Over the weekend, there were three threads in which the majority of posters opined that parents should not have the right to demand religious activity from adult children living in the home.

Now, lets flip that script. Should parents have the right to forbid religious activity for adult children in the home?

As in this scenario: Jim and June once were TBM but have resigned. Their 22 yo son Junior remains TBM. Like many 22 yo people, Junior doesn't have a career in which to make himself fully independent. He has to live in his family home. He does not pay rent, but does the majority of household chores in order to help out.

Junior has two jobs, both at $8.50 per hour. He works an average of 35 hours per week, total, at the jobs. Out of his appoximately $300 per week earnings, he gives $30 in tithes and another $10 in various offerings to the LDS church. He attends all meetings and is current on his temple card.

Jim and June decide to give Junior and ultimatum. Leave the church or leave their home. They give him 30 days to sign and mail a resignation letter they have written for him. If he does not do so, he must move out.

How do you see this?

Stupid parents. That's how I see it.

If the adult 'child' is not causing any disruption in the house, and is helping with the chores, why throw him out?

A 22 year old is an adult. He should be able to make his own decisions about his beliefs and his faith. The house rules should be about the house.

I never give my TBM wife or kids any flack for their church activities or tithing money. See my post on my parents reaction on my wanting to go on a mission.

I love and cherish my kids, I'd never intentionally hurt them. Also, when they have questions they'll come to me. My parents Bad parenting only push me deeper into the Morg. The Boner.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/06/2015 12:39PM by byuboner.

Parents can "demand" whatever they want.
Demanding doesn't, of course, guarantee compliance.
It also very frequently alienates those upon whom the "demands" are being placed.
It's not a question of "rights" -- it's a question of behavior. "Demanding" most of the time simply doesn't work the way parents hope it will, so it's not very smart to do it.

I would like to think this is the difference between us and TBMs. Most of us would recognize Jr's freedom of religion as an American and most of us realize it's his money and none of our business.

Most of us as parents would never throw Jr out and enjoy having him around regardless of his TBM behavior. Only if he were to cause repeated major disruptions crossing relationship boundaries to throw religion in our faces would we even consider asking him to move out. WE UNDERSTAND RELATIONSHIP BOUNDARIES! We would never spie on Jr or have other exmos around town monitor him and report back to see if he is going to YSA activities or doing splits with missionaries.

We don't act like cult members or force others to our viewpoint.

My 2 cents.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/06/2015 12:53PM by Haunted Wasatch.

I think the better option for the parents would be to say, while you are living with us you are required to pay rent. If they feed him, then he needs to contribute for the food. If he uses the car, they should charge him. Make him do a share of the housework just like a roommate would. Charge him for the things he uses, no free ride. I wouldn't drive him to church functions just like I wouldn't drive him to a nightclub or a movie. Treat him like an adult who makes decisions and deals with the consequences of his decisions.
If I was this parent, the money he pays would secretly go into an account that we could decided later to use to help him find an apartment (first, last, deposit) and moving costs.
He can continue to pay tithing which simply means he has less money. He can go to all church meetings, which means less available hours to work, he has less money. He can find his own way to the activities he wants to attend: church, movie, date, etc.
Don't hinder or forbid religion, but don't help him at all. Helping would include subsidizing his life so he can pay tithing, go to church.

This is good advice as far as the house rules are concerned. They need to be constructive and headed towards self sufficiency.

They aren't doing him any family favors. Their job is to help him leave the nest, not have a more comfortable nest.

They need to help him get into school or training to make more than minimum wage, or he will be there until they die.

He isn't living the gospel. They sell self sufficiency, so they can siphon off more tithing.

He's an adult, he is acting like it and he should be treated

like it. Respect his wishes even though you don't agree.

Its insulting to treat a grown man like a child.

I have long held the person with the responsibility can make the rules for those without it. Namely, the person who pays the mortgage/taxes can make any rule they want.

If the homeowner wants to have the "renter" park in the street instead of the empty garage, it's their perogative. If they say handwash all dishes, ignore the dishwasher, it's their perogative. If they insist the heat is at 55 in winter, put on a sweater.

If you don't like the rules, move.

Is it fair to try to dictate behavior in your home? Absolutely. No smoking. No drugs. No wild house parties. All of these rules seem reasonable, no? Rules dictating behavior are totally fine, no matter how rediculous they may seem to others.

The OP and the other posters from the weekend though aren't talking about behavior. They want to change beliefs, by controlling behavior. That is doomed to fail.
You can make a condition of the child living with you to join your bowling team. You can make them roll the ball, but you can't make them care about what it does next.

