Do you take your atheist grandchildren to church?

[Lost-in-FL]

You’re a lifelong churchgoer; your daughter and son-in-law are atheists. Three days before Christmas, they must leave town to be with his father, who is gravely ill. They leave their two school-age children with you. You always attend Christmas Eve services. Do you bring your grandchildren with you?


http://www.ucobserver.org/ethics/everyday/2009/12/atheist_children/

[SheilaT]

1. Not unless the parents are okay with

it. If the kids are at least 14, maybe more like 16, they can decide if they want to accompany you.

[darkstar3]

2. I know this is expected of an atheist,

but I say "no", and here's why:

Church qualifies as "plans", as in "I had plans before I had to take care of the kids for the night." As a courtesy to the people whose children/pets/house you're sitting, you cancel those plans.

At least, that's what I do.

[pnwmom]

4. A more courteous atheist would want his or her children to cause the least disruption

possible to anyone who had to look after them in a pinch -- and NOT expect them to miss Church services on Christmas, of all days. The children aren't going to be ruined by one exposure to Church.

[darkstar3]

5. And the more courteous Christian

takes into account the feelings of the parent whose child they are caring for.

And if you think that small children would not be somehow upset at a church service, you've never been to my old church. There's a reason they had a 'cry room'.

[pnwmom]

11. The OP wasn't about "small children" who would be "upset" at a Christmas service.

The OP was about school-age children.

[darkstar3]

13. School-age is a BIG range

In my hometown, it starts at FOUR. I'd call that "small"

[Lost-in-FL]

9. I am sure the atheists can ask for their parents to not get gravely ill on christmas...

as you have to go to church and cannot watch the kids. That would be very disruptive of them. :hi:

[pnwmom]

25. You can watch the school-age kids at Church. It's not hard. n/t

[darkstar3]

45. Sure, it's easy to make sure kids behave in church,

that must be why I've seen so many well-behaved youngsters at all the services I've seen.
:sarcasm:

[Lost-in-FL]

50. Wha? kids won't behave in the house of god? nt

[DeSwiss]

52. One exposure to a deadly virus is all it takes. n/t

[pnwmom]

3. They know you're Christian and you go to services at Christmas. It's hard to believe

they would expect you to find a babysitter on Christmas or to miss Christmas services.

The grandchildren won't be tainted by a single visit to Church.

[katandmoon]

6. A real Christian would give up "services" (like you can't worship your god at home?) and stay home

With the kids, and be glad to do it.

[darkstar3]

7. PREEEEECISELY.

[pnwmom]

8. Are you an atheist? How would you know what a "real Christian" would do?

Who are you to decide what a "real Christian" is?

[darkstar3]

16. Who are YOU? n/t

[pnwmom]

24. I wasn't the one who attempted to define the term. n/t

[katandmoon]

29. I thought Christians were supposed to be selfless. Sorry, my mistake!

[pnwmom]

32. Wanting to share the "gift of faith" also part of being Christian. n/t

[katandmoon]

35. Right -- even when the kids they're watching are the children of ATHEISTS.

Gee...what's a poor Christian to DO????

[pnwmom]

62. These particular children are the grandchildren of theists.

The adult children obviously went their own way. Their parents' religion didn't end up controlling their lives, did it? One service at a Church isn't going to ruin their children, either.

[darkstar3]

90. And the grandparents do NOT take precedence on how to raise those children. N/T

[pnwmom]

106. Of course not. And they're entirely free to leave their children with whomever they want.

On Christmas and on every other day. And if they have special requests, they're entirely free to make them.

[darkstar3]

38. Which is where a lot of atheists' problems with Christianity come from.

What you call "sharing" is what we call "proselytizing".

[DeSwiss]

55. Gift?!?!?

Since when is delusion a gift?

[rd_kent]

143. What you call "the gift of faith" atheists call "the shackles of religion".

[trotsky]

10. But that's not the way it works.

Atheists are expected to genuflect and respect any expression of belief, honor it and never criticize it. Otherwise they are branded as militant, "fundamentalist" atheists.

Christians, on the other hand, can force their beliefs on impressionable children because those beliefs are SO VERY IMPORTANT you see. Oh, and how terrible for atheists to expect those Christians to respect THEIR lack of beliefs, and just spend some quality time at home with the grandkids.

Always has been a double standard, and it always will be.

[pnwmom]

17. So if a Christian left his children in your care for the weekend, he or she

could expect that you would happily take those children to Church? Yeah, right. You're the one with the double standard.

I think that the Christian should NOT expect you to take his children to Church even if they are used to going every Sunday. I also think you should NOT expect the Christian to refrain from going to Church if he was taking care of your children.

[darkstar3]

19. Please, false parallel

You, I, and Trotsky all know that there isn't a single Christian on this planet who would leave their kids over the weekend with an atheist family member.

NEEEEEVER gonna happen. And even if it somehow did, my respect for that child's church would extend to finding him or her a ride.

[pnwmom]

21. Are you kidding? You must not know many Christians. My brother is an atheist

and he's spent many weekends alone with my kids. And I never expected him to take them to Church.

And I'm sure, if he had children, he wouldn't be shocked or upset if I took them to Church with me. Because, as the parent, he's the one with the major influence. Though anyone who thinks s/he can control every aspect of what children are exposed to is deluded.

[darkstar3]

34. Damn near everyone I know is a Christian.

And where is your brother on the list of people you call to care for your kids? 4th? 5th? 10th?

My nephews have never been left with me overnight, and it is entirely because their parents think I'm "the den of vipers." I am LAST on the list of people to care for these kids, and it is entirely because of my atheism.

[pnwmom]

68. My brother is A #1 at the top of my list to stay with my kids. Always has been.

He's also legal guardian in the will. His atheism wouldn't preclude him from taking good care of them.

My childrens' godparents can look after the religious side. But my brother is a wonderful uncle, and would be the best guardian if something happened to us.

[darkstar3]

92. Well that's very enlightened of you.

Would that more believers, especially the ones in my family and hometown, were so open-minded. All the ones I know believe that it is impossible to raise a child correctly outside of the faith, and that it would be an incredible sin to allow it to happen.

[Sal316]

26. Oh, puh-leeze

You, I, and Trotsky all know that there isn't a single Christian on this planet who would leave their kids over the weekend with an atheist family member.

Way to assume that all Christians are small minded bigots.

Project much?

[darkstar3]

31. Putting words in my mouth again, Sal.

There's a huge difference between not leaving your kids with someone over the weekend and being a small minded bigot.

Maybe not very much, but again, they're your words, not mine.

[Sal316]

86. Then, please, enlighten us...

...as to why you believe "no Christian parent on the planet would leave their kids over the weekend with an atheist family member".

