I hear ya, Quirk! BM's DH is an absolutely wonderful, sweet, adorable man and he loves to think, think, think. But, all within a certain context...he won't think beyond a particular point, of course. Like, there has to be a "given" that certain things are true, and then he can parse the particulars all to heck! (So to speak.)

"We had to promise BM that she could teach them supernatural beliefs even though for us, this is pretty much tantamount to intellectual child abuse"

Her DH is a theology professor, so I assume this is recognized religion. And you regard teaching it as intellectual child abuse? Do you think maybe the mother has picked up on this, and it has generated conflict. As I said, many divorcing people have different views on religion.

My husband and I are not religous at all...we see things more from a scientific perspective. we decided long ago, that we wanted our children, SD included, to make up their own minds about what they believed. We do not push our views on our children, and if asked, we will explain our beliefs, what we have pushed for the children to do, is to learn as much as they can about ALL religions and decide for themselves what they believe. Many times my children have gone to Sunday school or another religous activity with a friend just for the experience.
IMO these children are old enough to make their own opinions about religion, it is also my opinion that at this stage in the game, you shouldn't have to be dealing w/ BM very much at all. I think it is a disservice to all children involved, if you aren't able to discuss and explain your beliefs if the children ask you. You and DH have nothing to be ashamed of, your beliefs are your beliefs, and with these children in college they are def old enough to understand that people are different, and different people have different beliefs.
Personally, id tell BM to kiss off, and inform her that you will no longer be "hiding" your beliefs.....

It's one thing to be openly derisive on someone's religion, to ridicule or scorn someone for deeply-held religious convictions. That would be hurtful, and IMO, wrong. But I think it's also wrong to be required to silence your own deeply held convictions.

Imagine if the shoe were on the other foot, and BioMom was the non-religious one. And Dad and StepMom wanted to explain their deeply-held Christian beliefs to the children, to share their love of Jesus and guide the children into the light... NOT require them to go to church or be baptised, but gently sharing the joy of Christ's love. Who here would be chastising them then?

We're talking basic freedom of speech here! Not malicious speech. Not lies or distortions -- but the sharing of opinions and experiences. That should never be stifled.

BM is unfair and you have been more than accomodating. Why on earth would one side be silent while the other isn't?

Of course faith is shaky! It is not based on anything factual or proven. Religion depends entirely on that leap of faith.

BM will go plum crazy trying to protect her daughters' tenuous faith!

So its OK for me to tell my D that her Dads religion is wrong and bad and is the route of evil and terrorism? OK.

I don't know if you are talking to me, kkny, but I didn't say that, nor did anyone else, I don't think.

I just think things should be fair. If she agreed not to say anything bad about BM's religion, it doesn't mean she (or the kids) cannot discuss their beliefs in their own house. It does not mean they can't express their beliefs about Santa out loud if they want to, for example.

There are more non-theists in the closet in this country than gays these days. . .

I think divorced parents should agree on what they are going to communicate to their kids re religion and stick by what they say -- and not call it intellectual child abuse. And dad should tell SM what the deal is. And she shoudl live with it.

I don't believe that teaching religion is intellectual child abuse. I am Jewish and raised my DD in that relgion, moderatelly though since we are Reform Jews. DD attended hebrew school on sundays and graduated from it. No i do not think i intellectually abused my child. We have atheists, Catholics, Jews, eastern Orthodox, Muslims in our family and we do not think anyone is intellectually abusing anyone. inappropriate concept in my opinion.

My SO is muslim and i am jewish and we are not bothered by that.

i think intellectual abuse is to tell your children that what others believe is wrong.

"There are more non-theists in the closet in this country than gays these days. . . "

no, there are not

I'd put that clearly in the category of derisive or scornful speech.

But IMO, it WOULD be OK for you to tell your DD that you don't agree with Dad's religion and feel the emphasis on 'jihad' catalyzes unnecessary conflicts that could be better handled through diplomacy.

In this case, Dad and StepMom agreed not to say anything against BioMom's faith or to promote their own non-theist views. And they did! You criticized them for "not having their heart in it!"

How can you 'have your heart in it' short of converting? By being a 'really good' hypocrite?

And I'm with you StepMomof4 about closeted non-theists. The U.S. deosn't seem the be a very tolerant place for non-theists right now.

