Dating an Atheist

[epan]

Bottom line is, if he is not willing to wait for her until marriage, then he does not truly love her. By saying I will give you one year, means he is ONLY willing to wait 1 year. Although he said “He will try because he loves her” this is good, then there is a chance he might really love her if he actually does not violate her beliefs after the year.

I have a good friend who is agnostic who married a Catholic. They were sexually active prior to marriage, however, he is a very respectful guy, and allows the wife to raise the kids catholic.

Although he is a great guy, pre-marital sex is one of the worst sins anyone can commit with there potential spouse and it’s unfortunate that Catholic women are lowering there standards

Please explain why premarital sex is one of the worst sins.

I would rank murder, rape, genocide, fraud, stealing … as among the “worst”

 

[1ke]

Please explain why premarital sex is one of the worst sins.

I would rank murder, rape, genocide, fraud, stealing … as among the “worst”

I believe you have misunderstood the post. The poster stated that premarital sex is one of the worst sins that a person can commit with their future spouse.

 

[epan]

I believe you have misunderstood the post. The poster stated that premarital sex is one of the worst sins that a person can commit with their future spouse.

Thanks. Well I guess hypothetically, there are worse things one could do with another. But, I get the point.

 

[Hokomai]

But atheism is not good. It is a cancer of the soul. It is poison and it is dangerous… it is the very definition of insanity … So, you really want to let that cancer of atheist belief into your home, your children, your most intimate relationship?
.

This is an excellent example of the things people are able to say about atheism and non-belief on CAF which we would not be allowed to say about belief. Try replacing the word ‘atheism’ with ‘Judaism’ or ‘SSPX belief’ to see what I mean. My efforts to promote a rule change to encourage more respectful language about what are genuine conclusions about the world were rejected. So all I can do is appeal to you 1ke, and others, to consider posting in a way which puts your view without the use of uncharitable language which leads to anger, and not to understanding.

 

[epan]

This is an excellent example of the things people are able to say about atheism and non-belief on CAF which we would not be allowed to say about belief. Try replacing the word ‘atheism’ with ‘Judaism’ or ‘SSPX belief’ to see what I mean. My efforts to promote a rule change to encourage more respectful language about what are genuine conclusions about the world were rejected. So all I can do is appeal to you 1ke, and others, to consider posting in a way which puts your view without the use of uncharitable language which leads to anger, and not to understanding.

 

[BettyBoop416]

This is an excellent example of the things people are able to say about atheism and non-belief on CAF which we would not be allowed to say about belief. Try replacing the word ‘atheism’ with ‘Judaism’ or ‘SSPX belief’ to see what I mean. My efforts to promote a rule change to encourage more respectful language about what are genuine conclusions about the world were rejected. So all I can do is appeal to you 1ke, and others, to consider posting in a way which puts your view without the use of uncharitable language which leads to anger, and not to understanding.

As one who grew up in the Church, attended Catholic school, and attends mass every week, I have identified several “hot button” issues that most CAF type Catholics share. Any sense of reason seems to just fly out the window where these issues are concerned - they just see red and start foaming at the mouth. Although most of these issues are related to sexuality, there are a few related to other belief systems. Or, as in the case of atheism, a lack of belief system. For example:

But atheism is not good. It is a cancer of the soul. It is poison and it is dangerous… it is the very definition of insanity.

While this poster (understandably - this is a Catholic website after all) does not embrace atheism, to suggest that an individual is insane simply because they don’t believe in God is just mindless.

As for any rule changes to promote a more civilized discourse regarding such hot button topics, don’t hold your breath. Respect is a one-way street around here where these subjects are concerned.

 

[Hokomai]

. Respect is a one-way street around here where these subjects are concerned.

