home
RSS
June 22nd, 2012
11:27 AM ET

Prominent atheist blogger converts to Catholicism

By Dan Merica, CNN

Washington (CNN) – She went from atheist to Catholic in just over 1,000 words.

Leah Libresco, who’d been a prominent atheist blogger for the religion website Patheos, announced on her blog this week that after years of debating many “smart Christians,” she has decided to become one herself, and that she has begun the process of converting to Catholicism.

Libresco, who had long blogged under the banner “Unequally Yoked: A geeky atheist picks fights with her Catholic boyfriend,” said that at the heart of her decision were questions of morality and how one finds a moral compass.

“I had one thing that I was most certain of, which is that morality is something we have a duty to,” Libresco told CNN in an interview this week, a small cross dangling from her neck. “And it is external from us. And when push came to shove, that is the belief I wouldn’t let go of. And that is something I can’t prove.”

CNN's Belief Blog: the faith angles behind the big stories

According to a Patheos post she wrote on Monday, entitled “This is my last post for the Patheos Atheist Portal,” she began to see parts of Christianity and Catholicism that fit her moral system. Though she now identifies as a Catholic, Libresco questions certain aspects of Catholicism, including the church’s positions on homosexuality, contraception and some aspects of religious liberty.

“There was one religion that seemed like the most promising way to reach back to that living Truth,” Libresco wrote about Catholicism in her conversion announcement post, which has been shared over 18,000 times on Facebook. “I asked my friend what he suggests we do now, and we prayed the night office of the Liturgy of the Hours together.”

At the end of the post, Libresco announces that she is in a Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults class and is preparing for baptism. She will continue to blog for Patheos, but under the banner, “A geeky convert picks fights in good faith.”

According to Dan Welch, director of marketing for Patheos, Libresco’s post has received around 150,000 page views so far.

“Leah's blog has gotten steadily more popular since she arrived at Patheos, but a typical post on her blog is probably closer to the range of 5,000 page views,” Welch wrote in an email. “Even now, a few days later, her blog is probably getting 20-30 times its normal traffic.”

Libresco’s announcement has left some atheists scratching their heads.

“I think atheists were surprised that she went with Catholicism, which seems like a very specific choice,” Hemant Mehta, an atheist blogger at Patheos, told CNN. “I have a hard time believing how someone could jump from I don’t believe in God to a very specific church and a very specific God.”

Mehta says that Libresco’s conversion is a “one-off thing” and not something that signals any trend in atheism. “The trends are very clear, the conversions from Catholicism to atheism are much more likely to happen than the other way around,” he said.

But while atheists were puzzled by the conversion, others commended Libresco.

“I know I’ve prayed for her conversion several times, always thinking she would make a great Catholic,” wrote Brandon Vogt, a Catholic blogger. “And with this news, it looks like that will happen. Today heaven is roaring with joy.”

Thomas L. McDonald, a Catholic Patheos blogger, welcomed Libresco to the fold: “Welcome. I know this was hard, and will continue to be so. Don’t worry if the Catholics make it as for difficult for you as the atheists. We only do it to people we love.”

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

Libresco says one of the most common questions she has received is how she'll deal with atheists now.

“The great thing about a lot of the atheist and skeptic community is that people talk more critically about ideas and want to see proof provided,” Libresco said. “That kind of analytical thinking is completely useful and the Catholic Church doesn’t need to and should not be afraid of because if you’ve got the facts on your side, you hope they win.”

Libresco is just switching the side she thinks the facts are on.

- Dan Merica

Filed under: Atheism • Catholic Church

soundoff (7,475 Responses)
  1. jack

    Theists and Atheists have one thing in common. ARROGANCE. If anyone thinks that they know that there is a god or that their is not based on our limited knowledge, they are FOOLS. Listen A**HOLES, this is not a duplicate comment!!!!!!!!

    June 25, 2012 at 10:38 pm |
    • John

      I have never met an atheist who claims to know for certain whether there are any gods.
      Only religious people seem to make that ridiculous claim.

      How may times in a row are you going to make this comment?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
  2. jack

    Theists and Atheists have one thing in common. ARROGANCE. If anyone thinks that they know that there is a god or that their is not based on our limited knowledge, they are FOOLS. Not a duplicate comment!!!!!!

    June 25, 2012 at 10:36 pm |
    • John

      I have never met an atheist who claims to know for certain whether there are any gods.
      Only religious people seem to make that ridiculous claim.