"The U.S. doesn't seem the be a very tolerant place for non-theists right now".

i have to disagree. yes US is much less tolerant than Europe, but US is a very diverse country. most of my coleagues are nontheists and are very open about it. most people i know are not religious and even oppose organized religion. then of course if one lives in Bible belt, it is a different story.

I think it is somewhat fasionable now to be a victim or to fall into a minority category. Now nontheists equate themselves with gays (in their need to protect themselves and hide their identity). i think it is unfair to trully discriminated people. I think it is unfair to equate open declaration of lack of faith and declaration of one's sexual identity.

"i think intellectual abuse is to tell your children that what others believe is wrong."

I agree, well said. I also think it is abuse to someone else's intellect to "teach them" seriously about something that does not exist, or rather something for which there is no proof, or teaching them that faith is all that is required to have a belief.

so you are saying that nonthesists are forced to be in a closet in this country yet you saying that raising children in religion is child abuse.

so if it is not OK to say bad things about nontheists, why is it OK to bash the ones who do raise their children in religion?

i think what you saying in your posts is deeply offensive to people on this forum and this is one of the topics that needs to be discussed very carefully. you are crossing the line here.

Goodness, folks, I certainly didn't mean to get a holy war going on the stepmom's board. When one lives in a country with freedom of religion, people are free to decide what they want to believe. That's really the only way to handle a species like ours, that evolved so fast that over history we have invented thousands of fascinating ways to explain the natural world around us.

To clarify, I have no problem with teaching children ABOUT religion--historically, it has been an important repository for some of the most fundamental things that helped our species survive. Heck, when we are traveling anywhere in the world, the first thing we do is make a beeline to the temples to see the pretty stuff and hear the pretty music. We love the part of the human brain that wants to make sense of the universe, whether that be a science lab or a mosque.

On the other hand, we are wary of anyone who tries to convince kids (or adults) that they should not subject a certain belief to systematic testing--that certain things should not open to critical thinking. Teaching children to behave in a certain way because a supernatural creature of some kind says they must can make them more subject to manipulation in other areas of life.

I agree from experience that it's frightening to be a non-theist in some situations. But if we all work together to find common ground and find answers through sensible inquiry, I believe there's hope for our wonderful, diverse world.

You said: "I think intellectual abuse is to tell your children that what others believe is wrong." (hey, how do I make italics?)

Is there any limit, though? When they were young, my kids were very freaked out by some Santeria practitioners who were sacrificing cats. I was trying to tell them well, that's what they believe, etc., when it didn't seem right at all. My son said "I would try to stop them if I could" and I thought oh jeeze, he is going to get a neighborhood holy war going....

"then of course if one lives in Bible belt, it is a different story."

That's where I live...
And many of my friends have even gone so far as to try to convince me that non-thiests are amoral and evil! (They don't mean ME of course... God suposedly has big plans for me, once I see the light.)

""i think intellectual abuse is to tell your children that what others believe is wrong." "

I'd quibble with this. I'd call it verbal abuse to call people stupid for believing what they do, but I can't agree that saying "I believe something else" is wrong.

You said: "And dad should tell SM what the deal is. And she shoudl live with it."

I think maybe I haven't been clear--their dad is my husband. We are married; we make decisions together and our decisions take priority over those of other people we have had relationships with in the past. If he were to "tell me what the deal is," he would find himself standing before a judge again, just as I would never dream of telling him "what the deal is" and making decisions with my former husband that take precedence. As a couple we work together with BM and her husband to arrive at the best arrangements for the children we are all raising together.

I think you are overstepping -- there not your kids. It sounds to me that th childresn mom has tried to be accomodating to you and now you make fun of her and want to cut her out. A lesson to all moms who would try to be accomdating.

There is a distinct difference between the abuse of the intellect, which is a vague concept to begin with, and child abuse. Why is non-theist rhetoric so offensive? Do you not think non-theists are offended deeply by the constant assumption that people are all on the Christian team? The perpetual condescension that what we believe in is not only somehow inferior but immoral as well?

As far as the quibble and the shudder about telling someone their beliefs are wrong . . there are examples like Hitler, OF COURSE, but generally it is better to say they have a different opinion, or that you disagree. Most religions are not so extreme. BTW the cat killers are terrifying.

