Topic: Can anyone explain to me the mentality of people who kick out their kids over religion/orientation?
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago#15,547
Maybe it's just me thinking rationally, but the idea of kicking one of my children out with no place to go over them preferring to be with the same sex or praying towards Mecca confuses me. Even if I was a religious person, I don't see how I could justify sending one of my children (whom I love) out on their own over something so trivial. Can anyone explain this mindset?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later[^][v]#271,508
To them its not trivial.
Liken it to, perhaps, how you'd feel if your child murdered somebody.
Hmm... well actually I'd still love my child if they did...
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,509
To a devout religious believer, their child's disbelief isn't exactly "trivial". In some twisted way, they don't kick their kids out because they don't love them, but because they love them so much. They genuinely believe, as most Christians/Muslims/Jews do, that their child will end up in burning hell for all eternity.
Same applies to gay kids. Homosexuality and atheism earn you a one-way ticket to hell, apparently.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,510
@previous (C)
How does kicking them out show that love, though? It's one thing for them to believe they'll burn in hell, and something entirely different to ostracize them over it.
Meowth !WcOabcjNAM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 20 seconds later, 11 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,511
"Tough Love"
I dunno man.
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,518
@271,510 (A)
I suppose kicking them out is seen as the ultimate punishment — a desperate attempt to get the child to change their ways. It might seem crazy to us, but if you really believed the child you loved was going to be tortured for eternity, you would respond in a similar fashion.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,521
@previous (C)
Maybe you're right :/ I just...I guess I can't imagine thinking like that since I'm not really into that belief. In my head, I'd consider my love for my children to be greater than for some man in the sky. But again, I guess I can't imagine that way of thinking without living it.
postmortem !!Qe8ScDbX+ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 26 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,531
It seems like the natural instinct to love and protect your own would supersede any sort of cultural ideals, regardless of how important they are to you. However, humanity is known often for breaking away from its natural instinct, and that's especially true of religion. The whole abstinence shtick is inherently against human nature for instance. So in a way it makes sense that somebody with religion would even do something so drastic as reject their own child. Furthermore it's hard to look at it from the perspective of someone who believes in God, because it isn't fucking rational, but if God is the rational choice for you, it's fucking God. Master of the universe, all powerful, more important than the entirety of the universe. Which is also why I think atheists who try to debate with Christians, and wonder why "atheist" campaigns garner such distaste are completely and totally fucking dumb.
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 41 seconds later, 27 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,533
@271,521 (A)
Exactly, that's the problem. It's difficult to try to grasp the mindset of someone who believes in talking snakes, and other things which seem nonsense to us. It's especially hard for someone who has never been religious.
Personally, I would never throw out anyone I loved, no matter what.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,545
@271,531 (postmortem !!Qe8ScDbX+)
They're still fucking retarded. If they really loved their child, as good Christians they would forgive them, not judge them, and try to help them. They're not following the teachings of Jesus. They're just assholes who think they can use religion to justify their hate for that which they don't understand. They're lazy parents, and they don't love their kids if they just kick them out like that. It's not like they can say "Well I love my kids, but my religion says I have to do this" when their religion says to do just the opposite. They're hypocrites.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 32 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,547
@271,533 (C)
It would take something much more serious than religion or sexuality for me to kick out one of my children. Again, why I don't understand the ease at which Christians can kick out their children.
It makes me think somewhat of a quote from Christopher Hitchens. I'm paraphrasing somewhat, but it was something like, "If I was told to sacrifice my kids to appease God, or to admire the person who does, I'd say 'no, fuck you' ". (That was a bad paraphrase, but you get the idea).
> It seems like the natural instinct to love and protect your own would supersede any sort of cultural ideals, regardless of how important they are to you.
That's what I would assume, and how it would be with me. It really upsets me that people will put their beliefs over people they supposedly love and can see and feel.
EDIT: Actual quote of Hitch: "And not scorning the three delightful children who result— who are everything to me and who are my only chance of even a glimpse of a second life, let alone an immortal one, and I’ll tell you something: if I was told to sacrifice them to prove my devotion to God, if I was told to do what all monotheists are told to do and admire the man who said, “Yes, I’ll gut my kid to show my love of God,†I’d say, “No, fuck you!""
(Edited 9 minutes later.)
postmortem !!Qe8ScDbX+ replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 37 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,553
Anonymous C replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 52 minutes after the original post[^][v]#271,559
@271,547 (A) > It really upsets me that people will put their beliefs over people they supposedly love and can see and feel.
Responsible, caring parents would act to protect their children and keep them from harm's way, yes? Now imagine you had a child, and you thought your child was destined to Hell if he didn't believe in God. How would you respond? I imagine you would respond like any other parent who wanted to protect their kid — you would feel angry, disappointed and scared. While kicking them out is irrational and absolutely an unChristian thing to do, parents don't do it because they hate or don't love them, but because they do love them.