      By the way you already made this comment.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
  3. jack

    Theists and Atheists have one thing in common. ARROGANCE. If anyone thinks that they know that there is a god or that their is not based on our limited knowledge, they are FOOLS.

    June 25, 2012 at 10:34 pm |
    • John

      I have never met an atheist who claims to know for certain whether there are any gods.
      Only religious people seem to make that ridiculous claim.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:38 pm |
    • Think-About-It

      Do you two ever think that God, "IF" HE existed, would make it sure that He left a record of Himself and a way for us to KNOW Him?

      June 26, 2012 at 12:03 am |
  4. RudyardK

    Observing futile rattling of cages, Rudyard
    Scanned Tom Tom's scathing posts.

    Became interested
    In the mind behind the
    Ridiculing facade.
    Down I plunged.

    Daylight I missed.
    Old those posts became,
    Though Tom Tom is obviously bright...in a dark way.

    Clues I left
    Over and over.
    Most certainly Tom Tom has deciphered.

    June 25, 2012 at 10:30 pm |
  5. Star Performer

    Ever tried promoting my new movie FACEBOOK(MY FAST LEARNERS)?

    June 25, 2012 at 10:00 pm |
    • The Corrector

      Sounds like the perfect movie for me!
      FACEBOOK(MY FAST LEARNERS)?
      I fully agree!

      June 25, 2012 at 10:01 pm |
    • The Corrector

      Sounds like the perfect movie for me!
      FACEBOOK(MY FAST LEARNERS)!
      I fully agree!

      June 25, 2012 at 10:02 pm |
    • atheist@heart

      I fully agree too!
      Go go go FACEBOOK(MY FAST LEARNERS)!

      June 25, 2012 at 10:04 pm |
  6. monk

    I have to have a good laugh at all the atheist having a panic attack at the thought of an atheist turning religous. "o noooooooes it can't be true!!!!!!" Grow up. Maybe she changed because she wanted too? I always thought many atheists depend on their herd. And this proves it. Look at the childish behaviour because someone left the flock.

    June 25, 2012 at 9:54 pm |
    • Smurfette

      um, monk – do you know the term "straw man". Look it up – there's a good boy.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:02 pm |
    • Chad

      Atheists have that extraordinarily odd dysfunctional trait of assuming that anyone who isnt an atheist is a moron.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:14 pm |
    • Colin

      Chad – I don't think believers are morons outside of their religion, but within their religion, it is pretty hard to have respect for the nonsense they believe. Religion has the remarkable ability to make outherwise smart people behave like morons in this one aspect of their lives.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:17 pm |
    • Voice of Reason

      @Chad

      You're wrong. Atheists are without a god, that's all. It is the believers that fail at providing proof of a god and when they fail they get angry at us. I would definitely call someone a moron for that, wouldn't you?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:19 pm |
    • Chad

      right.. as I said..

      The mark of a truly open mind, being willing to calmly and rationally investigate the belief system of another.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
    • Chad

      @Voice of Reason
      yes, thanks for demonstrating my point clearly..

      June 25, 2012 at 10:21 pm |
    • Smurfette

      @ chad: would you agree that monk's post was an example of a "straw man" argument?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:24 pm |
    • Voice of Reason

      @Chad
      @Voice of Reason
      "yes, thanks for demonstrating my point clearly.."

      Did I say something offensive? If a person gets angry for making a claim because they cannot prove it what would you call that person?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:24 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Chad

      You said, "The mark of a truly open mind, being willing to calmly and rationally investigate the belief system of another."
      Actually, the true mark of an open mind is the willingness to rationally evaluate one's own system of beliefs.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:26 pm |
    • Voice of Reason

      @chad

      moron |ˈmôrˌän|
      noun informal
      a stupid person.
      ORIGIN early 20th cent. (as a medical term denoting an adult with a mental age of about 8–12): from Greek mōron, neuter of mōros ‘foolish.’

      A person that makes claims and then gets angry because they cannot prove the claim is surely stupid and foolish, wouldn't you agree?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:27 pm |
    • Chad

      @Smurfette "would you agree that monk's post was an example of a "straw man" argument?"

      =>no..
      The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

      perhaps borderline ad-hominem but not strawman.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:28 pm |
    • Chad

      @Voice of Reason

      again, thanks for illustrating my point.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:30 pm |
    • Reality

      I evaluated the major religions and this is what I found:

      1. origin: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

      “New Torah For Modern Minds

      Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

      Such startling propositions – the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years – have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity – until now.

      The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine docu-ment. “

      prob•a•bly
      Adverb: Almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell.