I appreciate your concern for us and others! A surprising number of people are respectful to me despite the upset I cause from time to time, and some are quite witty in their responses. Non-believers like me have to always remind ourselves about how deeply people feel about religion. Oddly, I have taken to quoting the Catechism on this, which, I am embarrassed to say, gives what I think is really good guidance:

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.277 He becomes guilty:

• of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
• of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;278
• of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
  2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
  Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. and if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.279
  2479 Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one’s neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I appreciate your concern for us and others! A surprising number of people are respectful to me despite the upset I cause from time to time, and some are quite witty in their responses. Non-believers like me have to always remind ourselves about how deeply people feel about religion. Oddly, I have taken to quoting the Catechism on this, which, I am embarrassed to say, gives what I think is really good guidance:

We’re gonna rope you in yet, just wait!



An atheist quoting the Catechism? Oh, yeah, you’re in trouble now, buddy!

 

[1ke]

This is an excellent example of the things people are able to say about atheism and non-belief on CAF which we would not be allowed to say about belief. Try replacing the word ‘atheism’ with ‘Judaism’ or ‘SSPX belief’ to see what I mean. My efforts to promote a rule change to encourage more respectful language about what are genuine conclusions about the world were rejected. So all I can do is appeal to you 1ke, and others, to consider posting in a way which puts your view without the use of uncharitable language which leads to anger, and not to understanding.

Atheism is a grave offense against God and the First Commandment.

It is dangerous, it is false, and we are called to speak out against it.

Gaudium et Spes, 19: atheism must be accounted among the most serious problems of this age

Gaudium et Spes 21: In her loyal devotion to God and men, the Church has already repudiated and cannot cease repudiating, sorrowfully but as firmly as possible, those poisonous doctrines and actions which contradict reason and the common experience of humanity, and dethrone man from his native excellence.

I think you must again make sure you understand that I am talking about atheism, not atheists or any particular atheist. As a system, atheism is false and dangerous. The Church says poisonous, I say cancerous. To me, those are synonyms.

 

[1ke]

to suggest that an individual is insane simply because they don’t believe in God is just mindless.

I did not do so. Please stop with the logical fallacies.

I stated atheism is the definition of insanity in the context of contrasting it with objective reality.

As for any rule changes to promote a more civilized discourse regarding such hot button topics, don’t hold your breath. Respect is a one-way street around here where these subjects are concerned.

Actually, atheism is a banned topic on CAF so we are treading on some thin ice on this thread. Its main topic is not atheism, but rather the relationship of a Catholic with an atheist. But clearly it is going to wander in that direction due to the nature of this particular relationship.

 

[1ke]

I appreciate your concern for us and others! A surprising number of people are respectful to me despite the upset I cause from time to time, and some are quite witty in their responses. Non-believers like me have to always remind ourselves about how deeply people feel about religion. Oddly, I have taken to quoting the Catechism on this, which, I am embarrassed to say, gives what I think is really good guidance:

And again, I made no statements about YOU or any individal atheist regarding their belief system. My statements were about the belief system of atheism itself.

 

[1ke]

We’re gonna rope you in yet, just wait!



An atheist quoting the Catechism? Oh, yeah, you’re in trouble now, buddy!

I would like to point out, however, that a certain pitchfork toting individual himself quoted Scripture.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

We’re gonna rope you in yet, just wait!



An atheist quoting the Catechism? Oh, yeah, you’re in trouble now, buddy!

I actually own a catechism. And a rosary. Both were gifts from my soon to be SIL. No signs of conversion yet.

 

[epan]

Atheism is a grave offense against God and the First Commandment.

It is dangerous, it is false, and we are called to speak out against it.

Gaudium et Spes, 19: atheism must be accounted among the most serious problems of this age

Gaudium et Spes 21: In her loyal devotion to God and men, the Church has already repudiated and cannot cease repudiating, sorrowfully but as firmly as possible, those poisonous doctrines and actions which contradict reason and the common experience of humanity, and dethrone man from his native excellence.

I think you must again make sure you understand that I am talking about atheism, not atheists or any particular atheist. As a system, atheism is false and dangerous. The Church says poisonous, I say cancerous. To me, those are synonyms.