Quit getting offended. I have a lot of friends who are Christian. Be tolerant, live and let live. My views are just as important as yours.

Peace, people. ;-]

Where, exactly, is the OP overstepping? She has upheld her end of the deal made with BM. Her steps, who are free thinking adults, are now questioning the religion mom has shoved them into and mom is upset about it. I don't see how even you, KK, can turn that one into a overstepping SM issue.

What happened to teaching our children religous tolerance? I am not in the "closet" and I share so openly with anyone, including my SD and bio children, including my very religous side of my family.....
I mean honestly, there are SO MANY different religions out there, how can people 100% say theirs is right or someone elses is wrong? you can't until your dead!!
OP I think that you all have kept your religous beliefs quiet for way too long, your beliefs are not "shameful" and by not being open about them to your SD's gives the appearance. I honestly would give a rats patutie what BM thinks. Does she expect her girls to never be around someone of a different religion? Perhaps she would feel better if she could keep them in a bubble and only allow people within her religion to conversate with them.....

JNM, as to why I say OP is overstepping --

"You [referring to me] said: "And dad should tell SM what the deal is. And she shoudl live with it."

"I think maybe I haven't been clear--their dad is my husband. We are married; we make decisions together and our decisions take priority over those of other people we have had relationships with in the past. If he were to "tell me what the deal is," he would find himself standing before a judge again, just as I would never dream of telling him "what the deal is" and making decisions with my former husband that take precedence. As a couple we work together with BM and her husband to arrive at the best arrangements for the children we are all raising together. "

It should be mom and dads decision as to the role of religion in the kids life. They have two parents, not four.

I am sooo glad when I read things like this -- its an education. Never give SM or Dads SO an inch. It his and my decisions about these things. Being dads wife doesnt give her the right to make these deicisons.

KKNY, I haven't been on the board very long, so I don't know your stepfamily story. Does your husband just go meet with your SKs' mom and then come home and issue an order to you about how things will be in your own house? What if you have concerns about his unilateral household decisions?

I know there are stepfamilies where it does come down like that, but generally because there is an irrational, jealous ex. And even in those families, the spouses talk beforehand so when the bioparent discusses kid matters with his/her ex, the two adults of the home are presenting a united front.

I do know several stepparents who genuinely aren't interested in being a parent figure to the kids, and that is certainly their right--some folks just aren't kid people! But for the most part, if children are living with two adults and there is this dynamic where one of the grown-ups has no say, that is a recipe for spoiled and often unhappy kids. Kids--even teens--do crave limits and truly, on some level, don't want to have control over adults. It's very sad to see a kid say to a stepparent, "I don't have to do what you say, my dad mom said so."

If I got wind that one of my own kids said something like that to their SM, I would give them a major lecture.

Religion is NOT a household decision, it is a parental decision. Things like cleaining up after yourself are household decisions. A house does not have different religious beliefs (other than a house of worship I guess)

I told me X I would raise D in his religion. He knows my word can be trusted. Even if I were to remarry, that decision would be a parental one, not a household one.

We were talking about religion. In general, I think the bio parents should lay down any rules for kids, but that is especially true for religion. Without knowing what you did, I dont know if the mom is justified or not in saying a child doesnt have to do what a step says.

I am sorry for the stress in your life, but I am sooo glad no one but me and my Ds father makes the important parental decisions.

Never give SM or Dads SO an inch. It his and my decisions about these things. Being dads wife doesnt give her the right to make these deicisons."

Really, KK? So you think my SD's mom is better suited to make significant decisions in her life than I am?

I like your image of a house of worship having a different religion! "Darn, I'm an episcopalian, what are these snake handlers doing in me throwing around those rattlers?" :)

Ha, my stepchildren have NEVER said anything like "We don't have to do what Ulrike1 says." I hope you didn't think I was talking about my own SKs.

You said you aren't a SM? I'm sorry, I assumed everyone on this board would be in a stepfamily. Is your ex-husband remarried? Do you have problems with his new wife?

Here's my findings about stepfamilies: one can make it a good thing or a bad thing. One can cling possessively to the children who have one's own DNA (and as a BM I know well the temptation!) and get stuck in the grieving-the-nuclear-family stage indefinitely. Good for the kids?