      2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations (or “mythicizing” from P, M, M, L and J) and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a ma-mzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). An-alyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Ludemann, Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, ) via the NT and related doc-uments have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

      The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hitt-ites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.

      earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

      For added "pizzazz", Catholic theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

      Current RCC problems:

      Pedophiliac priests, an all-male, mostly white hierarchy, atonement theology and original sin!!!!

      2 b., Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs” et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immacu-late co-nceptions).

      Current problems:
      Adulterous preachers, pedophiliac clerics, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology,

      3. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

      This agenda continues as shown by the ma-ssacre in Mumbai, the as-sas-sinations of Bhutto and Theo Van Gogh, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, the Ft. Hood follower of the koran, and the Filipino “koranics”.

      And who funds this muck and stench of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

      Current crises:

      The Sunni-Shiite blood feud and the warmongering, womanizing (11 wives), hallucinating founder.

      4. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) – "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

      The caste/laborer system, reincarnation and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

      Current problems:

      The caste system, reincarnation and cow worship/reverence.

      5. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."

      "However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

      Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circu-mstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

      Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

      Then, apply the Five F rule: "First Find the Flaws, then Fix the Foundations". And finally there will be religious peace and religious awareness in the world!!!!!

      June 25, 2012 at 10:31 pm |
    • Colin

      Chad, let me put it this way. Name a field, other than religion, in which the practi.tioners can make the following claims:

      1. I know what happens to humans after they die
      2. I know how the Universe started
      3. I know how life on Earth started

      And in each case provide no evidence whatsoever for their claims, but base them entirely upon Bronze and Iron Age Palestinian writings.

      If a biologist, historian, paleontologist, archeologist, astronomer or cosmologist made any of these claims, much less all of them, they would be laughed at. Yet believers make them all.

      Can you perhaps see why we atheists have a small problem with the credibility and intellectual wherewithal of believers?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:31 pm |
    • Voice of Reason

      @Chad
      @Voice of Reason
      "again, thanks for illustrating my point."

      Please explain to me what your point is.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:32 pm |
    • Chad

      @LinCA "Actually, the true mark of an open mind is the willingness to rationally evaluate one's own system of beliefs."

      =>actually I would agree with that as well, the ability to examine your own and others claims in a clear non-emotional manner is a clear sign of an open mind.

      I dont see that a lot among atheists however..

      June 25, 2012 at 10:33 pm |
    • Chad

      @Colin 1. I know what happens to humans after they die 2. I know how the Universe started 3. I know how life on Earth started And in each case provide no evidence whatsoever for their claims, but base them entirely upon Bronze and Iron Age Palestinian writings. If a biologist, historian, paleontologist, archeologist, astronomer or cosmologist made any of these claims, much less all of them, they would be laughed at. Yet believers make them all. Can you perhaps see why we atheists have a small problem with the credibility and intellectual wherewithal of believers?"

      @Chad ";-)

      ah yes.. the "you never provide any data" claim..

      ==The atheist answer algorithm==

      atheist answer algorithm based on your input:

      1. Atheist “science isn't discarding an external force, there is just is no evidence of an external force”

      2. Creationist “well, what about the origin of the universe, the fact that the universe obeys laws, the origins of life on this earth, the fact that the largest “gaps” in the fossil record correspond exactly with the organisms identified in the bible as being created by God, namely fish, birds, land animals and humans ”

      3. Atheist “We don’t know how to explain those things. The supernatural is by definition beyond nature and therefore beyond investigation by science. As utterly improbable as it is, our only answer at this point is to say it’s possible that all of those things just popped out of nothing via random combination of molecules”

      4. Creationist “Well, if you don’t have an answer for these fundamental events to begin with, and your only explanation is to posit the possibility of the utterly improbable time and time again, by what basis are you discarding the possibility of a force external to our universe?”

      5. Atheist: “Please go to step #1

      June 25, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
    • Smurfette

      @ chad – no, ad hominem attacks the person as opposed to the argument. Straw man sets up a false picture or representation to attempt to ridicule atheists: " all the atheist having a panic attack at the thought of an atheist turning religous. "o noooooooes it can't be true!!!!!!"

      I'm not seeing any panic attacks.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      @Chad

      That's a huge argument from ignorance and you know it.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:38 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Chad

      You said, "I dont see that a lot among atheists however.."
      Could it be that you still maintain that the atheists position is a belief? Would it be possible that, because you regard atheism as a belief, you fail to see that it is the conclusion of a rational evaluation of a belief system?

