Are Safe Spaces for Religious Millennials Justified?

[AspieMillennial]

If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

[David Horn]

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

The most persecuted group in the religious sphere are still the atheists.  Show me even one elected official or sitting judge who is a declared atheist.

[AspieMillennial]

(06-30-2021, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

The most persecuted group in the religious sphere are still the atheists.  Show me even one elected official or sitting judge who is a declared atheist.

Most politicians are Boomers or older Gen X. In anyone under 40, the persecuted people are the religious.

[Captain Genet]

In France the government has been officially atheistic for a long time, but there are many religious people and noone stops them from practising their faith.

I think some degree of self-imposed isolation is natural for any minority culture, like the Jews in Europe before WW2. It is possible that American Christians will behave in a similar way in the future, especially when the majority starts using genetic modification.

[David Horn]

(06-30-2021, 10:11 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(06-30-2021, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

The most persecuted group in the religious sphere are still the atheists.  Show me even one elected official or sitting judge who is a declared atheist.

Most politicians are Boomers or older Gen X. In anyone under 40, the persecuted people are the religious.

Other than you saying so, is there any real evidence?  I didn't think so.

[pbrower2a]

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

Interfaith marriages happen all the time. Marriage between a person of religion and a person without religion likewise happen often. Unless one specifically asks for someone of a particular faith (as in a dating site that, for example, says that it connects Catholic singles) it is possible to end up befriending and dating atheists and agnostics. 

Hostility toward religion is usually selective. If one has antipathy to people of certain sects -- and I am not going to name names -- then you are unlikely to meet people of these sects as possible dates. (They generally stick to themselves, and for good reason. Getting along with them in a marriage if one is not already part of their sect practically requires that one fully convert to the religion and culture. Again, draw your own conclusions on who they are, as their sexts have characteristics of a cult).

Atheism and agnosticism do not preclude a moral compass.

[Eric the Green]

(06-30-2021, 10:11 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(06-30-2021, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

The most persecuted group in the religious sphere are still the atheists.  Show me even one elected official or sitting judge who is a declared atheist.

Most politicians are Boomers or older Gen X. In anyone under 40, the persecuted people are the religious.

I see some truth in this. The Millennial Generation has largely drifted away from religion, and embraced allegedly scientific worldviews like that promoted by such figures and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, while many in the older generations still cling to religion and try to impose it on all of us, and they persecute atheists and support conservative politics to do it. On the other hand, we see on wikipedia, staffed largely by millennials, a culture that denies and suppresses the paranormal, and tends toward the agnostic. I don't know to what extent this indicates that there is "persecution" of religion by young people, but then I am probably not in the online forums that Aspie is in, so I can't reply to him about it. But if so, it is natural for religious and also spiritual-but-not-religious people to find forums where they are more supported. However, if such groups tend to ape the ways and dogmas of older conservative religious people, and/or promote today's delusive conservative politics, then such groups are not worth being a part of, and whether its members know it or not, they are being stifled and oppressed. And critics of such groups are really liberators, not persecutors. It all depends.

[AspieMillennial]

(07-01-2021, 05:45 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(06-30-2021, 10:11 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(06-30-2021, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

The most persecuted group in the religious sphere are still the atheists.  Show me even one elected official or sitting judge who is a declared atheist.

Most politicians are Boomers or older Gen X. In anyone under 40, the persecuted people are the religious.

I see some truth in this. The Millennial Generation has largely drifted away from religion, and embraced allegedly scientific worldviews like that promoted by such figures and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, while many in the older generations still cling to religion and try to impose it on all of us, and they persecute atheists and support conservative politics to do it. On the other hand, we see on wikipedia, staffed largely by millennials, a culture that denies and suppresses the paranormal, and tends toward the agnostic. I don't know to what extent this indicates that there is "persecution" of religion by young people, but then I am probably not in the online forums that Aspie is in, so I can't reply to him about it. But if so, it is natural for religious and also spiritual-but-not-religious people to find forums where they are more supported. However, if such groups tend to ape the ways and dogmas of older conservative religious people, and/or promote today's delusive conservative politics, then such groups are not worth being a part of, and whether its members know it or not, they are being stifled and oppressed. And critics of such groups are really liberators, not persecutors. It all depends.

So why should young religious people talk to the atheists our age? They just mock us. Why not just be friends and just marry each other? I don't see a reason to integrate into the hostile mainstream. If some prophet child blames me for the lack of spiritual world I will tell them to blame their parents and that I had avoided most people so I can feel support.