Or, you can (ASSUMING the stepparents are decent people and certainly most are) look at it in a different way: that your kids have this incredible resource of an additional source of family connection. That they will have a greater range of experiences, a more expansive frame of reference in life, and, bottom line, have more "backup" all around. Need a peacock costume? Mom can't sew? Maybe SM can! Need a ride home from lacrosse? Which of the four parents isn't at work?

I think of my kids' SM, for example. Now she and I are very different, in age, temperament, background, ethnicity. And yes, at first it panged me when I waved goodbye to my kids and they climbed into her car and gave her a big hug and spoke to her in her language (that I didn't speak at the time but now I do a bit). But over time, I came to really like her and I have some of her artwork hanging in my house and (I admit) I brag about who she is when someone admires it.

And ditto BM and me. We enjoy each other's company most of the time and share private jokes and silly e-mails and photos of the kids. She and I communicate much more than she and DH do (unless she's mad about something, which she seems to be getting over, thank goodness).

Sorry, I am being so longwinded--it's nice to be able to think these things through.

JNM, of course this is discussion is restricted to moms who dont have severe mental issues, drugs, etc.

Urek, I dont "grieve" the nuclear family, but that doesnt mean I abdicate responsiblity for my child. My D doesnt have 4 parents, she has 2.

I highly recommend women in the process of divorce read this board, and see how often SMs overstep. I highly recommend ROFR, no third party pick ups etc.

So KKNY - If I'm reading this right, you and your Ex are different religions, and you agreed to raise your DD in his religion. I've certainly got no problem with that.

But that's not YOUR religion. Do you pretend it is? If DD asks you why Dad's religion believes XYZ - Do you explain why they do? What if she asks if YOU believe that? Do you say that you do even if you don't? If your DD buys into Dad's religion whole hog, then tries to convert you, what would you say?

I see your core point -- that it's the parents decision which religion to raise the child in.
But exactly what is a StepParent supposed to say when the kid asks point blank questions?

Sweeby, I do not pretend, but I show that religion respect (actually I hope I show all religions respect), and answer whatever questions I can (most) - or suggesti she call her dad otherwisw.

kkny said: "Religion is NOT a household decision, it is a parental decision."

It is so very true! It is certainly not up to a stepparent at all to decide re: religion.

sweeby, what a strange question: "DD asks you why Dad's religion believes XYZ - Do you explain why they do?"

why would DD ask her mom about religion that she (DD) and her dad practice? Wouldn't be logical that she would go to her dad for clrafications?

now sweeby asks: "But exactly what is a StepParent supposed to say when the kid asks point blank questions?"

If a child asks a stepparent a question about religion that stepparent clearly doesn't practice, then steparent should say i do not practice that religion and do not know the details so it would be better to ask your parents. if anyone asks me details about Islam or Christianity (not in a historical perspective-that i can answer, but in theological aspect) i would refer them to a person of that faith.

"We are married; we make decisions together and our decisions take priority over those of other people we have had relationships with in the past"

ulrike, I certainly hope you do not make decisions together in what religion his children will practice. that is between their mother and father. No, your decisions what their children will practice should not take over decisions of their mom and dad. You are clearly overstepping the boundaries.

"I think of my kids' SM, for example."

I get along wiht DD's SM great, she is really nice. But she would never ever tell (or show) DD that what she and I practice (different from her beliefs) is something to roll her eyes about. And I know she shouldn't say that what she and her DH (my X) decide should precede what I and X decided in regards to DD.

maybe she thinks that raising children jewish is intellectual abuse or maybe it is ballony or maybe it is supernatural crap (I know she doesn't think that but let's assume for a minute), she would keep it to herself, and wouldn't mock what my DD believes. I do not understand such insensitivity and lack of understanding.