      Atheism, for most here, is the absence of belief. It is the rejection of taking things on faith. It is the result of evaluating and weighing the evidence for the core beliefs at the roots of all religion.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:41 pm |
    • Chad

      Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance" (where "ignorance" stands for: "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four, (1) true, (2) false, (3) unknown between true or false, and (4) being unknowable (among the first three).[1] In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof.

      no way @monk's initial argument is that, just compare it to the definition.

      But boy do I sure see a great deal of similarity between the definition of argument from ignorance, and the basic atheistic claim that "God isnt real because the theist hasnt "proved" it.".

      as always, I'm indebted to being prompted to investigate something.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:44 pm |
    • Chad

      @LinCA "Could it be that you still maintain that the atheists position is a belief?"

      =>I think that because I rarely if ever see an atheist actually calmly and non emotionally be willing to investigate the belief system of an atheist.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:45 pm |
    • Chad

      "belief system of an atheist"
      should be
      "belief system of an theist"

      June 25, 2012 at 10:47 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      @Chad

      I'm talking about your little skit and you know tht as well. Jeez you are really getting desperate if you need to be that dishonest. Demanding that someone meet the burden of proof is in no way an argument from ignorance.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:47 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @Chad, Some atheist make think a person is a moron based on the content of their posts. I think this is a fair assessment. However, I don't think most atheists think that most religions people are morons. Childish, yes. Misguided, yes. The mantle of stupidity is only bestowed upon those who are truly willfully ignorant. I personally think most religious people fall into the category or childlike innocence. Who can blame them, really? Accepting reality is a tough pill to swallow.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:54 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Chad

      When monk said, "I have to have a good laugh at all the atheist having a panic attack at the thought of an atheist turning religous. "o noooooooes it can't be true!!!!!!"", he used a straw man argument. Questioning what her motives were when she converted isn't "having a panic attack". Nor is questioning whether she ever was a "real atheist".

      This fits quite nicely with the definition that you picked: "The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position."

      When monk said, "I always thought many atheists depend on their herd. And this proves it. Look at the childish behaviour because someone left the flock.", he was trying to insult atheists by using a borderline ad hominem.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:54 pm |
    • Chad

      @HawaiiGuest "I'm talking about your little skit and you know tht as well.
      @Chad "here's where you have difficulty: explain how my "skit" is an argument from ignorance by using the definition.

      ===========
      @HawaiiGuest "Demanding that someone meet the burden of proof is in no way an argument from ignorance."
      @Chad "ok, here's the thing to remember:
      1. if you are saying that the theist must meet the burden of proof to prove that God is real. That's ok
      2. If you are saying that the theist claim that God is real is false, until they prove it true, that is an argument from ignorance.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:00 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Chad

      You said, "I think that because I rarely if ever see an atheist actually calmly and non emotionally be willing to investigate the belief system of an [a]theist."
      You do realize that most atheists here were once theists, don't you? You do realize that most of us grew up being firm believers. It was the evaluation of those beliefs, and the beliefs of other theists, that led some of us to what we consider the only logical conclusion.

      While I don't exclude the possibility that there is a <insert mythical being here>, until there is some convincing evidence, I don't believe it exists. This is equally true for Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and any gods.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:02 pm |
    • Chad

      @LinCA, no.. read the definition again.
      here are some examples:
      http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

      June 25, 2012 at 11:03 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @Chad, Of course @LinCA is correct. I've pointed this out to you a few times already. 13 years in a xtian school, 18 years in a baptist church. My family is still highly religious. I like most atheists found our way free of religion by a method of study and reasoning. It is not at all hard for us to imagine what life must be like for you because we have lived something similar.

      The real question is, can you imagine what life is like for us, because you clearly have never reasoned your way free of god.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:06 pm |
    • Chad

      @GodFreeNow @Chad, Some atheist make[sic] think a person is a moron based on the content of their posts."

      =>thanks for proving my point,
      and at the risk of sounding like TTTPS, I'll point out that you used poor grammar to insult anothers intelligence..

      June 25, 2012 at 11:06 pm |
    • Chad

      @GodFreeNow, thanks for proving my point.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:09 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @Chad, I'm not an English major, but I openly welcome corrections to my English. It's because I want to improve and be correct, so thank you.

      However, when I was referring to the content of the post, I was speaking about what is said, not the way it is said. I live in a country where English is not the native language, so I am accustomed to seeing past the way someone is saying something to what they are actually saying. This is why I have no issues conversing with you or Nii for example.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:10 pm |
    • Chad

      @GodFreeNow " I live in a country where English is not the native language, so I am accustomed to seeing past the way someone is saying something to what they are actually saying. This is why I have no issues conversing with you or Nii for example."

