I was active in fundamentalism in the 1970s and early 80s, and up to that point, there was still a substantial contingent of evangelicals who considered "worldly power" beneath them, and a distraction. Also, it's easy to forget that the politically weaponized doctrine that life begins at death / abortion is murder was invented in the 1980s, it did not exist before then, even among fundamentalists, as a coherent groupthink position.

So the seeds Graham planted in the 1950s really flowered in the 1980s, and gave rise to anti-abortion groups, the Moral Majority / Liberty University and the Pat Robertson presidential campaign, etc. And then the matured flowers barfed demon seeds all over us here in the 2010s, culminating in Trumpism.

Even my wife, who doesn't pay much attention to fundamentalism, not having come out of it as I did, thinks Billy Graham was a "humble man of god", befuddled but sincere and perhaps adorable, and is confused by my "finally" reaction to his death.

So it goes. It's an absurd world we live in.

@mordant Religion evolves (oh no the dreaded word) and is a far cry from the original. Yet they still talk about a literal interpretation and don't recognize the difference between today's dogma and that from the past.

My late partner as from Iran and a lifelong atheist. From childhood she thought religion goofy. When we met I was in my transition stage and she turned me into what I am today. Sounds like the reverse of your situation.

@JackPedigo Actually more similar than not. My wife (who I married after my deconversion) is also a lifelong atheist, but the indifferent kind -- and religiously naive. She doesn't think about it, and is open enough to want to explore liberal churches as a source of social connection. She finds theism itself to be incomprehensibly silly -- but she doesn't abreact to it like I do as a former believer. I'm left to myself to integrate my current headspace with my past -- it's one of the reasons I hang in places like this. To my wife, it's simple -- it was all bullshit, what is there to ponder. In a way, she's right of course.

@mordant True, in a sense. My partner, Parvin, saw what religion can do to a country (her country) and hated every part of it. I was a member of an environmental/religious group called Earth ministry. It was a coalition of liberal religions as Unitarians. We would camp and do other things but there were always a prayer included. She hated this and got us to leave. That opened my eyes about religious motivation. She did not need to look for social connections, they found her. Our whole community was affected when she died and I still hear stories about how they miss her even after some 20 months.

@JackPedigo I'm truly sorry for your loss. I lost my prior wife a little over ten years ago to a long illness. It helps emotionally to know how your partner positively influence others. Your Parvin sounds like she was quite outgoing and centered.

Her personality was the exact opposite of mine. Extreme extrovert. 5' 0" 100 lbs and not afraid of anything or anyone. Died a perfect death, short, no suffering, surrounded by the community/family and took advantage of this states Death with Dignity program. Believe it or not it was an inspiring death and numerous people agreed. Her death has helped me contribute to this group. @mordant

@JackPedigo My wife went the rational suicide route also, before she became too ill to accomplish it for herself.

Ironically I think she lived a year or two longer thanks to making those plans; when you feel in control of things and have a plan you can bear up under your suffering better.

@mordant The book "Being Mortal" brings that out. I am curious about "Rational suicide". I don't know if you know our story (I have commented on it numerous times) but a resident who wrote the law on Death with Dignity stated that the word "suicide" had to be left out of any law. One is listed as dying from what one would have died from without any intervention. Suicide is seen as negative and counterproductive to implementing intervention laws.

@JackPedigo Sorry if I assumed to much about the mode of Parvin's death and her active role in it; I'm new here and hadn't read your previous writings. In my wife's case, she probably would have died passively in a year or so but just didn't want to suffer anymore, and therefore decided to take positive action in the matter. There was every indication that her final months would have been excruciating and she might well have ended up in a horrible institutional situation where she wouldn't have had options about the endgame.

The term for when a person ends their own life is suicide, which I divide into rational and irrational forms (although that is a bit of an oversimplification). I define rational suicide as choosing the timing and manner of your death in a situation (in consultation with loved ones where applicable) in which the alternative is pointless suffering and/or lingering illness which is burdensome to your family emotionally and/or financially.

Maybe there is a better term but I don't know what it is. Meanwhile I tend to think that the stigma attached even to non-rational suicide needs to be broken, so I'm okay with getting a conversation going about both.

My wife used the book "Final Exit" in her planning. I have not read "Being Mortal", I'll add it to my reading list.

@mordant Too bad you missed the previous connections. We discovered 2 unbelievable Drs. on island that were heavily involved with the endoflifewa program and they both helped and we heard many stories. Her death process was amazing in the connections and impacts it brought to this island. One doctor got a write up in the Seattle Times which contained some very interesting stories. Her death was the ideal one and she knew it and never stopped smiling. I could send you her story but it is lengthy.

I will try and make note of the book. We have a number of people here with Parkinson's. One guy is in his later stages and it is seriously affecting his wife. After Parvin's death process many started asking "what would Parvin do?" I have started asking that question about what would she do if she had some slow, debilitating death and there was no legal way out. I do know she would not want to live a life that was constantly going downhill. She definitely would have been proactive. The big question is how and who can use to help? Several on us on this site want also to have that discussion.

Oh yeah, don't get me started on Mother Theresa. That old hag is as bad in her way as Billy Graham Cracker.

There was something that seemed fundamentally "wrong" or "off" about him to me, even when I was an evangelical.

@mordant that is funny about being 'wrong' or 'off'...I can remember his sermons on the TV, as something I should be hearing...but, for some odd reason, I was not drawn into his web...all that coming 'down front,' pleading stuff! And I never thought of him as my preacher, even when I was in the Evangelical religion.