I have people of all kind of religions as well as nontheists in my family and surrounding, never ever anyone of us would make inappropriate comments, mock, or encourage mockery. In fact I and my SO celebrate Christmas (I am Jewish he is Muslim) because his DDs are Christians and my niece and nephew are Catholic (while my brother and father are adamant atheists and my mom and DD are Jewish). We all are there and all get along. And then we celebrate our respective holidays. We all show respect. Not that hard.

i don't need to belive in Jesus Christ or Allah but it is not my place to mock or pock fun at those who do. And frankly knowing how many people suffered or died because of who they are or what they believe telling or showing children that this is all crap, is intolerant and wrong on every level. maybe because my people continue raising our children in our faith (or "intellectually abuse") we survive and didn't dissapear even if it is crap in others opinion.

and no, religion, is never a household decision. "what's for dinner"-is household decision.

I seem to have missed the part where Ulrike rolled her eyes and ridiculed BioMom's faith --

Maybe someone here can find it?

I didnt see anything about rolling either, but I do see her putting down mom's faith in about as severe a way as I can see -- as in "intellectual child abuse"

Mom lived up to her part of the bargain. Now that it may be harder to control, SM decides her word and dads word is meaningless.

OK - Found it:

"We had to promise BM that she could teach them supernatural beliefs even though for us, this is pretty much tantamount to intellectual child abuse."

IMO, the reasonableness of this viewpoint would vary with the degree of demonstrable scientific inaccuracy of the theology in question. Using Christianity as the sample religion, if BioMom teaches her children the conventional "there is one God, Jesus was his son, he died for our sins, ten commandments" spiel -- well I can't see that as intellectual child abuse. But if BioMom teaches an absolute and unwavering LITERAL interpretation of every single word of somebody's translation of the bible: "The bible says seven days - that means 7 days! Adam's rib means Eve was created from a rib bone from Adam's chest!" and everything else in life that doesn't fit perfectly with "God's word" needs to be twisted or disbelieved to fit that religious viewpoint -- well then yeah, I would consider that "intellectual abuse".

How can you teach a child how to think (not what to think or what to believe) when critical thinking standards can't be applied to certain subjects?

I also think the fact that Dad and SM agreed ten years ago under duress makes the agreement somewhat less 'morally binding'.

"But, we did make a deal over a decade ago. We would say nothing...and in return, BM did not make the girls go to a very repressive school she had in mind."

Choices as to religion and education are no more under duress than anything else. As IMA always says you could take it to court. Dad gave his word. Doesnt sound to me that anyone forgot. So why is it less morally binding.

You know what duress means --

"We would say nothing...and in return, BM did not make the girls go to a very repressive school she had in mind."

"As IMA always says you could take it to court."

Wait! How'd I get roped into this discussion? This is the first time I've read this thread...

Just my two cents on religion... we live in a FREE country! We have freedom of religion... and that includes our kids~ they can be whatever THEY choose. They can believe what they WANT to believe! Especially when they are college aged! I would have told her "they are adults, they have their own minds and if you have a problem with that, then it's YOUR problem!"

OP, don't waste your time worrying about what someone else thinks of your beliefs or accusing you of something you know is not true. You don't have to answer to her.. the kids are adults now.

In my experience, children change their minds several times about their faith as they grow up. I'd adopt the attitude that whatever the kids are saying to each other will not be taken too much to heart - and even if it is, everyone has a right to freedom of thought.

I'd hope that your partner's ex would accept that, too, but some partner's exes need to do some growing up of their own, eh? ;-)

Good luck with it all, but try not to let it get you down too much. This too shall pass (without wanting to spark a debate on the infinity of the Godhead and all that ...!)

Here is a link that might be useful: Author's website - buy the book!

Ima, I seem to recall when moms make compromises, your responmse is take it to court.

What I see here is mom made a compromise, and now SM doesnt want to live with it.

And it is not SMs business as to religous choices. Again, I urge all moms to read these threads, and see how SMs think relegion of stepchildren is in their court.

oh, come on, kkny. SM never said she didn't want to live with the agreement, or that she's not living by it. What she said was that her and her husband have lived by it, but that BM is upset because BMs now college age kids and SMs now college age kids have (GASP) had conversations with each other about their differing beliefs. Bet they've also had conversations about sex and politics and drugs and alcohol and tattoos, and who knows what else. The "kids" are all grown now. Neither BM nor SM at this point can control what they talk to each other about. College age kids are going to be exposed to things their parents wish they weren't, (such as BMs kids being exposed to different religious beliefs) and do thing their parents have told them not to (such as SMs kids talking to their step-siblings about religion). There's a point at which parents just have to accept that and let go a bit; trying to lay blame because the world doesn't operate the way you want it to just doesn't do any good.