      =>good point, I make a million grammatical mistakes myself, and you are correct, it's the argument not the sentence structure that's important.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:13 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Chad

      You said, "LinCA, no.. read the definition again."
      The only way you can not see what monk said as being a straw man argument is if you consider his representation of the atheists position an accurate one. So I can only assume that you consider "all the atheist having a panic attack at the thought of an atheist turning religous."" accurate and true.

      That's not a very rational evaluation of the belief system of another.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
    • tallulah13

      How funny, monk. I've not read a single comment where an atheist is upset about this persons conversion. There is a certain discontent, however, with the headline of this article, because "prominent" is quite a stretch of the truth.

      June 26, 2012 at 1:23 am |
    • Lil

      @Chad....not a moron, just delusional...now run along and play with your imaginary friends......they must get the very best drugs..

      June 26, 2012 at 9:41 am |
    • Lil

      @Colin......EXCELLENT POINT....

      June 26, 2012 at 9:51 am |
    • HawaiiGuest

      @Chad

      “Well, if you don’t have an answer for these fundamental events to begin with, and your only explanation is to posit the possibility of the utterly improbable time and time again, by what basis are you discarding the possibility of a force external to our universe?”
      This statement in your little skit is an argument from ignorance. "You cannot explain X, therefore Y."
      No come on with the dishonesty and stupidity Chad, we all know it's coming.

      June 26, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
    • Chad

      @HawaiiGuest "This statement in your little skit is an argument from ignorance. "You cannot explain X, therefore Y.""

      @Chad "nice strawman 😉

      actually, what I said was
      “Well, if you don’t have an answer for these fundamental events to begin with, and your only explanation is to posit the possibility of the utterly improbable time and time again, by what basis are you discarding the possibility of a force external to our universe?”

      I do NOT say (as you incorrectly indicated that I did) that because you cant explain these fundamental events, God exists.
      I do say, that since you cant explain these fundamental events you shouldnt discard the possibility of God (the external force).

      right?

      which makes your accusation of dishonesty baseless, right?

      June 27, 2012 at 11:39 am |
  7. Paul S

    One supposedly "top atheist blogger" converts to Catholicism and makes the front page of CNN. How many Catholics would need to become atheists to garner the same coverage? I guess a lot. There are plenty of atheistic priests out there but talking about them might make the dear religious reader feel their religion is being attacked...

    June 25, 2012 at 9:43 pm |
    • Chad

      I dont think CNN misses any opportunity to report on priests that fall away..

      see for example: Unbelieving preachers get help to 'come out' as open atheists
      http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/13/unbelieving-preachers-get-help-to-come-out-as-open-atheists/

      June 25, 2012 at 9:50 pm |
    • Lil

      Oh, she is not only " PROMINENT" !, but "TOP" ! Atheists blogger, yet no one has ever herd of her? Smells like money to me...

      June 26, 2012 at 10:03 am |
  8. tom clancy

    hi!,I really like your writing very much! percentage we be in contact extra approximately your article on AOL? I require a specialist on this area to solve my problem. Maybe that is you! Looking ahead to look you.

    June 25, 2012 at 9:27 pm |
    • The Holy Octonity

      Not only did Jesus resurrect, but apparently William S. Burroughs did too!!! That was quite an example of cut-up!

      June 25, 2012 at 9:34 pm |
  9. TheGarderner

    f you believe in God, then you are not stupid at all. You just get used to use chopstick Fajita instead of folk, knife, and hands. However, if you are using folk, knife, and hands for Fajita, and switch to use chopstick instead, well, there is something wrong with your brain. In this scenario, i think the lady never really have what it takes to be a "atheist" in the first place. She probably become a catholic with the same reason for her being an atheist in the first place: JUST CLAIM TO BE ONE, how about that? by the way, I never heard of this individual. I heard of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkin.. etc .. not this kid.

    June 25, 2012 at 9:10 pm |
    • TheGarderner

      sorry for the typo.. i meant fork.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:11 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Gardener, do you believe in me? Smurfette? Or my buddy Santa? Big guy – all in red? Or the Abominable Snowman – nice white coat. Hey – we're the original Red, White, and Blue! That must mean we're real.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:16 pm |
    • Julio Iglesias

      Okay, I really dig on you, Smurfy, especially when you tie me up and talk dirty to me, but your pet Abominable has got to go! Last time you had me tied up and hanging upside down from that hook on the ceiling, you went to answer that phone call . . . and . . . and . . . okay, it's just not funny when a 43 foot tall beast humps your leg!! It's pretty horrific, actually!!! And why did you name it "Sandusky" anyway?!?!?!

