Bias? Or sound life choice?

[verdalaven]

This situation caused a firestorm of debate in my workplace, and I found myself in the uncomfortable center. I am looking for opinions.

A college girl meets a boy at a dance and they have a great time. The next morning, he joins her for breakfast and over breakfast reveals that he is a seminary student. She, raised by atheist parents and pursuing an interest in Buddhism, decides to herself that maybe dating this boy would not be a good idea. He is a nice guy, but their fundamental belief systems are very different. They stay friends, but no more. Do you feel she made a bad decision? Was it a bigoted decision?

If you believe she made a bad or bigoted decision, would your view change if the tables were turned, with the seminary student deciding that the atheist Buddhist girl was not right for him, and he stayed friends with her?

This is an actual situation that my daughter faced, and when I related this at work (to friends, no less) and supported her decision, I was called a bigot. I was asked questions like, what if he was another race? I tried to explain that I don't see race as a fundamental difference between two people(they did!) because race would not necessarily prevent them from sharing the same worldview and life goals. And unlike the color of your skin or the culture you are born into, for the most part Religion is a choice, a lifestyle, and besides, most religious people want life partners to share their beliefs. It isn't impossible for a couple to share a life and go in opposite directions with their faith, but it is difficult. She didn't want that complication right now.

Opinions, anyone? Did she act rash? Show bias? Was I wrong in supporting her decision?

[Az]

1. It was the right decision

In cases where people of differing religions are involved it might work if they are only slightly committed to their beliefs. But for people of such diametrically opposed positions and to such a degree of intensity ... well ... there are a lot of problems. Particularly on the Christian there is the constant need to save the one's they love. It would be a constant irritant. It can work. But it is a difficulty to take into consideration. Remaining friends is the best path. Differing world views are a serious aspect of a relationship.

[cosmik debris]

2. It is her call, not yours or your work mates.

She is in charge of her dating habits and she can date anyone she wants to. People who object to her decision are just being meddlesome.

I've been single for a long time and dated several women since my divorce. I have crossed racial and ethnic barriers, but I WILL NOT DATE REPUBLICANS OR CHRISTIANS. It is not a matter of bigotry, it is just that those relationships don't turn out well for me.

I have to wonder if your friends at work would have felt the same way if she had rebuffed a student from a Madrasah? Is that bigotry? And what if the seminary student had rebuffed her for being inadequately Christian? Seminary students can be bigots too.

Refusing to date someone is not the same as refusing them service at the Woolworth Lunch Counter or denying them the right to vote.

[verdalaven]

19. Absolutely true,

After telling my daughter about the debate, she wondered if my co-workers thought she should date every boy she meets while at college. After all, wouldn't want to discriminate. :) And next time one of my friends at work ask me if she is dating, I will just say, YES - and leave it at that.

[PassingFair]

27. You hit the nail on the head here: "It is HER call..."

I would never date a republican or a "practicing" Christian either....

but that is MY choice. I don't have a group of atheists forbidding
or objecting to my choices.

People DO change, and they can affect one another, so when I hear
religious people going off on their "unequal yoking" bullshit it
rubs me the wrong way.

My husband is an atheist, but he was a "Catholic" when
I met him who had never really THOUGHT about the basis of his "beliefs".

He was never spooked by my non-belief...

[Jim__]

3. Can a decision be both biased and a sound life choice?

According to this definition from wikipedia:

Bias is a term used to describe a tendency or preference towards a particular perspective, ideology or result, especially when the tendency interferes with the ability to be impartial, unprejudiced, or objective. <1>

I'd say her decision was biased. It was definitely based on their differing ideologies. I also think it's probably a sound life choice. I don't think a there is much promise in an intimate relationship between an atheist and seminary student.

[regularguy]

4. It doesn't seem to me that the word "bigotry" applies

to a personal choice such as this. We're not bigoted against people who we choose not to have a romantic relationship with for whatever reason. Would your colleagues think a religious person who didn't want to date an atheist is a bigot? The whole idea seems absurd to me.

[Sanctified]

5. It's a good decision and one the boy would have probably made himself.

If he is in Seminary then there is probably no way he would have married your daughter unless she converted so in the end it saved both of them from heartache and pain later down the road when they come to the conclusion that their spiritual lives just did not mesh.

There is nothing bigoted about your daughters decision, in my church we encourage our young people to date but remind them that they should not become attached or plan to marry someone who is not a Christian simply because the marriage will have way to many to issues.

[verdalaven]

20. Yes, I know Christians who date only Christians for that reason -

Which is why my co-worker's reactions surprised me. It is like they took it personally that she rejected him, but it wasn't even a rejection!

[PassingFair]

28. In my world, PEOPLE come before dogma.

The young man may change his mind, but
he will have missed his chance for a
real relationship with a real person.

[Evoman]

6. Lol...I wouldn't make any decisions until after I had done the nasty with the person.

Anything ele before that is hasty, I say :evilgrin:.


