Universal Atheist Single and Part time Parents


Universal Atheist Single and Part time Parents

For universal atheist parents with religious former spouses...

Location: International
Members: 7
Latest Activity: Mar 10, 2011

This group is for UniAPE (universal atheist) single parents with religious former spouses. It is for exposing and discussing the dirty tricks, nuttiness, and structured psychological abuses perpetrated on atheist spouses and their children by religious former spouses backed by religious institutions and their co-optively weaponising doctrines, and for the discussion and sharing of informed and intelligent strategies for managing and responding to such psychological abuses and basic insults to decent humanity and decent human behaviour. Note: I study cognitive science and philosophy, but am NOT a psychologist/therapist etc. - just a 'sufferer'. Do not use real names of former spouses and protect the interests of children. Here is some discussion to help get us started:

{Rant warning! Peroration alert! Our pioneering member TN has pointed out, quite rightly, that this is something of a mammoth essay and that I should cut it down. I should of course, but it probably isn't going to happen: I'm too busy and too pre-occupied. Besides, if you can wade through it, you should find some helpful insights. Otherwise, close your eyes and point with your finger to pick a paragraph :)}

Universal atheist (UniAPE) parents reject the existence of any and all kinds of supernatural realities, gods or deities, and who correspondingly reject all and any kind of religious, theistic-deistic, spiritual, supernaturalistic and/or beliefs, faiths, dogmas and codes. Religious and supernaturalistic institutions and their doctrines, especially (but not exclusively) those of judeo-christian type faiths and their adherents can (and do) attempt to make life difficult for such parents. They regard such institutions and faiths as psychologically abusive and delusive, and seek to protect their children from them. Chances are that if you are a universal atheist and you have been divorced by a theistic spouse, or if a theistic spouse has left you, then the primary causal factor in this life event - despite any diversionary excuses or false reasons provided - has been the co-optive weaponisation of your former spouse as an individual by the religious or theistic faith based institution. They are the weapon, and you are the target, despite nineteen kinds of obfuscating and discombobulating nonsense rhetoric to conceal the fact (or not, depending on the sect/cult/institution.) Most sects and denominations of the Christian Church are highly xenophobic and exclusivist, regardless of any obfuscation or denials of this fact, and ultimately prefer to be rid of an actively atheistic parent, even at the cost to the children of their losing the security of their family unit. It is easy to see that this is the case. Many more traditional Christians will stay with atheist partners if those partners sit still and keep quiet about their reservations about or opposition to faith, religion and supernaturalism, because of course such atheists are gagged and managed anyway, and thus no real threat. As soon as an atheist ‘militates’ against the doctrine, however, they are considered relationally and socially (and in some countries and by some faiths physically) execrable. Any theist who tells you otherwise is lying, ignorant, or ill informed. The mechanisms for effecting the requisite excommunication are built into the doctrine and dogma, so most believers don’t have to do much to justify the move to themselves. Take the Christian doctrine for example. You may get some of this nonsense quoted at you in an attempt to demonstrate the Christian reverence for marriage:

(1 Corinthians 7, NIV) To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife. 12To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

(Notice, by the way, that the human author’s propensity to promote their own writing as being inspired by a supernatural god is actually foregrounded in the text here, making the whole ridiculous psycholinguistic control mechanism completely transparent even in the text itself.) Witness first the disgusting demonization of innocent children on the basis of their parent’s behaviour, which is of course tantamount to punishing and marking children for certain vilification for something over which they have absolutely no control. Of course, some ecclesiastical moron will certainly try and deny or avoid acknowledging to you that children so regarded – especially in pre-20th century societies – would suffer because of such ascriptions. The bible is all about control by punishment and demonization, and the evidence for this is all through it, despite the focus on sin-construct necessitated salvation soft-pedalled by Christian religionists. Children are not exempt from threat and co-optive abuse, and as the actively atheist co-parent with a religionist former spouse knows, they are readily and happily conscripted by the Church as involuntary weaponised resources leveraged against the nonbeliever. In another duplicitous twist, the above passages are one reason why if your Christian theistic spouse leaves you because you are an active universal atheist, they must try and make it look like it is your fault. If you are a former believer, you will probably be able to understand what is going on. Otherwise, it will be puzzling to say the least, and it can be tricky even if you know about the ‘systems’. As with everything else in religious texts, there are contradictions, duplicities and loopholes built in everywhere. For example, the above passages are rendered completely meaningless by the following:

“But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. “(Matthew 5:32)

Now aside from the astronomical sexism and hypocrisy (the deal is only for husbands divorcing wives), this passage provides a total escape clause from the very pious sounding passages above. Most contemporary Christian sects and denominations regard the dynamic to apply to the wife leaving their husband. At the end of the day, most reasons given for a Christian leaving an atheist spouse are frequently manufactured, or if not, they would not result in separation if the spouse was still a believer. They will try and deny it. It’s all about plausible deniability: something religionists are not really very good at, because very little they say is plausible. It matters not, however, since plausibility is up for grabs in an anti-intellectual supernaturalistic environment. It sounds perfectly plausible to them. Der Bye-bull maketh it so. This does, thankfully, provide a sound way of dealing with religionist and theistic former spouses and their peer groups, since you are not subsumed to the same pscyholinguistic program that makes them vulnerable to control, which in turn makes atheists extremely versatile in our ability to handle them. The above passage seems to avail the Christian of little in the blame game, but of course all it takes for a man to be considered ‘maritally unfaithful’ is the following:

“But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matthew 5:28 (New International Version))