Surely you have empirical evidence to back up this claim since there's no way you'd expect us to take a claim like that "on faith".

[darkstar3]

97. The Bible says all over the place that your people and mine aren't to intermix.

"Den of vipers and thieves."
"Thou shalt not be unequally yoked."
"The fool hath said in his heart that there is no God."

There's a whole lot more in there, but those are pretty famous. If Christians go against the Bible and leave their children with fools, vipers, and thieves, that's their business, but the book is pretty clear on how atheists and infidels are to be treated, and this is all I've seen from Christians IRL.

[pnwmom]

107. The OP describes an extended family of Christians AND atheists so they're already

intermixed. No problem there, except in the minds of some DUers.

[Sal316]

133. So now you're using the Bible?

A book you mock and condemn?

Nice try.

Please show us what empirical evidence you have that proves your position that "no Christian parent(s) on this planet would leave their kids with Atheist family for a weekend."

That should be easy for you, right? You wouldn't want to be guilty of using anecdotal evidence or asking us to take your word for it "on faith".

If Christians go against the Bible and leave their children with fools, vipers, and thieves, that's their business, but the book is pretty clear on how atheists and infidels are to be treated, and this is all I've seen from Christians IRL.

Hmmm... sounds like someone's using anecdotal evidence. Something you've categorized as "Anecdotes = / = evidence". So, using your own standard, your position is invalid.

And actually, it is really clear. Atheists, "infidels", and all of humanity are to be approached and treated with love.

[Dorian Gray]

202. Sal's got a point....

and there is proof right here that many of us would, indeed, leave our children with atheist family members and friends... either for a weekend, or to be raised for life. It's not that shocking, really.

[katandmoon]

Bwahahahahaha! Zing!

[Still Blue in PDX]

198. I did many times.

My dad was an atheist and my mom was agnostic, and they babysat my kids.

My parents were appalled when I became a Lutheran at age 24, but we all still loved and trusted one another implicitly. They weren't crazy about me getting religion, but they even came to the kids' baptisms and confirmations -- at least the one kid who was confirmed!

[Dorian Gray]

201. Are you kidding me?

If I had children, I would happily leave them with many of my friends and family members, most of whom are non-church goers. And many of whom are non-believers, to boot. And I would never expect them to take them to church if I was unable to take them.

[trotsky]

80. You really think that's the same?

Going out of your way to do something EXTRA, versus skipping plans you made to stay home with the kids?

That's the same thing, huh?

[katandmoon]

33. But -- but -- but -- Christians are people of FAITH! Aren't they supposed to get a gold medal?!

[stevedeshazer]

12. Of course. Why wouldn't you?

That's who you are. They want to learn about you, too.

I don't see any harm in that, only much good. If the kids and grandkids aren't believers it just sets up an excellent family discussion.

I like it.

[darkstar3]

15. Excellent family discussion??

You really think so? I see a fight when mommy and daddy come back to town and "educate" the kids on what they saw at grandma's church. Somebody's gonna get really f'in offended.

[pnwmom]

20. Why should the parents be surprised at all that their Christian parents went to Christmas

services?

If my in-laws were Jewish, for example, I wouldn't be shocked and upset if they took my children to their regular place of worship. And if they were atheists, I wouldn't be shocked and upset if they just stayed home -- instead of bringing my Christian children to Christmas service.

[darkstar3]

42. I'm not saying they'd be SURPRISED.

I'm saying that little Jack and Jill are gonna have questions about what they saw and what they were told, and mommy and daddy are gonna have to 'splain.

Kids say the darndest things, and when word gets back to grandma that mommy and daddy think "Jesus is magic," heads are gonna roll.

[pnwmom]

63. Mommy and Daddy had to explain about religion a long time ago.

Their children will no doubt have noticed many Christian things, both at their grandparent's house and around the community, especially around Christmas time.

[darkstar3]

94. I sincerely doubt that.

Certainly the children would have seen SOME religious iconography, but even if they were curious enough to ask about it, answers to those tangential questions would not require anything close to a full on explanation of religion. You forget, most decorations at Christmas time are NOT Christian in nature, with the one notable exception of a creche, and that's easy to explain.

"Mommy, what's that?"
"Oh, that's called a creche, dear. It's like a Minora, but it's for Christians. It's how they decorate during the holidays."

[pnwmom]

130. My grandparents house was full of Christian symbols, year around.

Children wouldn't have limited their questions about religion to things they saw at church.

[stevedeshazer]

59. So, you should stick your collective family heads in the sand and ignore what's obvious?

Why not talk about it?

[darkstar3]

60. Because nothing good comes from talking about it.

I won't be moving from my position and they won't be moving from theirs. Meanwhile, they consider my very existence an affront to their faith, as I have "turned my back on God" and committed the one sin which they believe is unforgivable (blasphemy against the Holy Spirit).

Really, a discussion board is a great place to "talk about it", but over the Thanksgiving turkey or the Christmas ham, not so much. (and I know we're not just talking about the holidays, it just seemed apropos.)

[pnwmom]

64. So are we talking about your particular parents or the theoretical parents in the OP?

Two of my children are atheists and none of us have problems talking about it. No one is trying to force their views on anyone else, and no one is afraid that someone else is trying to.

And no one goes around insulting other people for having different views on the matter.

[darkstar3]

96. I'm sorry, but this is getting hard for me to believe.

I know this will come off as insulting, but I can't think of another way to say it at the moment:

How is that you are a Christian with SO many atheist relatives and friends? I can't speak to your life either way, because there's really no way for me to know, but I hope you at least understand when I say that these claims increasingly sound to me like "I asked my black lesbian friend, and she said..."

Putting aside my suspicions for the moment, and addressing your post as truth:

No one is trying to force their views on anyone else, and no one is afraid that someone else is trying to.
Really? You mean you are uninterested in saving the immortal souls of your brother and children? You have forsaken the Great Commission? From the Christian perspective, your children will be separated from you for all eternity come death or Judgment day, so you'll forgive me if I don't believe you when you say you are trying nothing to prevent this.

[pnwmom]

116. FYI, lots of liberal Christians have friends of different religions and of no religion.

It's not uncommon at all among educated people. If you went to college, I would have thought you'd have experienced this.

As a liberal Catholic Christian, NOT as a fundamentalist Christian (or as a fundie atheist), I don't think my way of believing is the ONLY truth, or necessarily the truth at all. I'm groping toward the truth, that's it. So why should I impose my beliefs on others? But taking my own grandchildren along with me to church services wouldn't be pushing anything on them or their parents. I didn't impose my religious beliefs on my own children once they rejected it -- so why should they worry that I would hurt their children?

