Recovering from Religion


Recovering from Religion

Unless you were raised by atheist parents, you probably had some recovering to do when you left religion. The purpose of RR is to provide a landing place for people when they jump from religion. With local support groups throughout the US, Canada, UK, and Australia, and real-time resources accessible to everyone, RR is where to turn when faith has lost its luster.

Location: International
Members: 541
Latest Activity: Dec 3, 2016

Discussion Forum

Religious Trauma Syndrome (RTS)

Started by Steph S. Jun 8, 2015. 0 Replies

This is a good website for help in recovering from religion of Religious Trauma Syndrome:• Cognitive: Confusion, poor critical thinking ability, negative beliefs about…Continue

In what way are you still recovering from being brought up religious?

Started by Steph S.. Last reply by Richard C Brown Aug 30, 2014. 57 Replies

I was brought up in a fundamentalist family.Anyone still dealing with any issues from religion?Do you fear the result of coming out Atheist to your family?Any thoughts are welcome.Continue

Catholic Family / Atheist Wedding - HELP

Started by Megan. Last reply by tom sarbeck May 31, 2014. 4 Replies

Any one else out there still recovering from Catholic guilt??I come from an extremely Catholic family/upbringing. In 6 days I will be the first person in my entire extended family not to marry a Catholic in a Catholic Church.My biggest source of…Continue

Anyone still deal with anything like this?

Started by Starland Seay. Last reply by Matt Skaggs Aug 26, 2013. 27 Replies

One thing I have noticed is a tendency to "doubt" my new path in life. I still want to reach for the Bible sometimes. I still hesitate somewhat when someone mentions Pascal's "Wager"...LOL! Even though I know that science teaches this and that no…Continue

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Recovering from Religion to add comments!

Comment by Mary O'Grady on December 15, 2012 at 9:22am

I don't want to develop a thick skin. I want to be myself, and to be treated as I treat others, with a reasonable degree of sensitivity. I won't voluntarily deal with unkind, abrasive people, no matter how clever they are believed to be.

Comment by Joan Denoo on December 15, 2012 at 8:45am
James, Alice, and Kara, you convince me rationality negates empathy and empathy negates rationality. It is a matter of balancing the two. One person cannot be all things to all people; finding strength and developing understanding presents the tasks at hand. I can also benefit by understanding weaknesses and learning from them.
Alice, you prove, once again, you have wisdom beyond your years.
Kara, you correctly observe, "What was he supposed to do, encourage the man in his delusion? That would have been far more cruel in the long run."
James, your keen observations help keep me grounded.
I am so grateful to have you, each one, as a friend.
Comment by James M. Martin on December 15, 2012 at 8:13am

@ Alice, I sure do agree with the statement that rationality negates empathy and vice-versa.  I have to work on balancing those two.

Comment by Alice on December 15, 2012 at 3:49am

Dawkins has lead a privileged life.  He is a matter of fact man, not well versed in emotional response.  He has also achieved a lot in his own field of evolutionary biology and in addition to this in his educational role at Oxford to promote science to the public.  He has gone above and beyond to educate the world about the facts of reality - and to my mind he has done this to the best of his ability - achieving a lot in more than his birth country.  Again his ability is hampered by his limited life experience, as being very privileged and lacking skills to respond empathically to others.  I saw somewhere that rationally negates empathy and vice versa.  So when someone is particularly rational they find it more difficult to be empathic, and conversely when someone is empathic they find if more difficult to be rational.  We all have our gifts, strengths and weaknesses.

Comment by Joan Denoo on December 15, 2012 at 1:56am

Kara and Alice, I understand your position on Dawkins; he could have said something to acknowledge the man's pain and cognitive dissonance he experienced and then make his honest statement. Dawkins didn't acknowledge the man's pain nor Rebecca's. I  experienced those episodes as being harsh. Brief enough? 

Comment by Kara Ward on December 15, 2012 at 1:07am

I agree with Alice, I've seen that clip but there's really nothing abrasive about it. If he had called the man a name I could understand that being abrasive, but he was completely factual and honest. What was he supposed to do, encourage the man in his delusion? That would have been far more cruel in the long run.

Here's the loaded question: What SHOULD he have said? And please keep it brief. :-P

Comment by Alice on December 15, 2012 at 12:39am

I don't see Dawkins as being none compassionate here - he is simply stating the facts as he sees them.  I find his answer clear, honest and factual.  I think he deals with this situation excellently given his position and the setting.  He remains calm and respectful.  If what he says is cutting or hurtful for others then that is the cold hard facts of life - and Dawkins aims to provide some comfort when he says that he doesn't doubt that the man is sincere in his beliefs.

Comment by Joan Denoo on December 15, 2012 at 12:12am

Kara, Dawkins can be pretty rough on believers, and rightly so. There was one tape, months ago, that was so wrenching; I wanted to see more compassion. Dawkins could have been more compassionate, even as he was correct in what he said. Dawkins sincerely responded honestly, and the poor old man withered at Dawkins words. I desire to be as clear as Dawkins and I suspect there is no way to do this kind of encounter any more gently.

What do you others think?

Richard Dawkins cruelly answers audience question

When it comes to being rude, abrasive, short, blunt, and intimidating, Religious seem to have these characteristics down pretty pat. So, I guess we just have to toughen up. 

Comment by Kara Ward on December 14, 2012 at 11:55pm

@Tabitha: Don't believe everything you hear about Dawkins; I think he's just the sweetest old man. 

I can't believe I'm Kara#2 here, and I also used to be Wiccan! This is going to get confusing... ;-)

Comment by Joan Denoo on December 14, 2012 at 11:53pm

So many people don't like Richard Dawkins because he says what is on his mind and you don't have to wonder what he means. He can be rude, abrasive, short, blunt. and intimidating. 

One of the things I like about him, he makes sense. To be confronted by him, one has to have a tough skin. Some just don't want to listen to someone as direct as he. He was abrupt with Rebecca and she is one tough lady. She was right in calling him on his attitude toward her and he should have seen her side. And I don't think he still does. With women such as Rebecca, we can see that she is not intimidated by him, she can stand up to him and come out of it stronger and respected by women such as I. 

P.Z Meyers recognizes the challenges facing women in the atheist movement and stood powerfully beside her, both in his public statements and in his writings. Meyers has my respect for that. 

I guess the trick is to develop a thick skin, get used to abrasive men and women from all points of view, and don't let your ego get in the way of what you believe. If another woman were to give the same speech as Rebecca, about sexism in the atheist movement, I hope more men and women will stand with her. It is most unusual for women to be vocal when confronted with such behaviors and attitudes and we will do better if we do stronger. 


Members (537)




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service