So that porno mag that many atheist men (and quite a few women) have in the wardrobe/cupboard – that’ll do the trick for the loophole. The atheist former believer may find that dropping their faith was considered as marital unfaithfulness on its own. In any case, there is an even bigger loophole:
“Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14)

As usual, the Bible (and again, I’m sure the Koran is no different, but I do not know that particular reified quasi-historical mythologising fiction so well) is full of contradictions and duplicities. How does the believer decide which course of action to take? At the end of the day it is usually pragmatic, and will always favour the Church and the doctrine in the end. If there is a choice between two or more contradictory options, then the outcome will depend on expediency for the individual believer based on their perception of what defends the ‘gospel’, whether they can live with the cognitive dissonance created when the actual real truth comes up against the whacky biblical and doctrinal variety they are programmed with (in the end almost never), and how much their pastor/Christian counsellor/whacky ‘spiro’ friend(s) dislike you. In the end, the doctrine and the ‘cloud of witnesses’ will all be enlisted in the mission to make the unbelieving partner the bad guy. In my case, my wife left me on the basis of my loss of faith and ‘outspoken atheism’ (meaning that I wouldn’t pander to destructive nonsense and tended to say when I thought something was a bad idea/misleading/unfair/dangerous or whatever.) She overtly omitted that my beliefs were the reason for her leaving (meaning my lack of mental assent regarding the god fiction.) Of course, that is not the reason given to everyone else. Funnily enough, I remained faithful throughout our 14 year of marriage, but my former spouse didn't. Atheists, however, are even worse than adulterers! Of course, you are forgiven, and ‘we still love you’, but your family has been ripped apart, your money will be taken from you an given to the church/religious institution under the auspices of child support, your children have lost the full time psychological protection of a rational and cognitively cogent parent and will be condemned to live with two dogmatic supernaturalist loop-jobs at least half of the time, until they are old enough to make their own escape. My wife was fundamentally incapable of hearing any criticism of her faith (even if its effects were clearly damaging to our relationship), and to argue with her on any given point – especially if it involved the small revelation that she might be making limited sense - was to be labelled ‘psychologically abusive’. No kidding. Don’t argue logic or reason – it’s bad for the delusion, and the delusion has been well cultivated and cared for. Threaten it at your peril. Of course, the delusion doesn’t stop the religious being really angry, vindictive, vicious and just plain small minded – it just re-routes the anger through a bunch of twisted doctrinal and imaginary proxies and through a maze of almost indecipherable psychological and doctrinal weirdness. This results in the bizarre behaviour associated with projecting personal vices and viciousness onto the will of an imaginary deity who is – you guessed it – perfect and unquestionable. You will still get it in the neck in the end, but in a way that makes them feel they are nicely justified and sanctified.

Even if it was the atheist spouse who pulled the pin because of spousal nuttiness or to preserve their own psychological health and that of their children, or if something just went wrong, the responses will be similar. The Church is, metaphorically and actually, an army, and its clerics and adherents ultimately regard it as such. As with everything in religion, the discourse and doctrine slips between metaphor and literality continually. All that irrationality and wackety-woo is presided over at some level by a bunch of opportunistic hyper-pragmatists. Despite its overtures of spirituality and metaphorical deference, it is a military-political-economic complex. The obscenely violent and duplicitous handbook for warfare that is the Bible (and this goes equally for Islam and the Koran) has been developed to enforce the ultimately militaristic, political and economic mission of the faith-based institution, which is an implement of the monarch and autocratic hyper-pragmatist. Your family is only ‘sacred’ while it remains a viable tool for their aims. The cohesion and integrity of the religious family unit is instrumental to the aims of religious institutions such as the Church, but once you render that family unit useless or partly antagonistic to the religious or faith based institution by opting out of your faith, the religious institution will try and repair the unit as a religious atom by getting rid of you and replacing you with someone who is a properly dedicated religious nutjob (it is still amazing to me how many Christian divorcees either go for more religiously fanatical and/or less intelligent new partners, which of course is terrible for the children.) This behaviour is solid proof that despite all of their rhetoric and piousness, institutions like the Church ultimately don’t care about one iota about your family relationships or your children’s feelings or wellbeing (although they will put on a good impression of it in the short term if it suits them): all of this is not even secondary to the mission of the military-political-economic complex that is the religious doctrinal-meme spinning ‘faith-based’ institution. The mechanisms for the opposition and ejection of actively atheistic parents and spouses are built into the doctrines and the psycholinguistic programming of the believer. Christians do not have to say the words “I hate atheists” to communicate loud and clear that they hate atheists because the Bible clearly says it for them: the god character statedly hates atheists, and Christians of course have the god character in their ‘hearts’, and so all the believer has to do is smugly profess (they are often very smug about it too - it seems very clever to them.) total belief in the bible to deliver the same message indirectly, and then hide behind the “love your enemy” duplicity construct. The passages above provide the same cunning camouflage routine for the demonisation and dropping of non-believing spouses. At the end of the day, the Christian spouse is married to an imaginary god character and to the institution which pedals the doctrine that they believe in. They are not really ‘married’ to you at all. This is just the way big religious institutions like it. Of course, despite overtures of humility and obvious anti-intellectualism, believers still think that believing in the god character makes them smarter than you because the god character is smarter than everyone. Of course, that the god character is just an imaginary character makes this all the more stupid, but that is lost on your former Christian theist spouse, since “the beginning of wisdom is” – no – not rationality, reason, pursuing scientific evidence or intellectual prowess – but, you guessed it “the fear of The Lord.”

Discussion Forum

This group does not have any discussions yet.

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Universal Atheist Single and Part time Parents to add comments!


Members (5)




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