Your idea about the "Great Commission" is drawn from the fundie tradition. Leave me out of it. I'm not one of those people who are trying to slam others with their certainties. Everyone has to search for their own truths. And anyone who's a seeker -- rather than a self-satisfied know-it-all -- has my respect.

[darkstar3]

126. You found a lot of ways to bash me in that post.

1. Fundie atheist is an oxymoron.
2. I never said I or anyone else knew the ONLY truth. You made that assumption on your own.
3. Self-satisfied know-it-all? Are you resorting to name-calling because you can't answer the issue of respect for the parents' wishes, or just because it's easier in general?

[pnwmom]

127. Where did I call YOU a fundie atheist or a self-satisfied know-it-all? n/t

[darkstar3]

129. Oh, so those little barbs you buried

in #116 WEREN'T for me? If not, then for whom?

[pnwmom]

137. Not for anyone in particular. n/t

[Dorian Gray]

203. Are you for real?

Don't you have friends and family members from all different backgrounds? Or is everyone the same, and you just veered off the path at some point?

My non-religious mom married my Catholic father, and they do their own thing when it comes to sunday worship. It's only an hour, anyhow. My religious background has been steeped in charity and love, not condemnation. I do have faith, but I don't preclude to know that people from various backgrounds are hell bound while I am heaven bound. Who the hell knows. All we can do is live on this earth, together, and do what we do.

I find it hard to believe that you are from a family that would turn its back on you because you are a non-believer. That is so far from my experience that, just as you are amazed that Christians may be friends with atheists, I find it almost equally unimaginable. Perhaps it's because I live in the very liberal and diverse Brooklyn, NY. I don't know. But your experience is just as foreign to me as you say ours is unbelievable to yours.

[sandnsea]

14. Absolutely

If grandma did a good enough job to raise a daughter who found a husband that drops everything to go to an ill father, then grandma and her churchgoing ways should be good enough for her daughter.

Should grandma take the right wingers' children to a candlelight peace vigil? Absolutely.

That's called teaching tolerance.

[darkstar3]

18. Church doesn't teach tolerance.

In fact, at Christmas, mostly it teaches an origin myth to the exclusion of current American traditions. After all, Santa with swapped letters spells Satan!

[sandnsea]

23. Depends on the church

Most of them teach more tolerance than your pithy little response showed. And other than funerals, I've been in a church exactly once in the last 20 years.

[darkstar3]

27. If you've been in one 'once in the last 20 years'

how would you know?

[sandnsea]

44. I walk around on the planet

and meet people who go to church - and wow, lots of them are tolerant.

[darkstar3]

46. Anecdotes = / = evidence,

and since my anecdotes strongly contradict yours, I'm afraid I don't trust your statement.

[sandnsea]

48. Which is not tolerant

And that was my point to begin with. You teach tolerance by exposing children to experiences they aren't familiar with.

[darkstar3]

49. Exposure = / = tolerance,

and does not necessarily lead to the nurturing of tolerance, at least not without a whole lot more work on the part of the parents.

ETA: And while you may call me intolerant, you should remember two things: You have not yet provided me with evidence that the church teaches tolerance, and you must remember that rejection of another's intolerance does not make one intolerant themselves.

[sandnsea]

53. There's no guarantee any child will learn tolerance

no matter how much or what kind of nurturing is done by the parent. Clearly there is more to parenting than attending Christmas Eve services.

Just as clearly as most churches teach tolerance, which is such an obvious truth that I wouldn't even know what evidence would be sufficient to convince you. Sunday School lessons? Catechisms? The Bible? Koran? Torah?

[darkstar3]

56. Well, I don't know the Koran,

but Sunday School, Catechism, and the Bible (Torah included), do NOT teach tolerance.

Those who do not follow Jesus will burn in hell. (Catechism) That is not tolerance.
Those who are not the chosen people will be slaughtered by the chosen people with the backing of God. (Torah/Old Testament) That is not tolerance.
People in your family who do not attend church will go to hell, but you won't care when you're in heaven because God will change your brain. (Sunday School) That is not tolerance.

Most churches teach tolerance? I think not. I don't even have to leave mainstream Christianity to prove that wrong, what with the number of fire and brimstone speeches I've heard in the past. This doesn't even get into the denominations who create things like Prop H8, Scott Roeder, or the millions of other hateful assholes who walk this earth. And that's just Christianity. You want to get into Islam, a religion that subjugates women, gays, and infidels much more harshly than many others?

Most churches do NOT teach tolerance, that is simply a pretty fantasy that is used to cover the real truth of a hateful and exclusive group.

[pnwmom]

65. You don't have to go to church to know lots of church-goers. n/t

[Lost-in-FL]

22. If I had "christian" kids under my care I would take them to church...

only at the request of their parents. Also, I would NEVER talk them against going to church.

[pnwmom]

30. I'd never ask an atheist to take my kids to Church. It wouldn't hurt them to spend

time with someone who has different beliefs.

[darkstar3]

43. And I would never ASK a Christian to stay home.

I shouldn't have to. Parents have a hard enough job without having to worry about whether their wishes are being followed while their children are in the care of family members.

As I said before, if Christian parents left their kids with me, I would find them a ride to church. And if I left my kids with Christians, I would expect them to find similar accommodations. I wouldn't want my kids learning about eating flesh and drinking blood, however symbolic that might be, and every Christmas Eve/Christmas service I've been to has had Communion.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

28. if they're atheist they could go to a Unitarian Universalist church.

However, I don't know if they do anything on Christmas Eve.

[tkarolewics711]

36. I am a devout Catholic

I also pray in Latin, beleive it or not. Yet, I refuse to take Communion until until the Catholic Church stays out of poltics, allows Priests to marry, lets gays into the priesthood, preaches only the New Testament, adopts the pseudopygraphia, elects a Pope from South America, and of course returns to the Pre 1967 rules and again says Mass in Latin. I also wish for the Church to return to charity for the poor.This is one of the many reasons for which I am Liberal. Do you think I am crazy? Please advise.
I also firmly beleive in the separation of Church and State and the Theory of Evolution.

[Lost-in-FL]

39. Huh??

Just don't tell the Pope all that.

[tkarolewics711]

41. I probably opened up too much

What do you think?

[sandnsea]

47. Do you go to mass?

I don't take Communion because I'm divorced and remarried. But I don't go to mass for all the reasons you listed. It never occurred to me to go to mass but protest Communion and even let the priest know why.

[onehandle]

37. Oh no! The kids have to go along with your regular plans. THE HORROR!!!

DU cracks me up.

[darkstar3]

40. If I'm gonna cancel my plans to sit kids in an emergency,

then dammit I expect the same courtesy from others.

