About boyfriend visiting a quaker house?

I am sorry OP but you come over as more than a little close minded.

Whether your children have a faith or not is up to them, not you.

There's this phenomenon (not just on MN) where a poster starts a thread about something contentious, then argues with themselves under a different user name. There's a name for it, which I can't recall. I did wonder if this is what is happening here. Not sure.

It's called sockpuppeting, and it's now no longer possible unless someone goes to the extremes of making another account. That's a nasty accusation.

No atheism is not a belief, a faith - as the faithful would have it - is a belief in a higher power despite a lack of evidence. That is the basis of the Catholic mystery of faith, as far as I am aware (was raised a Catholic but admittedly only have a very surface understanding of the belief system).

Atheism looks at the overwhelming lack of evidence for any higher power and concludes that there is none. There is no belief system built around it, anymore than there is a belief system built around the lack of evidence for unicorns or absolutely anything else you can imagine.

Yes, people are starting to get overexcited, as often happens on the boards.

She has said a few times she would raise them open minded.

I'm pretty sure you're talking about the Friends Meeting House in Euston. It is a beautiful building and Quaker 'headquarters' I think.

My husband and I used to meet there in our student days (it's in the midst of UCL), as it's got a cracking cafe and a beautiful, peaceful internal courtyard. It's worth a visit for sure. Neither of us are religious.

Also if he picks any religion, the Quakers are one of the least offensive and most progressive ones out there. It sounds like you need to educate yourself, but also that you're not compatible with him if you're so furious about him entering a building with an interested and open mind.

I wonder what it is about you that assumes the father of your children would have more influence over your children's religious beliefs than you would?

Fair enough @RampantIvy but I don't think the OP has said anything that indicates closed-mindedness. She was upset at the comment her partner made, not his visit to the building. She has also indicated that any future children will be free to make their own minds up.

She was under the impression - having discussed the subject with her partner in the past - that he was on the same page in terms of religious beliefs being imposed on children, including things like going to weekly services. Now her partner has started making sarcastic comments about it, and she is justifiably upset that what he had previously indicated were their shared views on this, don't seem to be.

What??! Are you getting Quakerism mixed up with the moonies or some such? Do you even know anything at all about what Quakerism is?
Agree with you about the building though. It's lovely.

I think a lot of poster should cut the op some slack...she sounds quite young, not everyone has reached a considered understanding of their philosophical positions till they're older. There's plenty on this thread who don't seem to understand what agnosticism means (tbf it can mean quite a few different things).

Respectfully OP the ironic thing here is you’d still be raising them on a strong belief in atheism… it’s a belief in itself isn’t it?

I was in St Peter’s Basilica last week. Pretty sure I haven’t had a relapse of Catholicism.

I am sad for you if as a fellow atheist you don’t get any intrigue from visiting religious buildings. I love a good church.

and to be honest, he’s already told you he’s not atheist, and he doesn’t need to be. As long as you don’t interfere with each others faith that’s fine. I get the point about children but ultimately your children will be sentient beings and have their own exposure.

in our household we have:
one lapsed Catholic atheist (me)
one cultural Muslim who I don’t think has ever been in a mosque but who has more spirituality than me (DH)
one committed atheist who loved the blingy churches in Rome (DS1)
and one curious Christian (DS2)

you need to be way more respectful

I don't see any irony at all in the first statement, it's the opposite of narrow minded.

Ah well that’s a matter of debate isn’t it? Is absence of belief in gods the same as belief in the absence of gods? Clearly your position is that it isn’t. But when that position is held as strongly and emphatically as you appear to hold it, I’m not so sure.

I think it's a little bit from column A, a little bit from column B.

But ultimately, if you feel that strongly about the issue then you're going to maximise your chances of something like this never coming up by limiting yourself to avowed atheists. Obviously people can always change, but there's nothing you can do about that. Your DP is evidently an agnostic of the questioning and searching variety, rather than someone who doesn't know if they believe in God and doesn't want to spend any time interrogating the issue further. If you want to pursue the relationship then you're going to have to find a way to be ok with this.

