jump to last post 1-18 of 18 discussions (18 posts)

Has religion helped define the modern family?

  1. alvairs profile image62
    alvairsposted 5 years ago

    Has religion helped define the modern family?

  2. skgrao profile image71
    skgraoposted 5 years ago

    Modern Family in India is partly a religion mixed family and modern youngsters do not care for religion at least in my sub religion.

  3. DDE profile image26
    DDEposted 5 years ago

    It is difficult when it comes to religion in the modern family so much has changed  not much is practiced of religion

  4. Ericdierker profile image53
    Ericdierkerposted 5 years ago

    I think that if we all had perfect little families as directed by most religions, the world would be a better place. The trouble is that, the world would be a boring place. Religions should be a guidepost for the well being of a family. Trouble is that it often becomes a law to live under, and diversity is then shameful. Happily in my religion the notion of service to others is paramount. If we add Love to service of all family members it is hard to go wrong.
    So I hope it does not define a family, but is a great Influence.

  5. MrMaranatha profile image80
    MrMaranathaposted 5 years ago

    Modern family...

    Religion may have defined the family unit itself.. but the so called Modern Family is the result of those things held pure... being torn down and a "Every man did that in his own eyes" union arising in its place.

    Php 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

  6. Thomas Swan profile image96
    Thomas Swanposted 5 years ago

    Take out the word modern and the answer could be yes.

  7. John Sarkis profile image83
    John Sarkisposted 5 years ago

    Nietzsche makes reference to this in his writings.  Even atheists, oftentimes are obliged to conform to religion - e.g. you get married in the church to please your parents, even though you may not believe yourself; you send your kids to religious schools, because, you think they'd do better there than they would in regular public schools, etc.  "No man is an island" so goes the famous quote.

  8. SidKemp profile image93
    SidKempposted 5 years ago

    In the US today, is there any defined modern family?

    Clearly, marriage for Caucasians in the US up through WW II (1940s) was largely defined by the Christian religion as interpreted in England, Europe, and the colonies. (The Jewish tradition followed along similar lines.) Sex before marriage was sometimes accepted, marriage was heterosexual and intended lifelong, divorce or annulment very rare. Families were extended clans of grandparents to great-grandchildren. and uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces, and cousins made up an extended family with varying degrees of closeness. Extramarital sex was frowned on and kept hidden, as was homosexual desire or activity.

    Black, Native American, and other sub-cultures have their own history of the nature of family, not discussed here.

    The first change came in the 1950s, and it was due to modern transportation and marketing, not religion. The "nuclear family" came to refer to parents and their children set off separately from the clan-like extended family. As men came back from the wars (WW II and Vietnam), migration to California increased, and economic prosperity increased, the myth of the nuclear family - a husband earning a living, a wife raising children with little outside help, and an average of 2.3 children per family was born.

    The next change was due to the invention of reliable birth control in the 1960s. This opened up new opportunities for sexual activity, the divorce rate skyrocketed, and divorce for emotional reasons became acceptable. This meant that marriage was no longer likely to be lifelong, and children might not be in a household with both parents through their childhood.

    Starting in the 1970s, and increasing through today, a single income became not enough to support a family. That, combined with divorce rates, create single-family homes with a working mom (or dad), families with two working parents, and blended families. This is an economic influence, not a religious one.

    More and more, children did not have the role model of lifelong marriage in their parents. Now, parenthood without marriage is increasing rapidly.

    Public openness on homosexuality for men and women changes our definition of family as well. This is a cultural issue, not a religious one.

    Children exposed to abuse, especially sexual abuse, tend to grow up to have non-traditional patterns of sexual activity. This changes family patterns, too.

    Conclusion: Since the 1950s, religion has been a small influence on family definition.

  9. profile image0
    KDuBarry03posted 5 years ago

    I think it depends on numerous factors. There are numerous types of families based on religion; however, religion is just one aspect of a larger reason: culture and intercultural interactions. With the world becoming more globalized, intercultural and interracial families are becoming more common. I have friends who are dating each otehr and one is from a Hindu background while the other is a Christian background. In America, I think religion doesn't play as large of a role in marriage as it does in other countries; it truly depends on the culture we live in.

  10. Marsei profile image89
    Marseiposted 5 years ago

    I think yes.  I believe it's helped define the modern family as one that is "religious" or not religious.  Although it is a cultural issue, there would be more same sex marriages without religion.  I believe that even now, many couples marry because they are pregnant, not because they are in love and want to spend their lives together; and that is also influenced by religion, by parents who are religious and believe that a child out of wedlock is a bad thing.  I believe many parents with gay children have left the church because someone they love is not accepted there, especially if accompanied by a partner; and in that way, the church has helped define those families as families that do not attend church.  I belive the scandal within a church that teaches against homosexuality and whose priests routinely molest male children has defined a segment of an entire generation as families who have left the church.   