[pnwmom]

67. You don't have to cancel any plans. These kids are old enough to come along. n/t

[darkstar3]

98. Well, I'm glad YOU aren't my babysitter.

They're old enough to come along? Where? The bar? The club? The bowling alley? The R rated movie I was gonna watch with friends? No, I think we both accept that when children are dropped off with us in an emergency, plans change, and that is the way it should be.

[pnwmom]

117. No, we're talking about Christmas services. But ditto, I'm glad you're not

dumping your kids on me.

[pnwmom]

66. We've been viewing the atheist version of "helicopter parents." n/t

[darkstar3]

99. WTF does that even mean? n/t

[TCJ70]

51. Ask your daughter if it would be a problem.

Nothing wrong with discussing it. If your kids know who you are and what your traditions are, I wouldn't really think it would be a problem.

[DeSwiss]

54. No! And I would think that a caring person wouldn't even have to ask.

They'd ask their daughter and son-in-law if it's okay. They'd respect their daughter and son-in-law's desire not to expose their children to superstitions they don't accept. They'd worry that by imposing themselves into their children's lives in this manner and their right to raise their children as they see fit (as you once did), that they could do irreparable harm to their relationship. They may not trust you again.

Respect your children they way you expect for them to respect you. Isn't that your Golden Rule? If they say no, well in contrast to what someone else here has stated, "what would it hurt for you to be the one who misses one Christmas Eve Service?"


- No one's counting, is there?

[pnwmom]

69. The son and daughter-in-law know their parents will be attending Christmas services.

If they don't want that, it's up to them to say something OR to find somewhere else for their kids to stay.

[DeSwiss]

76. My way....

...or the highway, huh? Right. How Christian of you. Or they could just take the kids with 'em to see their dying gramps. Talk about emotional blackmail.

- Can't you just feel the warmth from those good 'ol Christian family values. Yay.

[pnwmom]

79. No. What part of "it's up to them to say something" didn't you understand? n/t

[darkstar3]

100. That's called automatic consent,

and it's a crap argument. I should have to "opt-out" my kids from your church.

[pnwmom]

105. When you leave your children with your parents, people you know well enough

to know exactly what they'd be doing on Christmas, it's up to you to say something if you don't want them to do it.

Don't expect them to read your mind. Otherwise, they'll assume that they can proceed as they always do. Why would you ever leave your children with people you trusted so little not to brainwash your children? What about all those other days when they might be -- horrors -- saying grace in front of your children?

[darkstar3]

110. Make all the snarky comments you want,

it doesn't change the fact that automatic consent is bullshit, and applying it in this case is dishonest.

[ZombieHorde]

57. Do you take your Christian grandchildren to a Satanic Mass?

No, you stay home.

[darkstar3]

61. +1

[pnwmom]

70. I wouldn't care if relatives took my children to a Synagogue or a Temple.

It would be a learning experience. But I would draw the line at a Satanic Mass. On the other hand, I wouldn't be leaving my children at the home of Satanists in the first place.

If these parents' religious beliefs are such a threat to an atheist, then the atheist shouldn't allow his children any contact with them at all. There's no telling what could be going on behind closed doors, whether at home or in Church.

[trotsky]

82. Why would you draw a line?

Why wouldn't you "expose them to other beliefs" as you claimed you support elsewhere in the thread?

Satanists aren't evil, you know. They follow the basic Christian mythology, just coming at it from a different angle.

[pnwmom]

138. I told you where I'd draw the line. But there's no inconsistency because

I wouldn't be sending my children over to stay with them in the first place. So I wouldn't need to say -- here, take my kid, but stay away from satanic masses while he's there.

[trotsky]

147. LOL

Double fucking standard.

[pnwmom]

78. Probably a Satanist would. But I wouldn't. n/t

[Meshuga]

83. You would have to ask that question to a Satanist grandparent. :-) n/t

[iris27]

58. I don't understand why their children aren't going with them, if their grandfather

is ill enough to need their dad's presence. I highly resented it as a "school-age child" when my parents decided it was their duty to shield me from death and thus I was not told anything of my great-grandma's illness until she had already passed and I never got to say goodbye. They were also planning to keep me home from the funeral until they got the unexpected fury of a 7-year-old insisting she was going.

[pnwmom]

73. I agree, Iris. I was very upset that my parents wouldn't let me go to my

grandmother's funeral. I guess that was the common wisdom at the time. But it was something I needed, and it would have made it more real to me. As it was, I kept hoping somehow she'd come back.

[DemBones DemBones]

71. Yes, if I'm going to babysit, the kids will have to

follow my routine, just as I had to follow my grandparents' routines when I stayed with them. I also followed the routines of my aunts and uncles when I stayed with them and of my friends' families when I stayed with them. My kids did the same.
Guests don't tell their hosts what to do, they go with the flow.

If the atheist daughter and son-in-law don't accept this, they need to ask someone else to babysit for their kids, or take the kids with them, rather than expect her parents to miss services. When you're old enough to be a grandparent, you have to realize that any Christmas Eve could be the last one of your life on earth. Given that reality, nobody should expect you to miss services.

If you're an atheist grandparent, your Christian kids don't have the right to expect you to take their kids to church on Christmas Eve, either.

[pnwmom]

74. I agree. When your kids are staying with someone else,

you don't expect the caregivers to rearrange their lives for your kids, other than for safety and/or physical well-being (such as baby-proofing). Kids benefit from exposure to other people's ways of doing things. It helps them to realize that the world is full of people with different beliefs and ways of living.

[pnwmom]

72. What many of the atheist posters here don't seem to understand is that Church services

are a small part of many believer's religious lives. For example, my grandmother said the rosary every night of her life, and when I visited I could hear her praying as I fell asleep in the bed next to hers. My grandparents said grace at meals and there were religious pictures and statues around the house. It wasn't as if daily living was completely secular and the only instance of exposure to religion was at Mass.

So the atheist parents' in the OP have children who likely have already been exposed to religion in their grandparents' daily lives. But the parents shouldn't worry that their own children will "catch it" from the grandparents. The atheist parents made up their own minds and their children will, too.

[ZombieHorde]

75. Then why the aversion to Satanists? nt

[pnwmom]

77. Just bigoted, I guess. n/t

[trotsky]

81. Then why can't they skip them to honor the (non-)beliefs of the parents?

You've kept trying to justify the double standard on this thread. You've failed.

[pnwmom]

84. What would be the point? And why do you assume the parents would want them

to miss the services? Is one service with the grandparents going to turn good atheist children into theists? Is atheism such a shaky belief-system?