      June 25, 2012 at 9:45 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Oh, Julio – I find my Yeti is a source of amusement, and he IS really big, so i named him after the town where the world's biggest amusement park is – Sandusky, Ohio!

      Sorry about the leg hump, btw. But, you're lucky he liked you! If he didn't . . . . .I don't really want to think about it

      June 25, 2012 at 9:50 pm |
  10. gosh

    So she just did it for her bf..not any ' enlightenment ' or whatever she claims

    June 25, 2012 at 9:02 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Probably the only "enlightenment" was when she realized that her bf's catholic mother was going to be a big problem unless she converted

      June 25, 2012 at 9:06 pm |
  11. gosh

    Why Catholicism?

    June 25, 2012 at 8:54 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Catholic bf

      June 25, 2012 at 8:55 pm |
  12. John

    Why is she being given so much coverage?

    The front page title said she was a "top atheist blogger" but then the article says her posts only got around 5,000 views until she converted and that post suddenly got 250,000. In other words she was not prominent but actually totally unknown. How is this news worthy or worthy of any kind of coverage at all?

    June 25, 2012 at 8:45 pm |
    • billdeacons

      6000 comments and counting

      June 25, 2012 at 11:19 pm |
  13. AVGPAGUY

    Why are atheist so angry? Why do so many of you presume that if I believe in a God, then I must be uneducated or have slept through my science classes?

    June 25, 2012 at 8:09 pm |
    • One one

      A reaction to being constantly dised by believers.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:19 pm |
    • Frank

      Why do you deluded masses call atheists "angry" if they simply demand proof in order to believe in the supernatural?

      June 25, 2012 at 8:20 pm |
    • Joe

      I always wonder the same thing about Christians. They come here and are hostile and threatening and abusive and mean and arrogant and hypocritical, and just downright angry. Why is that?

      June 25, 2012 at 8:21 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      "Why are atheist so angry?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUI_ML1qkQE
      There's also a book coming soon. I hope it answers your questions.

      Also, I'm not angry. Do I think you are less intelligent because you believe in a god? Well, I know you reason less. And if that is the standard by which we judge intelligence then I would have to say yes. However, this is all relative. People a lot dumber than you have found their way free of god just by applying some simple logic and only accepting what there is evidence to support. I'm smarter than a lot of people. I also don't care or think that it makes me special in anyway. In fact, I see it as more of a burden and responsibility than anything else. Likewise, there are people that are a lot smarter than me. Some of them are even religious. If you live your life measuring yourself against other people, you will be a very unhappy person. I wouldn't worry if I were you that people think they are smarter than you. Take that energy and apply it to cognitive reasoning. Then you'll be able to bring more to the argument of religion than just faith.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:22 pm |
    • One one

      Has an atheist ever told you that you will burn in hell for your beliefs AND that you deserve it ?

      June 25, 2012 at 8:25 pm |
    • Snow

      So, your definition of intelligence is, when posed with a question that we do not know answer for, you say "god done it that way, now don't question". That is intelligence to you? as opposed to someone who tries to delve deeper into the question and find an answer? smart.. real smart!

      June 25, 2012 at 8:28 pm |
    • Steve

      Frank asked, "Why do you deluded masses call atheists "angry" if they simply demand proof in order to believe in the supernatural?"

      Steve replies, "uhhhhhhh.....Because it is sooooooo obvious!"

      June 25, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Frank

      You said, "Why do you deluded masses call atheists "angry""
      My guess is that the emotion believers feel when atheists question, or ridicule their silly beliefs, is very similar to what they feel when someone is angry at them while they think they did nothing wrong. They may also feel personally attacked when someone asks for a rational argument and evidence to support what they consider self-evident. After all, how can you question something that is so obviously true?

      Quite a few can't comprehend atheism. They tend to believe atheists are merely believers (in their particular god, of course) that are simply rebelling against their god. They assume atheists are angry with their god. They automatically associate atheism with anger, and anything an atheists says is therefor out of anger.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:33 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @LinCA, Agree. I see a lot of that too. Life is cozy when living in a box. They are warm and sheltered but completely unaware of that they are living in a box.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:37 pm |
    • Smurfette

      I'm angry because I'm blue, only two apples tall, and imaginary, and nobody worships me!!!! (Well, the boys in the village worship me, but that's another story!)