TL;DR - you can make them do anything you like, but you can't make them change their mind, so why try like this?

At no point, in any of these threads, have I said anything about forcing a belief. I have said, at all times, the parents have a right to force attendance and participation.

The parents have no more rights to dictate behavior than the children.

The parent can say you will go to church or leave the home.

The child can say you will not ever demand I go to church or I'll leave home and never speak to you again.

I believe most of us here would never consider giving religious ultimatums to our adult children. We have been subjected to far too much intolerance and bigotry from all sides that, for me, I would want to protect the ones I love from that abusive experience.

After graduating from Law School, my oldest, and only remaining TBM adult child (the other three had resigned) lived with us due to a worsening health condition. We let him know that we loved him, and deeply respected his decision to remain a TBM Mormon. We also committed to do whatever we could to support him in his calling and such.

All we asked in return was that he be respectful and supportive of our decision to leave and live our lives as we see fit (our lifestyle hadn't changed all that much anyway). He agreed to the arrangement which, overall, worked out really well. After the long years missing him while he was away to University, we truly enjoyed having him home again!

whywait Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Junior has two jobs, both at $8.50 per hour. He
> works an average of 35 hours per week, total, at
> the jobs. Out of his approximately $300 per week
> earnings, he gives $30 in tithes and another $10
> in various offerings to the LDS church. He attends
> all meetings and is current on his temple card.

This is the tricky bit. $40 per week to the cult is ~$2000 per year, while Junior pays no rent. No mention of who pays for his food either. If his parents cover his food because he gave his money to the cult, they are effectively paying tithing.

I would say that they have the right to demand that he pay tithing only after he's covered room and board. However, family bonds are more important than the morg would prefer; the family shouldn't let themselves be torn apart by a stupid cult, so they should exercise good judgement when deciding whether or not to demand the above.

On the other hand, suppose he were donating $2000 per year to a hate group that wasn't masquerading as a religion? My answer might change... not that it was made up very strongly to begin with.

I'm of the opinion that the parents have every right to set the rules of their own home however they want for their adult children. If you are over 18, there's nothing to keep you there if you don't like the rules.

My parents forced us to go to Mass as long as we were under their roof. I have been a non-believer since I was 7, and I hate everything about the catholic church, so this ticked me off to no end. I would bring a paperback and read through it. But I still think they were entirely within their rights.

If my teenagers wanted to go to catholic church, I wouldn't support that. I think the catholic church is evil, and creates a great deal of suffering around the world. I'm not supporting that in any way at all.

The kids can become financially independent and do whatever they want in terms of religion and I won't say a word.

If any child of mine didn't believe exactly at I told them to
believe in every minute detail, I'd burn them at the stake.

What's the point of being a patriarch if you're going to act like a loving parent? How is that going to prepare you to be a mormon ghawd?

Tremendous judgement & open contempt
May make it a hostile emotional environment
Which proves toxic/ alas

I recall being beyond nonplused horrified, when my jack mo mom & non mo dad ran an illegal auction for stolen farm chemicals in the drive way. a semi truck twin trailer that was full of them; when I was Tom.

I recall my dad being called to leave in the middle of the night and transport large sums of cash to His boss while armed.

I recall my moms wine in her coffee cup.

I think, recalling the conversations at lunch between men about who would do him, at my grandmothers as she sighed oh how terrible again and again wringing her rosary beads,

That's what housing in jobs in the forest service are for, people like me who appear to be incompatible or uncomfortable with of not the mores, then can't romanticize a culture or lifestyle
But are repulsed or highly anxious within it.

Sometimes people need to go away freely, it's such a horrible place to be ; idn mb they used my T b m brother and me as their adopted conscience, token to God, or, had ransomed us for a place in the company which was in LDS family ownership just in case
They fell into hard times. sometimes It appears to be a calculated thing like a business transaction doesn't bother anyone involved, why should it bother you! In which case the wiser thing would be, to simply go away physically, not stay in anxiety etc.

Why all the argument? You'd think they did it on purpose they were so annoying, repulsive to one another, their life styles just clashed, they couldn't stand to be near one another's friends anymore /particularly after the first sibling committed a murder and began his life of crime.

Who would be the favorite? WHO would be the favorite
Enjoy the fruit if the land, ranch hands, workers, air conditioning, rental houses--- the one most like his dad.

The rest needed to go. How can you flip that script without scrambling it like eggs in a hot frying pan? It's a special California Scrable, uh, scramble, that is, on primagenitor.