    On the other side of that coin -- and there's always another side -- the church offers a social outlet and sense of community to many who would not otherwise have one.  Many churches regularly visit the sick in their congregation, comfort those who have lost friends or family to death, and surround them with love.  The church is a place where seniors can go each week and see other members of the community and feel part of things, even if they are limited in getting out during the week.  The church makes its members feel safe in the community and that they are a part of something, almost an extended family.

    I grew up in the Methodist church.  My parents attended regularly and insisted that I did until I was old enough to leave for college.  My husband and I do not attend church and did not insist that our children go to Sunday school or church.  My children are both successful in phenomenal ways, both professionally and as human beings.  My grandchildren do not attend church.   I think the family is defined by the things the church offers and the things one is willing to accept in order to belong; these choices define the family as a "religious" one or one that is not "religious."   I chose to find my sense of community in other ways, my neighborhood, a lucid dreaming group that I attend, my husband's Kiwanis club, etc. because I am not comfortable accepting exclusivenss, some are welcome in God's house and some are not.  Everyone makes these choices and I believe the church absolutely helped define the modern family as what it is -- or is not.

  11. Fuller-Life profile image76
    Fuller-Lifeposted 5 years ago

    Yes it has. Every society is affected by the predominant philosophy. Religion is one of the most influential tools that shape our thinking, actions and behaviors. It realigns our fears with reality and disturbs our human relations profoundly. - our relations both with other humans, and with the environment are no longer in harmony. If you look at America, the size and composition of the family among those who are deeply religious is largely determined by their religious perceptions. Although, most the Catholics I know, secretly practice family planning in defiance of their leadership.

    Because of religion, We now look at each other with suspicion.

  12. d.william profile image61
    d.williamposted 5 years ago

    Great question and all comments are appropriate within themselves.  Religion has indeed influenced every facet of our lives over the past 2,000+ years.  Both good and bad. 
    When people become more educated and learn to actually think for themselves they tend to drift away from those ancient superstitious idea that all religions seems to cling to.  We can blame social problems on lack of religious influence; and conversely on that religious influence itself.  It depends who is making that judgment call.  The lack of religious upbringing in itself, has nothing to do with whether a person is 'good' or 'bad', but rather on how they are treated in their formative years.  I have known many avid church goers who say they are 'christians' and are the chosen few who so berated and mistreated their children that those children grew up to be social piranhas.  I have also known many gay couples who maintained their respective faiths; and those who had no religious affiliations at all, that brought their children up to be successful, happy, healthy and productive citizens. 
    The point is that one cannot blame inappropriate behaviors on lack of religious teachings.  But one can certainly blame much of those bad behaviors and mental disorders on religious teachings when they imprint negativity on the innocent children at much too early an age for them to understand what is happening to them - ergo, many grow up with unfounded guilt, unfounded fear, and tenuous beliefs of what is right and what is wrong.
    The definition of the "family unit" is certainly changing, but fighting those changes by trying to destroy them serves no purpose at all, except to add to the social unrest.  So, we can only pray that religions will bring themselves into the 21st century and be an asset to those inevitable changes instead of being the cause of that unrest, hatred and intolerance.

  13. Perspycacious profile image81
    Perspycaciousposted 5 years ago

    See the LDS "Proclamation On The Family" which is a modern-day definition based on holy scripture.  Yes, religion defines the "modern" family.

  14. TeaPartyCrasher profile image71
    TeaPartyCrasherposted 5 years ago

    Honestly, the religious definition of a family seems a bit outdated to me in many ways.  The idea of the woman staying home, raising the children and keeping the house while the man provides seems to fly in the face of woman's equlaity. 

    Of course, most western religions seem to have a misogynistic streak to them, IMO.

  15. Buzzbee profile image74
    Buzzbeeposted 5 years ago

    I would tend to agree with whonunuwho.  It seems that the family is an element so integral to the proper and secure nurturing of children into adulthood and there is no real way around it.  Children need security to develop properly and be healthy-minded.

    Having said that, I know there are many many individuals that may have been brought up in orphanages who have turned out well and sometimes as very successful, assertive people who have a drive that children of 'normal' nuclear families sometimes lack.

  16. Jonesy0311 profile image60
    Jonesy0311posted 5 years ago

    Absoultely. First off, the idea of a "nuclear" family is nonsense; a socially-constructed Western idea. Historically, polygamy was the norm. It has always been more common for one man to have multiple wives/sexual partners, which has obvious evolutionary origins. It was only after the fall of the Roman Empire (and the death of the Roman family) that the idea of the "modern" family arose. It was at this point that women actually took a step back and lost their equlity, which they have not yet regained. You can thank the teachings of the Holy Bible which constributed to the rise of the "Christian" family. Today, we have a very convoluted unsubstantiated idea of the definition of family.

  17. kgarcia1113 profile image72
    kgarcia1113posted 5 years ago

    I think religion is doing more harm to the "modern" family then anything. People yell that religion says two people of the same gender can't be married and raise a family. Hello, separation of Church and State.

  18. chiradeep profile image64
    chiradeepposted 5 years ago

    God's standard of family is everlasting. So the families which are built on HIS 'Marriage & Family Standards' are applicable to any generation vice versa is understood, I don't have to explain.

 
working