You're the one with the double standard. When my brother, who is an atheist, stays with my kids, I would never ask him to take them to church. And if he had kids, I'm sure he'd have no problem if one of us took them along with us there. Neither of us is afraid that the other might be a bad influence, just because we have different beliefs. And neither of us judges the other person for their beliefs.

[trotsky]

85. You've kept trying to justify the double standard. You've failed.

And you've already admitted you wouldn't let your children be taken to a Church of Satan service. So if you had any kind of leg to stand on, it would be worth continuing this discussion with you, but you don't.

[pnwmom]

87. Go ahead. Take your kids to all the satanist churches you want. nt

[trotsky]

89. Well, at least you realize your double standard is indefensible.

That's a start.

[pnwmom]

103. No, you're the one who thinks everyone should march to your tune. n/t

[trotsky]

114. Actually, I'm the consistent one here.

Just asking for the same respect for my (non-)beliefs as you DEMAND for yours.

[pnwmom]

144. I'm giving it to you. Feel free NOT to go to church with whatever children are in your care,

just as I would feel free to go to church with any grandchildren ever left in my care (unless their parents specifically asked me to do otherwise, though I can't imagine that happening.)

[trotsky]

148. And you've already been told why that is a false parallel.

But you've got your self-righteousness going, so I'll just stay out of your way.

[pnwmom]

167. What an ego! "You've already been told"!

:rofl:

[trotsky]

169. Yeah, by others, elsewhere on this thread.

Nice try though. You've exposed your nasty double standard on this thread far better than I could have hoped, and now you're just trying to claw everyone else down to your level. Not gonna work.

[pnwmom]

172. Close, but no cigars. n/t

[trotsky]

185. Yup, according to you:

Atheists have to shut up and let their parents take their kids to a religious service they don't like.

You, on the other hand, allow yourself the right to deny your kids be taken to a religious service you don't like.

Double FUCKING standard.

[DemBones DemBones]

192. No, if you don't want people taking your kids to

religious services, don't ask those people to babysit your kids. It's very simple.

If we don't want our kids taken to satanist service, we won't ask satanists to babysit our kids. Simple.

[trotsky]

193. You're missing the point.

Re-read the OP. The basic question is, do you honor the beliefs/non-beliefs of your children, or do you take the grandkids along to your service? It isn't about asking, it's about honoring and respecting the position of someone else.

pnwmom has already shown that she has no problem with grandparents who would take the children of atheists to a church service, but she vehemently objects if those grandparents took Christian children to a Satanist service.

Do you have the same double standard?

[darkstar3]

194. And if you have no choice?

If the only person who can watch your kids with 30 minutes notice is your Satanist brother, what then?

[onehandle]

93. Because this is the real world.

It's the self-righteousness of whines like that that make us truly look like the looney left.

[pnwmom]

120. The level of self-absorption IS pretty amazing.

This must the the atheist version of "helicopter parents."

[trotsky]

160. Strange, the only whining I've seen on this thread...

is coming from Christians who are enjoying their special protected belief status, whining about atheists who are wondering why their (non-)beliefs aren't worthy of consideration.

[onehandle]

91. They believe that any degree of religious involvement means that the involvee is brainwashed.

I imagine that anytime they drive by a church, they have to go home and flagellate themselves to purify their thoughts.

Like that's not a religion itself.

[darkstar3]

101. Wow, way to be an ass. n/t

[pnwmom]

141. There are two cliches that apply here:

Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

And beggers can't be choosers.

As a begger, you seem to have an enormous sense of entitlement.

When you're asking someone for a favor, you shouldn't apply unnecessary conditions. Your children won't be harmed by attending a Christmas service, it's just something you'd prefer not happen. Well then, make other arrangements.

[Meshuga]

88. If my parents became churchgoing Christians

I would ask them not to take my son to church on Christmas eve. If they are unable to comply with my wishes then I would look for a babysitting option.

If my son is an atheist and he (and his atheist wife) leaves his kids with me during a religious holiday then I would ask him if he is comfortable with the idea of bringing the kids to shul. If not, then I would ask him to find a babysitting option as I would also be busy.

[pnwmom]

121. And that's reasonable. You're not expecting anyone to read your mind.

And if you're not comfortable with the answer you get, you can find someone else to take care of them.

[Meshuga]

142. In my case,

My wife's parents are devout Catholics. Her mother was fine with my wife's conversion to Judaism and all so there is no issue there. If I had to leave my kids with my in-laws around Christmas I would be more uncomfortable with my son saying something inappropriate then with the fear of seeing him becoming a Catholic or whatever the fear might be. Jews make self-deprecating jokes all the time and God very often gets the short end of the stick in these jokes. So my Jewish son's big mouth present in a Catholic mass might cause some controversy. In other words, my wife's parents would regret the idea I'm sure. :-)

But my in-laws live very far away so this is not even an issue.

[SidDithers]

204. You'd put your church ahead of your grandchildren?...

You'd rather make sure you're able to attend your church service, than spend time with your grandkids?

That's fucked up.

Sid

[MineralMan]

95. As an atheist, I wouldn't be all that concerned about grandparents

hauling my kids to Christmas Eve service. My parents, in fact, were atheists, but they sent us to Sunday School every week at a generic protestant church. Did us no harm. Only one of the sibs are religious in any way now.

Only atheists who are insecure would worry about this.

[darkstar3]

102. It's not about security,

it's about respect, and not kicking the hornets nest. I have the right to raise my children in a church free environment, and Christian parents have the right to raise their children in a churched environment. Those rights and wishes should be respected. As I have said twice now in this thread, I would make sure that children of churchgoing parents made it to church with a trusted individual, even if I didn't go with them, and I would expect the same level of basic courtesy from others, including not subjecting my children to ritualistic cannibalism.

[MineralMan]

108. OK. I have no problem with that.

But you aren't the OP. If you feel so strongly, then you wouldn't leave the children with their devout grandparents, nor ask those grandparents to forgo their usual Christmas Eve church attendance.

If you demand that your children receive no exposure to Christianity, then you have the responsibility to arrange things so they do not receive that exposure. I'm sure you wouldn't demand that your parents not attend a desired (and important to them) church service to meet your demands.

And there it is.

[darkstar3]

112. There it's not.

Emergencies are emergencies, and you don't always have the luxury of making best laid plans. I was talking about courtesy and respect, which I would extend, and which you are saying is unimportant.

[MineralMan]

119. Courtesy and respect for whom?

Only for you and your wishes. I merely suggested that other arrangements be made for a couple of hours so the grandparents can attend their church service. No doubt that would be possible.

Everyone needs to be respected. Everyone needs to show courtesy. If that occurs, everyone's needs and desires will be satisfied. Is that not a good thing?