Even if God were real, I would definitely respond in a manner similar to Hitchens if asked to sacrifice anyone.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#271,604
It's because they worship lies. The pain of facing that is greater than the pain of losing a child.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 hours later, 21 hours after the original post[^][v]#271,809
It's like kicking out a kid with a drug problem to them.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 9 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#271,914
kook !nH6RAuX8mo joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#271,915
@previous (I)
it really doesn't make sense. they can't get help on the streets.
Handel !khEOdtKF56 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#271,986
Lets look at it the other way, what if your child was the religious one and the parent was atheist.
Would you kick your child out if he was constantly telling you that you were going to hell and had to change your ways.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#271,993
@previous (Handel !khEOdtKF56)
probably not, but that's not really a fair comparison. atheists aren't actively threatening their religious parents with certain doom.
Handel !khEOdtKF56 replied with this 15 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#272,020
> Would you kick your child out if he was constantly telling you that you were going to hell and had to change your ways.
No but I'd tell him to shut the fuck up and defeat him in debate about religion whenever it comes up. His arguments would be awful since he will probably be like 13 or something when he's doing that shit, it would probably be stuff like "look out of the window, are you seriously saying that stuff came about by accident?"
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#272,171
Looking at it from another perspective:
Would you kick your child out if they joined the KKK or a neo-nazi group and started behaving in a viciously anti-social manner? I would, and if they refused to leave, I'd call the cops and have them removed without a moment's hesitation.
It's not about religion or choice of partner. At the end of the day, it's about protecting your home. When you have a unibomber writing up his manifesto in your basement, you don't care whether he's a blood relative or not.
(Edited 53 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#272,173
Nah, racists aren't necessarily disturbed, they're just assholes. I wouldn't tolerate assholes of any kind in my home under any circumstances.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#272,190
@previous (L)
There's most likely some root cause for them going down that route. Instead of blindly kicking them out, I'd work on finding out why they've begun hating other races and see what I could do to get them out of this thought pattern.
Anonymous L replied with this 15 years ago, 19 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#272,206
I think that making my child homeless and plunging them into absolute poverty would cause them to commit more crime than keeping them where I can monitor them and help them back to health would.
You are extremely short-sighted and would be a bad parent.
archalana replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#272,975
@previous (I)
that's true. if your drug addicted daughter was on the streets, she would likely become a hooker. no one wants that.
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 8 hours later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#273,133
@272,972 (I)
"Monitor them"? WTF? You got cameras in their room or something? They don't have a job, they bum round all day every day and attract criminal attention to your house. You on the other hand, do have a job, and worry every day that they are stealing your cash, or pawning your wife's jewellery for another fix.
YOU are short-sighted. I am taking the long-term, big picture view. It would initially be unpleasant, but it would be a catalyst for change.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#273,207
> "Monitor them"? WTF? You got cameras in their room or something?
No, dumbfuck, but it's pretty easy to keep an eye on somebody if they are in the same house as you.
> They don't have a job, they bum round all day every day and attract criminal attention to your house. You on the other hand, do have a job, and worry every day that they are stealing your cash, or pawning your wife's jewellery for another fix.
The situation was "your child has a drug problem" and just that. Where did you get all this additional detail from? Your ass?
> YOU are short-sighted. I am taking the long-term, big picture view. It would initially be unpleasant, but it would be a catalyst for change.
The only change that would happen is that your child would become a criminal because otherwise they would starve to death. You are a fucking idiot if you think that throwing them to the wolves can help them in any way. Don't have kids.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#273,251
@273,133 (H)
the change could be a very bad change. don't you see? they're more likely to be murdered,raped, infected with hepatitis etc. on the streets. homeless junkies share needles and commit horrible acts of crime or experience horrible loses of dignity.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 18 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#273,260
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#273,381
@273,207 (I) > No, dumbfuck, but it's pretty easy to keep an eye on somebody if they are in the same house as you.
When you are at work, they are home. When you come home from work, they go out with friends. They only time you know they live at your house is when you notice things are being stolen.
> The situation was "your child has a drug problem" and just that. Where did you get all this additional detail from? Your ass?
You don't have a problem with drugs unless you are doing these things. Or are you against drugs because they're sinful? lol
> The only change that would happen is that your child would become a criminal because otherwise they would starve to death. You are a fucking idiot if you think that throwing them to the wolves can help them in any way. Don't have kids.
Not subsidizing a drug habit is "throwing them to the wolves"? lol betafag
Anonymous H double-posted this 15 years ago, 58 seconds later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#273,383
@273,251 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
What's the alternative? Subsidize their drug habit for the rest of their life?