Overthinking it A LOT
And nit-picking

Maybe @Celia24 is looking for a way out of the relationship?

Hyperbolic nonsense.

Compromise.

If he wants to join a church, tell him to join the Church of England.
The Archbishop Of Canterbury doesn't really believe in God and it's mostly just a woke political organisation nowadays.

They'll welcome him, as droves are leaving to join other religions. He can join some of their silly campaigns, most of which have nothing to do with God-
He'll be happy because he will have joined a church and you'll be happy knowing it has nothing to do with religion.

She never said was going to try to control their thoughts. She doesn't want them raised with a faith (which would be controlling their thoughts). She has already said that she is happy for them to make their own minds up.

I totally agree. I taught in a Quaker school for many years but wasn’t a Quaker myself. I didn’t agree with all aspects of Quakerism but personally believed it helped to create a supportive and accepting environment for many students.

That building in Euston Road is something else. Run away! He will in the end find himself a religious person, I have seen it happen before. Maybe not now, in a couple of years, but by then it will be heart break and so much time wasted for you both. If he is religious but does not offer marriage, he is using you until his 'ideal person' comes along. This is not nice.

Not sure you can say being atheist is closed minded. It is a well considered position. These statements are just like saying Catholics are closed minded because they are open to following Islam. As Ricky Gervais said there have been thousands of Gods in human history, atheists just believe one more doesn't exist.

Because part of the reason I'm not religious is I don't believe in telling kids what to think from the off.

Can you not see the irony in this?
You sound intolerant and narrow minded. What are you scared of?

Except the strength of your feelings on this is at a level of ferver that's quasi-religious.

I agree. Your beliefes aren't just atheist, they are anti religion

I suspect those calling you unreasonable may have a faith.

Wrong @CatCaretaker
I don't have a faith. I'm not religious at all, but I am not closed minded.

It sounds like the OP and her boyfriend are incompatible, and they need to break up, so each of them can find someone who aligns more with their beliefs.

Having being raised as a Christian, I now feel precisely zero need for religion (and certainly not for conspiracy theories ffs... I value rationality and evidence as do many atheists and agnostics!) but do still miss the ready-made community

I could have written your post as well @ErrolTheDragon
When I moved to the area I joined the local church and was made to feel very welcome. I no longer go to church, but members of the congregation still make me feel welcome at community events.

I made the journey from somewhat intolerant atheist to 'Quaker attender' (ie not an actual Quaker but someone who irregularly attends meetings and finds them meaningful.
For me it was partly a realisation that I had misunderstood something (or a range of things) about religion. I still don't believe in God, and in that sense am still an atheist. But I have a much broader understanding of what religion is. It doesn't have to be a matter of beliefs: As the Quaker 'Advices and Queries' says "Christianity is not a notion but a way."
Quakers believe all sorts, from traditional Christianity, to Buddhism, to atheism and humanism. What they share in common is a commitment to certain 'procedural' values which develop a deeply reflective and exploratory attitude to the fundamental questions to which religion is orientated (eg "What the heck is this all about - being a conscious entity in a material universe?! That's a bit flipping weird. How do I live this life?)
One of the central requirements (expressed in deist language because of Quakerism's historical routes but capable of being interpreted in a secular way ) is to respect "that of God" in everyone. That calls for something very deep, deeper than tolerance - a willingness to enter into others mindsets and travel with them.
So despite the fact that every Quaker tends to have rather strong viewpoints of their own, they are utterly nurturing of diverse and contrary beliefs. So I do think that the presence of a Quaker in a non-religious household can be a lovely thing for every member of the household - so long as the non-religious members feel able to begin to consider letting go of some of the anger and hurt that more intolerant forms of religion may have generated in them