[Lost-in-FL]

153. +1

[pnwmom]

134. You DO have that luxury. If it's important to you, then it's CRITICAL that you

make those plans in advance. Leave your parents completely out of any such emergency plans lest they subject your children to unwanted services. For the purpose of such plans, pretend that you don't have any parents. Put other people on your list. That's what you would do if they were physical abusers, wouldn't you? So treat religious abusers the same way.

[Lost-in-FL]

115. But then my parents would not sneak my kids to church like the link suggested

and they would ask me first. Depending of their reaction I would rather pay for a babysitter just to keep the peace and a respectful family environment.

[MineralMan]

118. There you go. Making other arrangements would

meet everyone's needs.

[Lost-in-FL]

154. Some people don't believe that. They are ok sneaking the kids against their parents wishes.

because they refuse to make accomodations even during situations of life and death. I guess christmas mass is more important and to hell with everyone else. So in that case, the parents should be ready to count on the insensitivity of others and have a plan B if their wish is to keep their kids away from church..

[pnwmom]

139. Why would it be sneaking when you already know that your parents

always go to Christmas services, and that they took you when you were growing up? It didn't kill you. Why would it hurt your kids?

[Lost-in-FL]

146. There you go again, not reading the posts. Read it again. nt

[pnwmom]

168. Nah. n/t

[pnwmom]

132. Actually, the poster would demand that his parents miss the service. He's said

so many times. And he thinks he's entitled to make that demand, for a reason I can't quite fathom. Something to do with the emergency nature of the situation . . . as if emergencies can never be anticipated or planned for.

[Lost-in-FL]

145. I noticed that you have not read the question or the link I posted

First, you missed the fact that one of the atheist's parent was gravely ill.

Then, you speculated about the age of the kids as if it mattered.

I would not demand for my parents to change their plans. For the sake of peace I would rather pay than inconvenience my parents. I am sure they would be upset at me for having someone else taking care of the kids and they would NOT dare take the kids to church out of respect for my family and my husband. They rather have the kids around even if that means no church service. A respectful family would understand both the situation and the sensitivity of the parents during a moment of possible loss.

The link I provided suggested that the grandparents take the kids to church independently of a possible conflict between the families because it was "THEIR faith" and their faith was foremost to family values. To me this situation is no different than caring for vegetarian kids and force feed them with meat or crap food because you think vegetarianism is stupid or simply because you don't know how to cook vegetarian fare. I know my parents would be respectfull. I was a catholic and my parents are devote catholics and I know that if they could not attend church for any reason, they could make it up some way or the other (through prayer, confession or charity work, etc.). So yes, there are other alternatives than force your grandkids to go to church even with the possibility of a family conflict. If people take atheist kids to church just "because they can" I think there is something emotionally wrong with the grandparents.

[pnwmom]

170. I read the link and I didn't miss the fact that the other grandparent was gravely ill.

It doesn't make a bit of difference.

No one planned for the other grandparent to be ill -- true. But there should be a general plan in place for emergency childcare because these unanticipated situations DO come up. And if a person has a serious issue with their parents EVER taking their child to a service, even on a major religious holiday, then there should be a plan to ask someone else instead. Unless you know the parents, like yours, would rather babysit no matter what.

When you ask someone, even your parents, to do you a favor, you should be aiming to inconvenience them as little as possible. They're the ones doing you a favor. Asking them to forgo church services because it suits you better is going over the line.

[pnwmom]

122. That's what I think. People who are secure about their beliefs wouldn't worry

that their children would be contaminated by one visit to a Christmas or Hanukkah service.

[onehandle]

162. Exactly right. nt

[darkstar3]

104. Wow, this thread has been an education.

I realize now that while I would go out of my way to accommodate the wishes of a parent whose child I am caring for, many Christians here in this forum would not extend the same courtesy. I find that surprising, given how many Christians have told me that I am the one without a moral compass.

ETA: I'm done here. It's OBVIOUS that those of you arguing have no clue what it means to show courtesy and respect for the wishes of other parents when you are caring for their children. This amazes me on a progressive board, but at least I won't have to let any of you babysit my kids.

[Lost-in-FL]

109. are you surprised?

At least ONE person was reasonable enough to suggest they would ASK the parents before taking the kids to church.

[MineralMan]

111. The question, really, is whether you would put the burden of

such a choice on YOUR parents. If you don't want them taking your offspring to the Christmas Eve services, which is important to them, then you need to make other arrangements for the children for that time period.

It has nothing to do with moral compass. It has to do with convenience. If it is inconvenient for your parents not to take the children to their church service, then the onus is on you to make some other arrangement. Both you AND your parents have a right to do what you and they want.

Make another arrangement for your childcare, and respect your parents rights to attend a church service they deem important. How simple is that?

[darkstar3]

113. Again, emergencies are emergencies,

and plans don't always come through. Respect and courteousness are paramount, and if you can't see that then I have nothing more to say.

[Meshuga]

123. If there is an emergency

And my parents are the only people able to care for my children then I would not impose and say they are not allowed to take my children to service just because I feel uncomfortable with the idea. If they have to go to the service because I have no other option then so be it. What am I going to do?

[pnwmom]

125. An atheist who feels it is so important to keep his children away from Church services

must have emergency plans IN PLACE to make sure that doesn't happen. Plans that don't involve people who can be expected to want to attend such services.

The time to deal with these issues is before any such emergency occurs, not in the midst of one.

[darkstar3]

128. And again you find a way to take the onus away from the

Christian, who is the person taking the action in this case. You don't HAVE to go to church, you WANT to, and frankly, your wants come after the needs of any children in your care.

[MineralMan]

135. Oh, for pete's sake!

The action is by all persons involved. You don't WANT your children exposed to a Christmas Eve service. It's all about WANT. I'd be surprised that you'd WANT your children ever to stay with such grandparents, who obviously have Christian beliefs.

Just ask them to have a trusted friend to watch the little ones for a couple of hours. If you don't trust their judgment to choose a reliable sitter, then how can you trust them with the childrens' care?

Heck, if I was asked to care for the children of Christian parents, and they were concerned that the children would miss Christmas Eve services in such an emergency, I'd take the kids to the service myself and make no comment whatsoever about my lack of belief.

The mistake here is in the assumption that a child is harmed by a one-time exposure to Christianity. Trust me...there will be plenty more of them. As I said in another post, the kids will just squirm their way through the service, enjoy the Christmas music, and ignore the preaching anyhow. Even kids from Christian families generally ignore the adult talk.

It is, or should be, a real non-issue.

[pnwmom]

136. No. The onus is on the parent, who is the one person ultimately responsible

for the child's care. If the parent absolutely doesn't want the child ever to go to a church service, then he has to have arrangements in place, in advance, that will ensure his child never will be subjected to one. That means finding an emergency caregiver other than the grandparents.