[AspieMillennial]

(07-01-2021, 01:05 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

Interfaith marriages happen all the time. Marriage between a person of religion and a person without religion likewise happen often. Unless one specifically asks for someone of a particular faith (as in a dating site that, for example, says that it connects Catholic singles) it is possible to end up befriending and dating atheists and agnostics. 

Hostility toward religion is usually selective. If one has antipathy to people of certain sects -- and I am not going to name names -- then you are unlikely to meet people of these sects as possible dates. (They generally stick to themselves, and for good reason. Getting along with them in a marriage if one is not already part of their sect practically requires that one fully convert to the religion and culture. Again, draw your own conclusions on who they are, as their sexts have characteristics of a cult).

Atheism and agnosticism do not preclude a moral compass.

As we're becoming the minority we can't afford to have inner faith marriages or friend circles. We can evangelize but filling the friend circles or marriages with nonbelievers is a mistake. The nonbelievers would win and dominate the conversation and the believers would be left without support. I think that the Millennial and early Zoomer believers in the US take our religious beliefs more seriously though because we can't take being in the majority for granted. We see the mainstream culture as hostile so we have fewer lukewarm people.

[pbrower2a]

(07-01-2021, 09:05 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(07-01-2021, 01:05 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

Interfaith marriages happen all the time. Marriage between a person of religion and a person without religion likewise happen often. Unless one specifically asks for someone of a particular faith (as in a dating site that, for example, says that it connects Catholic singles) it is possible to end up befriending and dating atheists and agnostics. 

Hostility toward religion is usually selective. If one has antipathy to people of certain sects -- and I am not going to name names -- then you are unlikely to meet people of these sects as possible dates. (They generally stick to themselves, and for good reason. Getting along with them in a marriage if one is not already part of their sect practically requires that one fully convert to the religion and culture. Again, draw your own conclusions on who they are, as their sexts have characteristics of a cult).

Atheism and agnosticism do not preclude a moral compass.

As we're becoming the minority we can't afford to have inner faith marriages or friend circles. We can evangelize but filling the friend circles or marriages with nonbelievers is a mistake. The nonbelievers would win and dominate the conversation and the believers would be left without support. I think that the Millennial and early Zoomer believers in the US take our religious beliefs more seriously though because we can't take being in the majority for granted. We see the mainstream culture as hostile so we have fewer lukewarm people.

You still have the power to evangelize through example. You can seek to make religion an enriching and desirable part of life to people who have some gaping void in their lives.

[David Horn]

(07-01-2021, 05:45 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(06-30-2021, 10:11 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(06-30-2021, 11:22 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

The most persecuted group in the religious sphere are still the atheists.  Show me even one elected official or sitting judge who is a declared atheist.

Most politicians are Boomers or older Gen X. In anyone under 40, the persecuted people are the religious.

I see some truth in this. The Millennial Generation has largely drifted away from religion, and embraced allegedly scientific worldviews like that promoted by such figures and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, while many in the older generations still cling to religion and try to impose it on all of us, and they persecute atheists and support conservative politics to do it. On the other hand, we see on wikipedia, staffed largely by millennials, a culture that denies and suppresses the paranormal, and tends toward the agnostic. I don't know to what extent this indicates that there is "persecution" of religion by young people, but then I am probably not in the online forums that Aspie is in, so I can't reply to him about it. But if so, it is natural for religious and also spiritual-but-not-religious people to find forums where they are more supported. However, if such groups tend to ape the ways and dogmas of older conservative religious people, and/or promote today's delusive conservative politics, then such groups are not worth being a part of, and whether its members know it or not, they are being stifled and oppressed. And critics of such groups are really liberators, not persecutors. It all depends.

If this wasn't happening, I would be shocked. We've had decades of intense religiosity -- mostly from the Christian Right, but a lot of New Age stuff too.  If we have no other beliefs we all share on this forum, the cyclic nature of history is at the core.  By no means does that support the argument that Christians are being persecuted.  Losing their vaunted status as the default belief doesn't qualify.

[sbarrera]

This thread clearly shows a much different experience of religion in society by Boomers versus Millennials. I get the impression that Boomers, having grown up with Christianity as the mainstream, can't imagine what it might be like to be a young Christian feeling like they are in the minority.

