[rug]

10. I'm skeptical muriel.

You should try it and be less reactive.

Regardless, it's an interesting phenomenon. People rarely change their behaviours when they change their opinions.

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. So you're saying it's not "man bites dog", it's that you think the truth might be different

and then it would be "man bites dog".

[rug]

12. No, I think it's exactly man bites dog.

When a child of a parent adopts views different from theirs, there is usually a certain amount of consternation mixed with misinformation. That's true whether the views are political, religious or musical.

There have been decades, if not centuries, of parents bewailing their children's changing - or shedding - their religion. You can see it now on dozens of websites that features atheists' "coming out" stories. I don't know, any more than you do, how accurate the details are in this letter to an advice columnist.

But I recognize the feelings, and the similarities, of these parents to those of religious parents facing the opposite.

That is the man bites dog. I expect there'll be a lot more of them coming down the pike.

[guillaumeb]

14. This:

"We worry for her safety and her future. We grieve the loss of our beautiful daughter. We miss the way our family used to be."

Obviously the parents had a vision of what the family "used to be", but the reality is that the daughter did not share that vision. She rejected the indoctrination that her parents provided and perhaps this rejection is what most concerns the parents.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. You're speculating, and assuming they aren't being open in the letter

Meh, you obviously don't care about them or the situation, since your reaction is to suggest a different situation to what was described.

[guillaumeb]

18. You also are speculating.

But your speculation supports your desired faming, making it acceptable speculation.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. No, I'm taking the letter at face value.

You made up the bit about the parents indoctrinating her. Remember, what they're sad about is her quitting her career and instead begging to raise funds for the evangelical org. They were happy that she graduated and got a good job - and that was after the first (religious) boyfriend. So the simple "taking up religion" wasn't a problem for them. It's the dubious evangelicals who charge her rent, and tell her to go and beg to cover it, that are the problem.

[guillaumeb]

20. The parents "promoted" their values and their daughter apparently shared those values.

Promoted sounds better than indoctrinated but the end result is the same.

And dubious evangelicals is pure projection on your part. Unless of course you are the arbiter of what constitutes a proper approach to religion.

We are limited to only what the parents chose to reveal about the situation. If the daughter were to be interviewed separately from the parents, one might hear a completely different version of the situation.

[muriel_volestrangler]

21. They say nothing about "promoting", or about values for that matter

so I've no idea why you've put it in quotes, or said it "sounds better".

The evangelicals are dubious because they charge her money. That's not what a religion is meant to do; if anything, it's meant to be charitable. She has to ask people to give her money so she can stay there. So, no, it's not 'projection'. ('Projection' would mean that you think I am the 'dubious' one, and am projecting my faults onto someone else. I'm sure you don't really think that, because that would be insulting. Perhaps you want to choose a better word.)

Yes, one might hear something different from the daughter. But what we see is that you assume the parents are inaccurate, while giving a pass to this sect that makes its followers pay.

[guillaumeb]

23. My comments regarded what I felt were the possible motives of the parents.

And given that we are both aware that only one side spoke, all comments are based on incomplete information.

Unless anyone here has proof that the parents' commenst are true, we are left with assuming that they are being truthful.

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. You're sticking with claiming I am projecting, then? You're calling me dubious.

Typical.

[guillaumeb]

26. Your projection in evidence:

You actually posted:

You made up the bit about the parents indoctrinating her. Remember, what they're sad about is her quitting her career and instead begging to raise funds for the evangelical org. They were happy that she graduated and got a good job - and that was after the first (religious) boyfriend. So the simple "taking up religion" wasn't a problem for them.
It's the dubious evangelicals who charge her rent, and tell her to go and beg to cover it, that are the problem.

I bolded the projection.

Either someone else is posting under your name, or you called them "dubious evangelicals" for reasons of your own.

[muriel_volestrangler]

27. saying someone is 'projecting' is accusing them of the faults they are talking about

You have to think that fault is there for it to be 'projected'. So you are calling me dubious. It's insulting. Take it back.

[guillaumeb]

28. You actually used the words "dubious evangelicals" when speaking of the group.

You are projecting your own feelings into the conversation. You know nothing about the group, nothing about the daughter, nothing about the parents.

And I know nothing about you except what I read here, but your comments about religion are many, and common in them is your dislike for religion and your disdain for some believers.

So the word dubious was actually introduced and used by you, not me.

So I hope you understand why I do not apologize for something which I did not actually say.

[muriel_volestrangler]

31. No, you have insulted me. You have called *me* 'dubious', by saying I project when I call

someone else 'dubious'. You didn't say I 'claimed'', or I 'speculated', you said it was "projection":

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Don't insult me. It's against the rules, as you know. I am allowed to called this unnamed organisation dubious, but you're not allowed to call me dubious. You are being rude and insensitive. It's also a crappy attempt at an argument - to accuse someone of being what they're calling others, rather than actually looking at what they do - take money off this woman, forcing her to beg it from other people.

I'll remember how keen you are to insult me.

[guillaumeb]

32. You introduced the word dubious, and the word projection.

Reread the entire thread if you doubt this. You described a group of people unknown to you of being "dubious evangelicals".