You don't HAVE to keep your children from church, you WANT to. And your wants as a parent need to be planned for in advance, not in an emergency.

Beggers can't be choosers, even when the begger is an adult child.

[pnwmom]

124. Well said. Best answer yet. n/t

[MineralMan]

131. Thanks. Life experience. There's almost always a solution and

if there is not, then those in custody of the children at the time make the decisions. No doubt, though, the grandparents know someone they trust who could watch the kids for a couple of hours. If the childrens' parents don't trust their own parents' judgment in such matters, then they should not trust their children to the grandparents' care.

In any case, as a long-time strong atheist, I don't think an exposure to a Christmas Eve service at a Christian church would be any sort of life-altering experience. It's going to be impossible to prevent exposure to Christianity for children of atheist parents, anyhow.

I'd just shrug, let Grandma and Grandpa haul the kids off to squirm in the pews and discuss what they observed with the kids later. Most likely, the kids would be somewhat amused, enjoy all the music, and ignore the preaching anyhow. Even the kids of Christian parents manage to ignore the preaching, for pete's sake.

Much ado over nothing, IMO.

[pnwmom]

140. The Christmas carols might be fun. But otherwise,

most kids get squirmy and bored after a while. So they're not going to go home dying to become good little Christians.

It didn't happen with two out of my three, anyway. But we all have to seek our own path.

[TCJ70]

157. I think it just comes down to communication and not assuming anything.

Being the child of pastors, I spent whole summers with my cousins and their family never attended church and for those months I didn't attend church. It was never expected for them to drive me to a church somewhere. In the reverse situation, if my cousins came and stayed with us, they came to church with us. Our families communicate regularly and understand each others differences when it comes to faith but there was never any expectations on anyones part to bend over backwards to accommodate either family's beliefs.

Short version: Just ask your kids if they mind the children going to the Christmas eve service...that way you avoid any trouble either way. If it's a big deal for the grandparents, they'll have to decline and there's nothing wrong with that.

[onehandle]

159. So all atheist parents would be as outraged as you if they made the kids go along with their plans?

Doubtful. There is no indication in the original question that the parents of the kids are anywhere near as intolerant as some atheists at DU.

There is no guarantee of a 'moral compass' in any believer or non-believer.

[jmm]

149. If I'm asked to watch a kid but I have plans to see a rated R film should I take them?

It's not unreasonable for parents to expect some accommodations to be made when somebody is watching their children. If those accommodations can't be met then it should politely be made clear like the first response in that link. Deciding to "integrate" holiday practices without being open to a child's parents that you realize you might be going against their wishes is disrespectful.

[Lost-in-FL]

150. or the strip club. nt

[jmm]

155. I think it's still legal for 16 yr olds to strip in Rhode Island.

If somebody imposes their 16 yr old daughter on me I could help her integrate her part time job and school girl outfit.

[Lost-in-FL]

156. Huh!!!!

:spank: :spank: :spank:


No seriously, 16 years of age legal for that? That's sick!

[jmm]

158. The saddest part,

ok one of the many sad parts, about it is Rhode Island isn't the only state teens can strip in.

Minors in R.I. can be strippers

11:44 AM EDT on Tuesday, July 21, 2009

By Amanda Milkovits
Journal Staff Writer

PROVIDENCE –– Rhode Island teens under 18 can’t work with power saws or bang nails up on roofs.

But dance at strip clubs? Sure. Just as long as the teens submit work permits, and are off the stripper’s pole by 11:30 on school nights.

.....

With the age of consent at 16 in Rhode Island, the police worry that teenage strippers could take their business to the next level and offer sexual favors –– and it wouldn’t be illegal. State law currently allows indoor prostitution, and two bills intended to ban it have stalled in the General Assembly.

.....

But a Rhode Island teen stripper won’t find work in Massachusetts, where state law prohibits anyone from hiring minors under 18 for live performances involving sexual conduct.

Other states have had mixed encounters with the issue.

After a 12-year-old girl was found dancing nude in a club in Dallas last year, the city council swiftly passed rules barring minors from strip clubs and automatically revokes for a year licenses for sex businesses caught employing or entertaining minors.

But an Iowa county judge ruled last year that a striptease by a 17-year-old girl at a strip club was artistic expression protected by the First Amendment. The state attorney general’s office has asked the state Supreme Court to review the ruling.

.....

[SidDithers]

205. I always try to attend the Christmas Eve Strip-off...

down at the local peeler bar :evilgrin:

Sid

[onehandle]

161. One hour in a church listening to a choir is integrating a holiday practice?

These must be fragile children.

I would want my kids to experience the rainbow of variety that is the world.

[jmm]

163. It is to the retired minister who responded to the question in the link

It will be fun for us to integrate their holiday practices into ours.

Nowhere did he address the concern about bringing the children of atheists to church. I love kids. Any time I spend time alone with somebody's children I make an effort to ask their parents about issues I'm unclear on such as foods and entertainment they may want them to have or avoid. I would never knowingly undermine a parent by bringing their child to a place I think they may not want them to go without asking first. It's not an issue of fragile children, it's about it not being up to me to decide what experiences somebody else's children have and letting them know if I can or can't meet their expectations.

[pnwmom]

179. It's not like these adult children don't know their parents well.

So the adult children, knowing their parents are likely to go to Christmas service, should bring up the issue if it's a concern to them -- just like they would any issue that's a concern.

When something's important to you, you shouldn't expect other people to read your mind.

[jmm]

180. Nobody is expecting the grandparents to be mind readers.

If they know the adult children may be be concerned with the grandchildren attending church it's not mind reading to speak up.

[pnwmom]

181. Sure they are, if they don't bring up an issue that is a concern to them.

If this is an issue of concern to the adult children then it's up to them to bring it up. Not to expect that the grandparents will realize it's an issue for them. My brother, for example, is an atheist, but I'm sure he wouldn't care if I brought any child of his to a Christmas Mass. One Mass isn't going to damage a child for life, and twenty years of them didn't make my brother a Christian.

[jmm]

182. In this situation they know it could be an issue. It's not mind reading if you already know.

This probably was a hypothetic situation. That still doesn't change the question at hand. In the scenario laid out in the article the grandparents know it could be of concern since the question is being broached. This was written about how the grandparents, not the adult children, should react. Regardless of what the adult children should do if the grandparents know it could be of concern as they do in this scenario then they should speak up.

[pnwmom]

171. You can go to an R-rated film anytime. Christmas services happen once a year.

No atheist child would leave his own children with his Christian parents over Christmas without realizing that a Christmas service is likely to be part of the picture. It's up to the adult child to bring this issue up if it's a problem. And to have other alternatives in place if needed.