I think OP has made it pretty clear what she thinks of whatever religion the mom is of, and is clearly wavering on it. As I said, I think she should tell her kids pls dont discuss religion with your stepsisters.

The stepkids can talk about whatever they want outside of the house -- the point is there was an arrangmeent that AT HOME - the moms religion would be respected.

What is the court going to do with this issue? Kids are in college and have had plenty of years to develop their own opinions on religion... just as they will form their own opinions on politics. If you were talking about 5 year olds, then maybe the court would care... but then both parents have a right to share 'their' beliefs. I agree that it's overstepping by anyone to say someone is WRONG... just as it would be wrong for a parent to say the other parent's sexuality is WRONG because it is different than theirs. But, I still can't imagine a court getting involved when kids are college aged... maybe tender years but then both parents have rights to share their values with their kids... until the court says it's detrimental to the child or decides one parent does NOT have the right.

Ima, I meant that when OP said that her DH agreed to the religion issue UNDER DURESS, he should have dealt with it then. Instead Dad agreed to it. He should keep his word. If I agreed to my Ds religion, and then now said, Oh too bad, that would be going back on my word. I wouldnt do it. D may or may not attend, etc., but in my house we repsect Dads religion, as I said I would.

I haven't read too closely through all the responses, but didn't OP say somewhere that this agreement was made 10 yrs ago?

Bottom line, these "kids" are now college-aged and from my experience in highschool AND college, religion is a hot topic of debate. The SKs cannot be expected to live in a bubble. Surely, by now, they've discovered that---gasp---others have different beliefs than them.

I haven't read anything in this thread that said SM or DH badmouthed BM's religion. It sounds like they've been close-mouthed about their own beliefs for years. And let's remember that it's not SM who is being "accused" of talking about religion/beliefs to the steps, it's her own bio-children who, I might add, are also college and grad school age. Sorry, but I don't think even their own mom has the "right" to tell them "please don't discuss religion with your step-siblings."

College-age people are free to form their own thoughts and form their own decisions. I can say for d*mn sure that the stepkids are going to be exposed to a LOT MORE controversial discussions in their lives, and if their faith is THAT shaky, then it wasn't really there to begin with.

I think SM/DH have done what they said they would do, and it doesn't sound to me like they're doing anything wrong now.

I won't go to the church where BM and SD take the kids. I used to if the kids were in special program or something, but no more...

I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't heard it with my own ears, but I do know what hate speech sounds like--and I heard it from their pastor one Sunday night that DH and I were sitting there.

You can bet DH talked to the kids about it...and that neither of us will go anywhere near that place again.

But yeah, before that, the kids' religious education had been left up to BM.

Yes, love college age kids will be exposed tomore -- the question is what they are exposed to in their own home.

Vivian, I have seen what borders on hatred of, not by, religion here.

Sweeby, Imamommy, Intheblender, Quirk, Lovehadley and Vivian31, thanks so much for your great input! Indeed, I'm not sure where the idea came from that (a) we "badmouth" BM's supernatural beliefs to SKs or (b) that it is exclusively MY life view. DH and I are in personal accord and we've never said anything negative to the girls. We have made the basic statement which was agreed on with BM and her DH, which is, "keep an open but discerning mind about anything anyone tells you about anything." We think that's pretty safe, and they are obviously following it. I think maybe BM is having second thoughts about that policy; when they were little, it was easy enough to get them to believe that certain information sources were of equal validity to verifiable facts, but as they are growing up, as many of you have pointed out, their intellects are maturing and they are becoming their own people.

But changing the subject a little bit, yesterday BM called DH about a totally different matter, something not having to do with the girls. Listening to her, it suddenly occured to me that maybe her anger the other day was largely a mask for anxiety...she does try to approach my DH when she is worried about something. Like, even though she knows well that he does not share her supernatural beliefs, she was feeling disappointed and felt the need to connect with him. I'm still wondering what her DH thinks about her many phone calls to my DH...her continued attempt to get my DH to be her shoulder to cry on, even though DH is totally businesslike. We talked about it more over the weekend.

Are we talking about religion? Or is that what you call supernatural??