And then you claimed that I called you dubious. An interesting leap there.

This post presents one side of an issue. Any speculation about motives is just that, speculation. But to call people dubious evangelicals when you have no actual knowledge of their beliefs or motives is evidence of......... what? You tell me.

Is it possible evidence of an anti-faith agenda on your part? A willingness to condemn theists based simply on a version of events presented by atheistic parents?

And when I asked about projecting, I asked about you possibly projecting your personal feelings about faith into this particular situation. That is not the same as accusing you of projecting.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. No, you used 'projection' first, in #20

"dubious evangelicals is pure projection on your part". Why didn't you bother rereading the thread before making such a claim? And yes, that is obviously accusing me of projecting.

I've told you, repeatedly, what 'projection' means. I've given you a Wikipedia article. It's not a leap; I'm telling you what you're saying, in English. If I call people "dubious" for taking money from someone who can't afford it themselves, and have to beg it from others, that's an opinion.

So, now I've explained what projection is, and have shown that you accused me of it, and you can see it's an insult, you'll take it back, of course. Won't you? Because I have, deep down, this hope (belief?) that DUers are normally honourable people who don't insult other DUers. Maybe I don't have enough evidence for that yet, though.

[guillaumeb]

35. I accused you of projecting your feelings about faith

into this post.

So yes, I did use the word first. And you gave a definition of projection in a psychological sense. I was using it in the sense of introducing an element. Introducing a motive, in this case the dubious evangelical theme, with no fact to back it up.

And if you wish to express an opinion, rather than call them dubious evangelicals, an accusation, why not simply say: In my opinion.....etc?

[muriel_volestrangler]

36. "the sense of introducing an element"? Since when has that been a meaning of 'projection'?

I suggested you could have used 'claim' or 'speculate'. But instead, you're sticking with the word that means you think I'm 'dubious'. You're insulting me. Still. You reveal your stubborn dislike of me, and of the DU rules.

I don't see you saying "in my opinion" every time you say something that is clearly just your opinion.

"The mother reveals her bias". No "in my opinion" there.

"the parents groomed the daughter in their non-theistic beliefs" No "in my opinion" there.

In fact, you haven't said "in my opinion" once in the thread, despite putting forward several opinions that had no evidence to back them up. Just as well, because talking like that would become unreadable.

[guillaumeb]

37. "Just as well, because talking like that would become unreadable."

We agree on that, but I have been lectured by another who frequents this group of not speaking clearly enough. And specifically of failing to insert "in my opinion" into statements that I feel quite clearly show that it is a statement of opinion.

Projection has many meanings, and projection in a psychological sense is one of those meanings. A better choice on my part might have been injected but I wrote the words and cannot change that.

And to find insult in every disagreement is, in my opinion, not what was intended by the TOS. There are disagreements evident everywhere at DU. If we all alerted on everything with which we disagree there would be no discussion.

As to the word dubious, you inserted that word into your description of the evangelicals referenced in the post.

As to like or dislike, I have been accused a few times of disliking people here. Given that it is not likely that I know you, I cannot imagine why you would think dislike would enter the conversation. I frequently disagree with you, but like has nothing to do with it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

38. No, you can change the words. DU has an edit function, that you've refused to use

because you want the insult to stand. It's not that you 'disagree' with me, it's that you insulted me, by saying calling the evangelicals 'dubious' was "pure projection". Just search DU for the phrase "pure projection". You'll find that English speakers use it to mean that the person calling someone something is actually describing themselves.

Yes, I do think the evangelicals are dubious. They take money from a woman who can't afford it. She has to beg the money from others. That doesn't seem to worry you at all. You're fine with a con being perpetrated. I fear that because it's religious, and so you turn a blind eye.

I'm sure you dislike me because you insult me.

[guillaumeb]

39. I feel that you are insulting these evangelicals with no evidence except for the unsupported

allegations of 2 people.

And I let the post stand because I did say what you read. I admitted that perhaps a better word to describe what I intended to convey would be "inserted".

And as I said, I am not insulting you, I am disagreeing with you. So like does not enter into this equation. I literally have no idea what type of person you are, but based solely on our past conversations, it is obvious to me that we disagree on some issues regarding faith.

But if you still feel that my responses indicate that I dislike you I cannot change that belief.

[Mariana]

30. It's really a waste of time to argue with someone

who makes up a definition for a word, then continues to use it incorrectly, even after being advised of the error.

[guillaumeb]

33. See #32.

And reread the entire thread if you wish.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

29. To me the huge red flag here is

that she has no intention of quitting this extreme religious life and getting a paying job.

I've known a few people who did something similar: fell into some religious group or cult, spent their entire adult lives inside, working for them, never being paid. And then got tossed out or perhaps simply left, and are unable to get work and will not be able to collect Social Security because never paid into the system. At least if one becomes a priest or nun or pastor and works for a regular church of any kind, they're paid and they're taken care of in old age.

This young woman has completely surrendered her autonomy to this life and hasn't given any thought to the long term. And that's the real issue, not so much the religious aspect.