      So why is it that people consider it completely normal and sane to worship other imaginary friends, but not me?

      June 25, 2012 at 8:49 pm |
    • TheGarderner

      I am not angry at you nor anyone who convert to Christianity. You are perfectly likable. Make sure not to let your children be too close to any bishops/priests, will you? Jesus won't be able to outsmart these wicked dunks. He is not around, too busy chasing angels (could be male/female)

      June 25, 2012 at 8:53 pm |
    • Doctor Heinz Doofenshmirtz

      I worship the ground you walk on, Smurfy baby! I worship the fact that you are really into leather! I worship your special bondage dungeon!

      You never call me. Just because you got that restraining order, doesn't mean you can't call me.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:04 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Hey, Doc – I don't call – I let them come crawling and begging for a little bit of the Smurfette! On your knees, worm! Fear me!

      HEY! I think I kinda like this worship gig! Kewl!

      Now keep crawling

      June 25, 2012 at 9:08 pm |
    • TheGarderner

      If you believe in God, then you are not stupid at all. You just get used to use chopstick Fajita instead of folk, knife, and hands. However, if you are using folk, knife, and hands for Fajita, and switch to use chopstick instead, well, there is something wrong with your brain. In this scenario, i think the lady never really have what it takes to be a "atheist" in the first place. She probably become a catholic with the same reason for her being an atheist in the first place: JUST CLAIM TO BE ONE, how about that? by the way, I never heard of this individual. I heard of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkin.. etc .. not this kid.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:09 pm |
    • JWT

      I keep an idol of you on the back deck Smurfette.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:09 pm |
    • Smurfette

      @ JWT – now we're talking! You know – many people do worship me – that must mean that I am no longer imaginary – I'm REAL!!!!!!!! Because so many people worship me. WHich makes me even more REAL!!!! (somewhat circular, I'll admit, but very satisfying!)

      June 25, 2012 at 9:14 pm |
    • H-a-r-k!

      Why do atheists claim that believers are hateful when they warn them about eternity in Hell? But they never see themselves being hateful when they mock , ridicule and belittle believers, calling them all kinds of derogatory names, even using profanities.
      If I knew that my neighbor is about to have catastrophe in his life, what kind of person would I be not to warn him?
      You people are living your lives with blinders on your eyes. And if you won't listen to us who know the truth, there is no help and no hope for you!

      June 25, 2012 at 9:16 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      Fear tactics don't work on people who don't believe. Besides, it's an insulting thing when someone thinks that if you don't believe as they do, then you deserve to be tortured FOREVER. You may be blinded enough to rationalize this so you don't need to really think about what your doctrine states, but don't expect thos who don't believe to think it's all nice and happy that you're "warning" people.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:19 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Hark – you're a follower of a system that condemns people to an eternity of torture simply because they think a certain way. While this same system will allow the most horrible mass murderer into eternal paradise if he just goes along with the game. I can't picture anything MORE hateful: Hey, Neighborino, you're going to burn forever. have a nice day.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:21 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Hark – you must bow down and worship me and love me, or I will hang you up by your eyelids and kick you in the nuts until you blink – forever!

      Now, go and tell your neighbors that. If you love them, you will

      June 25, 2012 at 9:24 pm |
    • H-a-r-k!

      Well, I KNOW to whom I'm talking to! Have your piece of pie now and enjoy it. Because what will come later, you'll need no one to warn you about. You'll just pass through "the door" and enter in!

      June 25, 2012 at 9:38 pm |
    • Smurfette

      @ hark – worship one imaginary creature or another – what's the difference? Smurfette or your god – what's the difference? Logically, now – why should anyone favor one over the other?

      June 25, 2012 at 9:46 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @H-a-r-k!, Well, if I'm wrong, I will know I made the moral choice, since I would refuse to worship a deity that is full of such cruelty, jealousy and hatred even if he did exist. If you're wrong though, you've wasted the only chance you have to live on a fairy tale.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:05 pm |
    • Lil

      WE DO NOT CARE ! about what delusions you want to believe in, however we get upset when we have to pay higher taxes because a belief system is tax exempt. Why should I suffer financially when churches don't pay taxes, when I do not support or believe in their cause. I do not need the services of the AMA, therefor I do not want to contribute. I have seen ginormous church structures, costing millions of dollars, while I pick up their slack of contributing to our government. Just as the fight to tax millionaires at a fairer level, so does the church need to pay theirs ! Church and state MUST stay separate, as no one has the right to include ONE belief on everyone aka, IN GOD WE TRUST. Would you like to pay higher taxes, so a group devoted reverently to the belief of pixies, gets a free get out of jail pass, I think not, so there is our biggest beef.