One of the most common myths (and truths) of dating and marriage is that opposites attract. The true is that yes, someone very different can be very attractive. The myth is that these differences are good in a long term relationship.

Not only did she do the right thing for her, she did it for him. Does it show her bias? Yes, absolutely. Is it bigotry? Not a chance. When it comes to dating, it's all personal preference.

Although she missed a golden opportunity to corrupt him....college is the perfect time to get a taste of the variety that is out there.

Why would anybody want to waste that time looking for real relationships is beyond me!

[knitter4democracy]

7. His parents and pastor/priest would've told him not to date her.

Many Christians take that "don't be unequally yoked" thing seriously. So, how is it a wrong choice if he would've ended up doing the same thing?

[pegleg]

8. Whatever reason one has for dating someone or picking a mate

is no one else's business. What constitutes bigotry has pretty much been demonstrated here at DU more than a few times, but this event certainly doesn't fit that mold.

[cosmik debris]

9. Are you accusing DUers of being bigots? n/t

[pegleg]

10. No. But there are a few here. nt

[cosmik debris]

11. So some DUers are bigots

But you won't tell us which ones?

[pegleg]

12. That would be rather bigoted, don't you think?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. Relationships work better if the two people share values

There are some people at my church whose spouses will not attend services, but the spouses are more indifferent to religion than hostile, so it works, in a "live and let live" sort of way. The church-going spouse doesn't try to convert the non-church-going spouse, and the non-church-going spouse doesn't rag on the church-going spouse for being religious.

But I doubt that a relationship between a strongly religious person and an actively anti-religious person could last. There are just too many possible points of friction.

It would be like me (a democratic socialist) in a relationship with a Rushbot. We'd have to tiptoe around to keep from getting on each other's nerves.

[Dorian Gray]

14. I don't know

I like men with dark hair who are over six feet tall. (I'm tall myself at 5'9''). It's a preference.

Saying that, I do think that inter-religious relationships can work, but both parties have to be extraordinarily understanding, patient and open-minded. It often takes work. (That's if the two parties are firm in their faith or religious identity. If not, the it's easier.)

[ZombieHorde]

15. I would have dumped him too, though my first objection would have been his gender.

Does that make me sexist?

[skepticscott]

16. Is this really such a thorny issue?

Why are so many people discussing it as if it were a question of bigotry, when it is really just a compatibility issue?

[verdalaven]

21. You hit it on the head, I think

It is an issue of basic compatibility, which is what I tried to explain to my co-workers; they weren't buying it. In their minds, he was a good Christian boy, she should have gone for it....he might have been "the one". Kind of sexist, if you think about it, like that is all a girl should be doing in college? Looking for Mister Right?

[Warpy]

29. There is another element to it with the people on the job

meaning an element of "How dare one of them dump one of us?" Without the ingroup/outgroup herd mentality, it would only be an issue of personal compatibility and nobody's business but the people involved.

[moggie]

17. There are three important words in your post

"They stay friends". I'd say that pretty conclusively rules out bigotry, wouldn't you? It's bizarre that this scenario should have "caused a firestorm of debate": to me that suggests some of your co-workers have a hair-trigger sensitivity and an over-developed sense of entitlement.

[verdalaven]

18. The firestorm took me completely by surprise

and came out of a casual conversation. And yes, I felt that the fact that they maintain a friendship rules out bigotry.

[Random_Australian]

22. Eh, what? That's not bigoted.

I notice that bigotry is directed at certain groups.

I do not, however, notice any particular groups in "I don't think I can form that kind of relationship with someone who thinks so fundamentally different".

But the question is - why would they think it is bigotry? The only thing I can think of that makes sense is something causes them to assume that if it involves a christian and a less than positive outcome, it involved anti-christian bigotry.

But that can't be right- they'd have to think christians are discriminated against all over the christian-dominated country.



Ahhhhhh! The other idea, of course, and more likely is that they use 'social standards' (bullshit standards) rather than thought of consequences to determine things like bigotry. Ack. You know, the kind that determines racism by whether or not race is mentioned rather than whether or not the people involved are treated equally, that kind of crap.

Yeah, that's my guess. <----- Note: I said "guess".

[ChazII]

23. Maitlan and Carville. n/t

[skepticscott]

24. Never been able to figure that one out...

the sex must be really awesome to make up for all that other shit. It's almost as if they're spies working for opposing countries but living in the same house...

[ChazII]

26. Me either but

they're opposites and seem to truly love and care about one another.

[MountainLaurel]

30. Easy, politics is their job

They don't actually believe what they're selling the masses.

[rug]

25. Good question.

While it's true their disparate belief systems would likely negatively impact their future relationship, to truncate it simply because they have different belefs is short-sighted. They're both more than the sum of their acquired beliefs and they may have been able to reconcile them.