[jmm]

173. What if I want to see a burlesque show with a limited engagement?

There's plenty besides Christmas service that can't be rescheduled. Sometimes you may not realize you're exposing a child to something their parent objects to. However, if you know the parents of the children may have objections then it is up to you to bring up the issue. Not doing so would be what my favorite priest from Catholic school taught us was lying by omission. Especially if you're concerned enough to write to a column for advice.

[pnwmom]

174. Not equivalent.

The adult children wouldn't know to ask if the parents might be going to a burlesque show.

But these adult children could anticipate that their parents are likely to be going to a Christmas service. So THEY should be telling their parents if this would be a problem -- or finding another place for their kids to stay.

Bottom line: when someone is doing you a favor, the onus on you to make it as easy as possible.

[jmm]

175. Bottom line:

Remaining silent when you know speaking up could significantly alter a person's decision isn't what I was raised to believe is a Christian value.

[pnwmom]

176. It wouldn't be likely to alter the decision of the adult children

because the adult children, if they have any sense at all, will realize that their parents are likely to be going to services on Christmas. So they should speak up if that presents a problem -- or not ask their parents in the first place.

[jmm]

177. If it wouldn't be likely to alter the decision then

two people would not have felt concerned enough to write an article about how to react to the scenario. Asking what to do in this situation is recognition that it could present an issue.

[pnwmom]

178. Just because someone had an ethics column to write doesn't mean anyone

was particularly concerned about the issue or that there's only one answer.

[laconicsax]

151. Am I too late?

:popcorn:

[Lost-in-FL]

152. Join in the fun! nt

[laconicsax]

165. In that case...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=227175&mesg_id=227404

[laconicsax]

164. I take them to chuch and not stop there

I'd secretly get them baptized and start pushing Jesus on them. After all, I don't want my grandchildren to burn in hell.

But seriously, I'd ask the parents. The wishes of the parents should be taken in to consideration. Of course the two preachers who answered at the link don't seem to think that atheists have any business raising children, but whatever. The only thing that makes either of them authorities on ethics is an undeserved privilege based solely on their study of a iron-age text with no real relevance beyond the reader's ability to "interpret" a meaning that sounds socially acceptable.

[Lost-in-FL]

166. ...

:thumbsup:

[struggle4progress]

183. Do you let your grandkids stay up late watching TV? Do you feed them ice cream for breakfast?

Do you tell your grandkids what rotten ill-behaved blighters their parents were when they were children?

[Meshuga]

184. Except for the ice cream for breakfast part...

...you pretty much described my mother.

[struggle4progress]

187. She may just have forgotten that she hasn't done that yet. Try reminding her.

:D

[Lost-in-FL]

197. That sounds like revenge to me.

No thanks. I have good moral judgement. :hi:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

186. Those Christmas Eve services must have awfully strong juju

if just one exposure is going to turn the children of atheists into Christians.

I don't have kids, but if I did, I would not hesitate to take them on the overnight-in-a-Buddhist-temple experience in Japan, which includes attendance at morning services.

[struggle4progress]

188. It's seems a Fundamentalist stance, rather like insisting that children should never hear

the arguments for evolution fairly laid out, or that certain books should be pulled from library shelves

An old activist friend once told me that when she was in school in the 30s, the Soviet Union wasn't depicted at all on the maps in her public school classrooms: for other regions of the world, capitol cities and rivers and political subdivisions and other standard details were included -- but the whole of northern and western Eurasia was left completely blank on the map, without any information or labels at all. With natural curiosity, she asked about it -- and unsurprisingly (I suppose), she was told not to ask; so, of course, she became very interested, which was the opposite of the intended result

[Lydia Leftcoast]

189. One of my mother's cousins has gone all evangelical, but her son and his wife are Bahai

She actively tried to convert the grandchildren, and THAT is stepping over the line.

However, one exposure to a Christmas Eve service?

No, that's just an experience.

Unless the grandparents attend a really fundamentalist church, there won't be any evangelizing going on.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

190. Let's reverse the situation:

You are a life-long atheist, but your daughter and son-in-law are members of some Christian denomination. (Yes, I know several people who were brought up as atheists who became Episcopalian or Lutheran.)

You are babysitting them over Christmas.

Do you take them to Christmas Eve services, because their parents would have, even if you personally are an atheist?

Or do you stay true to your own values?

If you, as an atheist, would not take them to church because it would be a violation of YOUR values, then how can you expect Christian grandparents not to stay consistent with THEIR values, particularly if it's not an active effort to proselytize? (Which, as I indicated in my post about my mother's cousin, I am opposed to.)

[darkstar3]

191. Did you not read the thread?

In several places I have stated that I would find those children a ride with a trusted individual, because I respect the wishes of the parents. I'm sure other atheists here agree with me.

It's common courtesy, respect, and decency, and I've said before, I would not hesitate to extend it. I expect no more or less from those to whom I would trust my children.

[MineralMan]

195. I'm an atheist, and have been for over 40 years. In the situation you

describe, I'd be more than happy to take the kids to the Christmas Eve service. How could that possibly hurt me? That's just silly. Before I became an atheist, I was a churchgoer, sang in the choir, and all that stuff. Heck, I sang solos in at least a dozen Messiahs AFTER becoming an atheist.

My nonbelief is not endangered by exposure to religion. Anyone who cannot tolerate exposure to beliefs or disbeliefs different than his or her own is not very grounded in those beliefs or disbeliefs.

This is just a silly thread with a silly premise. Life's more complicated than that.

[Lost-in-FL]

196. Since you insist...

YES! But only if the parents insist that I take them. I would gladly grant their wishes if they ask nicely. Going to church would be to me, no different than taking kids to the movies and watch cheesy disney movies which I hate. I know it is odd but yes I don't like them, specially cartoons (love old school disney movies tho). That would be something that would go against my principles; disney and horror movies. I would NOT capriciously harm a relationship with my own family merely due to religion.

[krabigirl]

199. I'm late, but for Christmas services? No big deal.

Why not let them go? I'm agnostic and raising my kids as UU, but if my religious parents were watching them on Christmas, I don't see why they couldn't go to the service. Christmas and Easter are usually times where many non-religious people show up at churches anyway.

[PassingFair]

200. This is kind of ridiculous....my mother took my kids to church once in a while...

as long as she can "tolerate" my kids telling
her that they won't take communion without
Bar-B-Que sauce.

If she wants the kids to experience her religion,
she better be prepared to experience their
irreverence.

(She doesn't take them anymore.....)

As far as the hypothetical question...the
Grandmother should have arranged for a babysitter,
just as one would for ANY adult outing that
children may be unprepared for.