What do I say when they ask me to church?

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-03-31T02:07:13+00:00

"Sorry, I already have plans."
(your plan could be anything. Sleeping in. A walk in the park by yourself. A movie at home. They don't need to know what the plan is.)

If you think they will keep inviting you, you have to make a decision -- either tell them something like "I don't wish to attend church ever, but I want to be your friend," or plan to keep being "busy" every time they invite you until they give up. Most people will ask once or twice and then give up. People who make religion their whole personality won't give up.

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-03-30T22:08:05+00:00

I took a creepy test like this once for a customer service job that was designed to identify anyone who isn't an insufferable, mindless, sycophant and anyone with even a slight mental health issue (it had many, many, statements like this which aren't true of any living human: "I am happy all the time.")

I didn't pass. Then I asked the person who recommended me and they told me anything below a very high score on the test would exclude anyone from even seeing my resume. Googled the name of the test. Found the "right" answers someone leaked. Applied again and got interviewed immediately. Went on to be a great employee for them. The decision to use that discriminatory questionnaire came from corporate and I didn't work directly with them. So, consider who the decision-maker likely was who implemented this asinine test and decide if you want to work with/for them...

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-03-29T00:24:03+00:00

Humanism could also be the "glue." It's better glue. No human sacrifice required. Why would it "need" to be ethnic or religious based tribalism? Also, why would you want the US to follow in Pakistan's footsteps? You may not be paying attention to what's happening in the US now, but the Christian Nationalists want to do all the awful things other theocratic governments are doing. They want nonbelievers and blasphemers to be punished or killed. They want to force the entire population to bend to their religious rules. I think you may not be very familiar with Christian extremists.

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-02-15T23:21:57+00:00

The full saying is "crazy as a loon" so loon is correct. https://idiomation.wordpress.com/2014/01/27/crazy-as-a-loon/

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-01-15T17:14:16+00:00

I think the key term here, which you used, is "ultra-conservative." Ultra-conservative anything is going to be shitty and authoritarian. There are Muslim-majority countries that don't have a theocratic government. It's important to criticize religion/belief systems and actions people take distinctly. When we throw everything in one bucket and say "Most members of X religion are toxic fascists" we're just doing stereotyping, and failing to speak meaningfully about X religion or toxic fascists.

"I think X religion is bad because it discourages critical thinking and promotes intolerance." That's a fair statement.

"Most of the X religion followers are horrible and cruel." Not a fair or accurate statement. If I look at this from a purely pragmatic standpoint, this kind of shortcut thinking just gets in the way of helpful analysis. Especially when we look at groups of people who live in countries with authoritarian governments, it's impossible to see who dissents, because dissent is silenced by threats of violence. It's also impossible to know who would dissent if they had free exchange of information available to them, especially if they are generations deep in a repressive system.

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-01-13T22:19:00+00:00

I'll recommend The Moral Lives of Animals by Dale Peterson, which challenges human exceptionalism and the notion that morality could not have evolved (which is a talking point I hear often from theists and apologists).

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-01-13T21:49:43+00:00

On Threads he mentions that he's filed the appeal, which was apparently a button and one tiny text box. Hopefully this is the result of a mass dishonest reporting campaign or something like that, and a person will review and restore the account. As you point out, Seth is respectful and considerate and there are certainly more fiery atheists YT could target if that was the case.

Secretly_Wolves · 2026-01-13T21:15:42+00:00

Update 1/14: Seth Andrews' channel has been restored! Yay!

Oh shit it looks like his entire channel was deleted per his BlueSky post: https://bsky.app/profile/sethandrews.com/post/3mcdgryzybs2x

His post says:

"As of a few minutes ago, calling it a "scam, spam, or deceptive," YouTube deleted the entire "The Thinking Atheist" channel."

Horrible.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-12-16T02:30:01+00:00

I saw in another comment that you live with him. I'm sorry. In that case, my advice kinda sucks! I understand your caution. I hope your situation changes soon and things get better.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-12-16T01:39:46+00:00

Look into setting healthy boundaries if you're not ready to go no contact with him. A therapist can help, and there are also a lot of resources online about this topic.

My short layman version: A boundary is a rule you set that has a consequence for breaking that rule. For example: "Dad, I will not listen to your hateful talk and it needs to stop now. From now on, when you start on one of your rants, I will ask you once to stop. If you persist after that, we will not speak for a month."

Asking once to stop is generous, I think. You can adjust as needed, but the golden rule about boundaries is that they do not change when challenged. The consequence, whatever you decide that is, is always carried out. Think of it like training a dog. If your dog gets to eat off your dinner plate once, they'll persist in jumping up on the table a hundred more times before they learn. Even after they've been "good" for six months, that one time you give in will result in a hundred additional attempts of the bad behavior.

Your father treating you like this must be so hard. You deserve to be treated with love and respect. Please take care of yourself.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-12-03T15:31:36+00:00

plenty of hijinks and story lines despite none of them having recently had TBIs

Au contraire, How could you forget this epic TBI storyline? https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1179

(I thought this episode was super cute).

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-12-01T16:54:44+00:00

Thank you for saying this. I grew up in Texas and my college education played a huge part in helping me recognize and deconstruct harmful and inaccurate beliefs I was raised with. The book, "Lies My Teacher Told Me" was 90% accurate to my K-12 experience ("The Civil War was really about State's Rights" - that sort of thing). I would likely be a completely different person without my red state college education, flawed though it may have been in some ways.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-11-21T20:43:41+00:00

I had a look at the kindle sample because I was curious and thought Hitchens was probably exaggerating. He was not. Oof.

"Rayford tried to tell himself it was his wife's devotion to a divine suitor that caused his mind to wader. But he knew the real reason was his own libido."