Why would an atheist be concerned about the first commandment?

This is a Catholic apologist site. One would expect a particular point of view. But I would hope that humor, charity, and tolerance of the foibles and variations of the human condition would overcome any differences enough to allow forthright and positive communication.

We all know that many of these concepts cannot be proved, but are taken instead on faith, and acceptance is based on personal experience, spiritual seeking, reflextion, and introspection.

Even when I strongly disagree with someone, that is not a reason to uncharitable or to closely ears to that person’s voice, humanity, and spirituality, no matter how those things manifest.

 

[adv]

Read Theology of the Body for Beginners by Christopher West. It will give you some insight.

 

[BettyBoop416]

I did not do so. Please stop with the logical fallacies.

You stated (even though you subsequently had it edited out) that “atheism is the very definition of insanity.” Assuming your premise is true, it would not be illogical to assume that if someone was an atheist, you would consider that person to be insane.

As for logical fallacies, almost every argument you present here on CAF begins with a logical fallacy - appeal to authority - and then works backwards. Although I struggle with it, for the most part, I share your faith. I do not, however, share your twisted logic. Nor do I stick my fingers in my ears and pretend that other, perfectly valid, points of view do not exist.

I stated atheism is the definition of insanity in the context of contrasting it with objective reality.

I don’t even know what you’re trying to say here.

Actually, atheism is a banned topic on CAF so we are treading on some thin ice on this thread.

The whole concept of a “banned topic” gives me the creeps, but OK.

 

[1ke]

You stated (even though you subsequently had it edited out) that “atheism is the very definition of insanity.”

I didn’t edit anything out.

Assuming your premise is true, it would not be illogical to assume that if someone was an atheist, you would consider that person to be insane.

No, it does not follow at all from my premise.

As for logical fallacies - almost every argument you present here on CAF begins with a logical fallacy - appeal to authority - and then works backwards. Although I struggle with it, for the most part, I share your faith. I do not, however, share your twisted logic.

When people ask for Church teaching on a matter, that is not an “appeal to authority”
fallacy. After all, that is the entire starting point for the Catholic faith. If I were on some other type of board, I would likely choose different arguments. I am on a Catholic board, and when people ask the Church’s teaching on a matter, I am going to respond with it.

 

[1ke]

I don’t even know what you’re trying to say here.

Yes, I know. That is why you think I’ve called atheists insane when I have not.

I could contemplate another direction to take here in this discussion, but I think that would be venturing too far off into the actual topic of atheism. So, let’s just drop it. I did not call atheists insane.

The whole concept of a “banned topic” gives me the creeps, but OK.

Well, when you have your own board you can make your own rules. I have no problems with the parameters here on CAF nor do I think it is “creepy” to have rules.

 

[BettyBoop416]

I didn’t edit anything out.

That’s odd. It’s not there anymore.

When people ask for Church teaching on a matter, that is not an “appeal to authority” fallacy. After all, that is the entire starting point for the Catholic faith. If I were on some other type of board, I would likely choose different arguments. I am on a Catholic board, and when people ask the Church’s teaching on a matter, I am going to respond with it.

Fair enough. Just don’t call it logic.

Yes, I know. That is why you think I’ve called atheists insane when I have not.

Aren’t you the witty one.

I could contemplate another direction to take here in this discussion, but I think that would be venturing too far off into the actual topic of atheism. So, let’s just drop it. I did not call atheists insane.

Agreed. Consider it dropped.

 

[epan]

Yes, I know. That is why you think I’ve called atheists insane when I have not.

I could contemplate another direction to take here in this discussion, but I think that would be venturing too far off into the actual topic of atheism. So, let’s just drop it. I did not call atheists insane.

Well, when you have your own board you can make your own rules. I have no problems with the parameters here on CAF nor do I think it is “creepy” to have rules.

Banned topic? does this mean that there are topics which cannot be talked about on this blog? Why would that be? Too contentious?