As an Xer, I take religion as a personal matter and say, believe what makes sense to you and don't let what others think worry you.

AspieMillennial, that might be tough advice for you, but that's what I think you should do. Yes, your generation is moving away from Christianity as the societal mainstream and you might feel persecuted if your view isn't respected, but that's just how religious freedom works.

[AspieMillennial]

(07-02-2021, 11:04 AM)sbarrera Wrote: This thread clearly shows a much different experience of religion in society by Boomers versus Millennials. I get the impression that Boomers, having grown up with Christianity as the mainstream, can't imagine what it might be like to be a young Christian feeling like they are in the minority.

As an Xer, I take religion as a personal matter and say, believe what makes sense to you and don't let what others think worry you.

AspieMillennial, that might be tough advice for you, but that's what I think you should do. Yes, your generation is moving away from Christianity as the societal mainstream and you might feel persecuted if your view isn't respected, but that's just how religious freedom works.

For young Christians we are more hardcore in our faith because so many in our generation are against our religion. The other side refused to compromise with us so our beliefs are much stronger. We're more against compromise with mainstream society because we see mainstream society as wicked. We are also more into liturgy and apologetics. What you should expect in the 1T are 2 camps of people: atheists and agnostics and hardcore believers. The lukewarm and casual believers aren't there as much.

If someone refuses to respect my choices I can and will block them and can and will cut off a friendship. Safe spaces are necessary for us to survive.

[AspieMillennial]

(07-02-2021, 06:31 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(07-01-2021, 09:05 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(07-01-2021, 01:05 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-29-2021, 07:27 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: If the majority is going to be atheistic, I don't see why someone religious would marry an atheist or agnostic, date them, or be close friends. I think a "safe space" is justified because we are the minority and the majority persecutes us especially online. Until the culture becomes less hostile towards religion, we need safe spaces to survive and our own clubs and groups.

Interfaith marriages happen all the time. Marriage between a person of religion and a person without religion likewise happen often. Unless one specifically asks for someone of a particular faith (as in a dating site that, for example, says that it connects Catholic singles) it is possible to end up befriending and dating atheists and agnostics. 

Hostility toward religion is usually selective. If one has antipathy to people of certain sects -- and I am not going to name names -- then you are unlikely to meet people of these sects as possible dates. (They generally stick to themselves, and for good reason. Getting along with them in a marriage if one is not already part of their sect practically requires that one fully convert to the religion and culture. Again, draw your own conclusions on who they are, as their sexts have characteristics of a cult).

Atheism and agnosticism do not preclude a moral compass.

As we're becoming the minority we can't afford to have inner faith marriages or friend circles. We can evangelize but filling the friend circles or marriages with nonbelievers is a mistake. The nonbelievers would win and dominate the conversation and the believers would be left without support. I think that the Millennial and early Zoomer believers in the US take our religious beliefs more seriously though because we can't take being in the majority for granted. We see the mainstream culture as hostile so we have fewer lukewarm people.

You still have the power to evangelize through example. You can seek to make religion an enriching and desirable part of life to people who have some gaping void in their lives.

Yes but that's different than marrying a nonbeliever. Religious Millennials can't afford to do it. We need the spouse to affirm the same belief. The marriage should be a place to escape from the world. If you marry a nonbelievers you don't get a break. I am consoled I don't live in Western Europe or the Western part of the US that are more atheist though.

[AspieMillennial]

One thing is that religious Millennials and Zoomers are refusing to date outside the faith. Believers are also divorcing the nonbelieving spouses for disbelief. There is more hardcore dedication as atheism becomes more common.

[pbrower2a]

Call attention instead to what you have in common. Maybe you both love golf... or skiing... or jazz... or horseback riding... or the ballet.... Religion does not matter that much if you enjoy the rest.

Morals are an issue, and I can easily accept that someone would get a divorce if a spouse became violent, abusive, improvident, or adulterous. There are things to which I cannot relate, like gambling. I hate drugs and drunkenness. I am not going to risk my life for some evanescent thrill.

I can see religion as useful at times; children and the feeble-minded can develop some moral ideas more readily from religion than from some arcane discussion of right and wrong. On the other hand, I prefer that nutters and sociopaths stay clear of religion. They are likely to do more harm to the religion in question and get nothing from religion except themes that they can abuse.

