Had a thread a while back about dh deciding he was now a deeply religious person (has chopped and changed religious interests, finally settled on one), and insisting on Sunday mornings at church, along with choir practice one evening a week. Not a wholly bad thing, I've supported him through years of his varying beliefs and time spent at church,
encouraging the DC because he wanted them involved too.
The problem lay in his insistence that any objections I raised were an attack on his deeply held religious beliefs. He was quite nasty about it at one point. At a time when he'd come back from working away for half the year, and had been spending a lot of time sightseeing /eating out/drinking/texting some colleague (f) past what I saw as appropriate, while barely having any contact with us, his DW and DC. The DC aren't interested in church now they're older as they find it boring and don't really believe. Apparently I've caused this.
Anyway, for one reason or another, the choir hasn't been practicing for many weeks, and during this time (both before and after xmas) he hasn't gone to church either. Not because we've had anything planned. I had a feeling from the start that the fuss he made about going was more about control than anything, and his main interest for going was social rather than a deeply held religious conviction. This seems to have been demonstrated by being completely disinterested when the choir isn't involved. Which makes his insistence that I was denying him his religious freedom rather odd.
I am categorically not starting a debate over rights of believers vs non believers, but asking what would your take be on this? He got his way, making out I was deliberately being nasty/mean not to want him to go every week, then doesn't go anyway. Is his interest more social/singing than actual religious belief?
(he doesn't do any alternative religious activity/worship)
Sorry it's so long. Tried not to drip feed!