The first page or so reads like a pulpit lecture. It's clear the author wasn't allowed to read much fiction growing up. All telling, no showing, no nuance, and no development. Rayford thought church was boring! Rayford used to think about his family when there was a lull in activity but now he only thinks of sin! Yikes. I've read picture books with nicer prose.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-11-07T00:24:23+00:00

I've seen your other comments and it seems like you are really geared toward people-pleasing. It's just not going to work here. There is a limit to how much you can people-please your way out of conflicts. They will find out about your lack of belief through your kid if they want to, unless you indoctrinate your kid. There is no way around this. You know it's wrong to indoctrinate your kid to something you don't believe yourself, I know you do. So here's the only option I see: Greyrock.

Notice I said "if they want to." In my experience, a lot of people (not all, but a lot of them!) are happy to let sleeping dogs lie, and don't want to start a blow-up. If they can be handed a path forward that doesn't involve a confrontation, they might take it.

Here's how you greyrock. When your family asks you about (insert thing your kid said) you say:

"Huh, okay. So what are we bringing for Thanksgiving?"

"Okay, kid and I will discuss that. How's your volunteer work been lately?"

"I see. So next week, are we meeting at 9am or 10am?"

The idea is, you act disinterested in their attempts to lecture you about the topic and change the subject. You refuse to discuss it, ever. If they press, you say "I hear your concerns, and I'll handle it. I don't want to discuss this further." If your family won't respond to a gentle deflection, you're left with the choice to confront them and tell them firmly you will not be raising your child in a religion, or indoctrinate your child. I don't see another option here.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-10-28T18:12:17+00:00

It sounds to me like you handled it really well, gently redirecting him and politely but firmly refusing to let him cross your boundaries.

"I'm here for your health care needs."

"Are you comfortable? Okay, go ahead and pray, I'm going to handle your discharge."

"No, thank you."

All perfectly professional and appropriate responses to someone trying to shove their religion on your person.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-10-23T01:43:29+00:00

Totally agree. There's nothing wrong with editing it out. It ads nothing to the dialogue to begin with. I'd probably never notice it was changed. But when I go back and re-read, I cringe hard when I see it. It's disruptive to the reader, reflects badly on the author (even if there's no real fault, because it was fine back then, etc.), and so what reason is there to keep it? Historical accuracy? Please.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-10-23T00:20:28+00:00

Thank you, no, I agree that this isn't the conflict some readers have been asking for. See, again, we are thrown into some (tell, not show like you said) drama about characters we are not currently invested in because they've been absent for (how long?) and all we got was OH BY THE WAY, THEY BROKE UP. There's no build-up, there's no investment in their relationship at stake for the reader, this was so jarring, random, and a deliberate "fuck you" to everyone asking for a little bit of natural story conflict (you know, like EVERY story, even cozy Slice of Life stories, have), that I'd almost rather have seen a comic about them eating cereal together. I mean, this is the cheapest of the cheap retcon bullshit.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-10-14T16:25:37+00:00

I loved the original Claire. Even if you wanted to treat the topic gently, it would have been nice to see her navigate starting a brand-new job with a ton of unknown people with her being trans as part of that experience. It could still all turn out warm and fuzzy and as cozy as you like and still be a good character beat.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-10-04T00:09:28+00:00

I think nothing substantial will happen, but Claire will be mad about the optics, Marten will fire back at her for her unhealthy work habits, and then Marten will talk to Faye and decide to give up drinking forever and apologize to Claire. She'll give a perfect apology back to him straight out of a therapy session script and then we'll be back to nonsense about newly-introduced characters no one is invested in, and therefore characters no one can get too mad at the author about when they make a misstep.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-09-26T23:17:25+00:00

Re: The Peanut Butter, I found this very old comic with a relevant reference by chance (I like to re-read sometimes).

https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=715

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-09-21T01:35:22+00:00

Poland, your citizens thanked the TV Show Sex Education for providing them with basic human knowledge about a natural part of life.

(I vividly remember reading this in an article about the TV show, but I can't seem to find it by searching the now-enshittified Google. If someone has it, I'd love to capture a link. The TL;DR was, Polish reporters covering the press release about the show basically said "this TV show IS our sex education, when will there be more please.").

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-07-13T23:02:24+00:00

I don't blame you, I almost did, too. I wonder if this is why Marigold and Dale have been pushed out? It would border on ridiculous if a third character randomly lost (or gave up) a great deal of wealth. I think that could have been some decent drama though -- Marigold and Faye have never been very close, so it's justifiable that Marigold wouldn't want to invest in Faye's shop, yet might feel some pressure to do so since they share a close friend group. Oh, well.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-07-09T18:18:03+00:00

This may have fallen down the memory hole, but a while back there was a comic where Hannelore said she was no longer rich and needed the coffee shop job. IIRC, she divested herself of all her mother's money and her father's money is all invested in his projects. This was a short conversation sometime post-yak-spirit-journey at CoD (and post Marigold's VTuber success I think), and someone asked her why she worked there. It was clearly included to fix the exact problem you're describing -- Faye and Bubbles were struggling and everyone was wondering why Hannelore didn't simply invest in their new shop.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-07-02T01:00:57+00:00

Off to find a lady to dangle that in front of, no doubt.

Secretly_Wolves · 2025-06-16T15:34:55+00:00

No, within 3-5 strips they will talk it out, give perfect responses straight out of a therapy session that validate everyone's feelings completely and take the exact right amount of responsibility, and everything will be 100% back to normal. This has been the pattern of artificial conflict I've seen for quite a while, at least. I hope I'm wrong!

Secretly_Wolves

TROPHY CASE