I took a simple test a few years ago that determined what religious traditions or novelties would best fit me. The top three were

Unitarian-Universalist
liberal Quaker
Reform Judaism

I consider a conscience far more desirable than religious dogma. The Spanish Inquisition was strong on dogma and weak on conscience. I can't say that there is no God but there is no more than one, as the Universe itself operates in accordance with well-connected realities of mathematics, physics, and the dialectic. I reject intolerance, especially if violent, and those three traditions are don't evangelize. (OK, there is an effort among Reform Jews to get the non-Jewish spouse in an interfaith marriage to convert... but that would be obvious in my case were I to marry a Jewish woman). These traditions are sympathetic to the intellect... and have no room for rogues. None offers the questionable reward of cheap grace in return for faith. I question the validity of miracles.

[David Horn]

(07-02-2021, 05:10 PM)BAspieMillennial Wrote: One thing is that religious Millennials and Zoomers are refusing to date outside the faith. Believers are also divorcing the nonbelieving spouses for disbelief. There is more hardcore dedication as atheism becomes more common.

So you are now the intolerants you accuse others of being. Be a bit introspective. It’s extremely valuable.

[AspieMillennial]

(07-02-2021, 07:02 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(07-02-2021, 05:10 PM)BAspieMillennial Wrote: One thing is that religious Millennials and Zoomers are refusing to date outside the faith. Believers are also divorcing the nonbelieving spouses for disbelief. There is more hardcore dedication as atheism becomes more common.

So you are now the intolerants you accuse others of being. Be a bit introspective. It’s extremely valuable.

Millennials are very much into consensus. If we compromise our beliefs they will overpower us and will refuse to compromise with us. We will have compromised for no reason. They don't live and let live so we don't have that option as Christians.

[Eric the Green]

(07-02-2021, 07:13 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(07-02-2021, 07:02 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(07-02-2021, 05:10 PM)BAspieMillennial Wrote: One thing is that religious Millennials and Zoomers are refusing to date outside the faith. Believers are also divorcing the nonbelieving spouses for disbelief. There is more hardcore dedication as atheism becomes more common.

So you are now the intolerants you accuse others of being. Be a bit introspective. It’s extremely valuable.

Millennials are very much into consensus. If we compromise our beliefs they will overpower us and will refuse to compromise with us. We will have compromised for no reason. They don't live and let live so we don't have that option as Christians.

It could be the consensus of the 1T. It could be the secular tech-oriented attitude, and the middle aged millennials will conform and set the tone and religion will be suppressed. It will be interesting to see if you religious folks can find your place in the next "high-tech high." Will there be enough consensus and enough prosperity to allow a conformist society, or won't there still be so many concerns that rebels and traditionalists alike will still question authority and depart from the predominant consensus? I tend to think so.

In the last 1T, it was kind of a mix. People had both secular and religious; well, sorta. We had the humanist manifesto becoming accepted and the materialist and tech worship and progress is our most important product, and the men in the grey flannel suit keeping up with the Joneses and the Giacometti Man and the inner gyroscopes. We also had Norman Vincent Peale (an inspiration to Trump) and plain-looking churches on every street corner and people going dutifully on Sundays to lifeless services and getting preached at. You could have you choice, or do both; in either case in mindless robotic motion. But it was OK, at least for white guys; they had their secure careers and pensions and earned their silver watches, and the middle class was growing and America was the top and lots of great new conveniences ("what will they think of next?") and amazing freeways and cars that looked like rocket ships and TV shows like Leave it to Beaver and those disgusting westerns all the time creating the myth of America, and we only had to worry about the Russians and love the bomb, and maybe look for a red under every bed.... 

If you weren't a white straight adult guy though, you were fair game for abuse or put downs or red-lined-confinement in ghettos, which however were still communities. Not for long though, because urban renewal and black removal was in the works too.

[Eric the Green]

(07-02-2021, 05:10 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote: One thing is that religious Millennials and Zoomers are refusing to date outside the faith. Believers are also divorcing the nonbelieving spouses for disbelief. There is more hardcore dedication as atheism becomes more common.

Civic generations are supposed to be more collegial, and critics of Boomer righteousness are looking to Millennials and Gen Z to be more accepting, less doctrinaire, more flexible and more fact-oriented. You are saying that today's polarization will continue through your generation, and that Millennials are just as uncompromising as Boomers are alleged to be. I don't know if you are correct about your generation, though. It's your view, your report. We'll see.