      i

      June 26, 2012 at 11:00 am |
    • IamIsaid

      @AVGPAGUY....we are not angry, but TIRED of the church making ridiculous claims on a daily basis, We really don't care what delusion you choose, we simply want a reasonable show of evidence, since it is put under our noses continuously. If something you did not believe in was presented to you continually, you too would feel indifferent. The believer, in actuality, gets much more defensive, because they cannot substantiate their claims, and feels offended because he is backed by many other delusional beings, thus wants the non-believer to surrender. The world was once considered flat, get it.

      June 26, 2012 at 11:33 am |
  14. Hunter

    "Why she converted after a lifetime without God"

    I HARDLY consider being 22 years old a "lifetime", lets be a little less hyperbolic and realize this kid is just experimenting and we have all been sucked into her God/Boyfriend/CNN/college experimental phase...

    June 25, 2012 at 8:00 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      Valid point. Not that I have anything against the youth, but I hardly think that 22 years of age makes anyone an expert on anything. Breaking news: 22 year old broke up with her boyfriend and then got back together with him then repeated this another 4x before realizing she was a lesbian.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:14 pm |
  15. Evil_Atheist

    I call something stinks on this whole thing. She went from not believing in god to "believing" (note the quotation marks – it's on purpose, same with the lower case "g" in "god")) in a very strict religious dogma, the most strict western religions? And she has a Catholic boyfriend, according to her blog, which also makes this seem fishy. Conversion because her future mother-in-law won't let her son marry an atheist? If she has abandoned her intelligence and reason in favor of religion to please someone else, shame on her. If she's abandoned her intelligence and reason because she never was that intelligent or able to reason logically, shame on her, but either way, shame on her for falling into the "god trap."

    June 25, 2012 at 7:43 pm |
    • One one

      She seems to enjoy the fame. Maybe she will turn it into fortune.

      June 25, 2012 at 7:50 pm |
    • One one

      I suppose if you like cult practices like symbolic cannibalism, raising the dead, and casting out demons atheism would seem rather bland.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:01 pm |
    • Hunter

      If you ever feel like you are on the fence between religion and a "life without an omniscient totalitarian fascist dictator in the sky", just watch a few Christopher Hitchens debates on youtube and you will be set as straight as an arrow!

      June 25, 2012 at 8:07 pm |
  16. littleflower

    I'm happy for Libresco. Adjusting to the faith can be hard at first, getting used to terminology, practices and other things. Will be praying for you. 😀

    June 25, 2012 at 7:09 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      The US as a country and American citizens as both taxpayers and donors to charities spend more than the rest of the world combined. You are going to have a hard time getting specific numbers however. Save the Children, for example, digs community wells and provides training in well digging, clean water/water safety in almost every community where they've had a sponsorship program going during the past 70-80 years, but the "clean water" numbers are not broken out as such. Many other charities (e.g. I believe Christian Childrens' Fund is among them) do water projects, but might not specify water and well digging among their community projects.

      My question to you is: the US has serious water problems of our own, including serious drought, water supplies in many areas contaminated by prescription drug residues and other contaminants, problems with aging water treatment facilities and sewer systems, depleted ground water resources. Why should a country that has a current account deficit of $9.5 trillion be spending money on other countries' water problems when we are so seriously neglecting our own infrastructure?

      Americans are the most kind, generous and caring people in the world, and we want to help others, but too many people take Americans for granted and take us to the cleaners while we have serious needs of our own that need to be addressed.

      http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080527153645AAoRDJr

      Just one person's opinion.
      You know what they say about opinions however.....

      June 25, 2012 at 9:48 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @b4bigbang, For the record, they also spend more on waging war all over the planet and has been in this perpetuate state of war for over 50 years non-stop. The collateral damage, a.k.a., civilian death ratio since the mid 20th century was 10:1 according to the International Red Cross. That's 10 civilians killed for every combatant. This same ratio applies to the recent drone attacks in Pakistan. The US official response to civilian deaths by drone strike... If they're near bad guys, they must be bad guys.

      I know it makes you feel better to believe in only the good America does. But again, selectively picking statistics for your argument really only works with religion.

      Warning: The real world you may contain facts that are harmful to your illusions.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:18 pm |
  17. Ariel

    Read what God is doing http://www.theresurrection.ca

    June 25, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      As opposed to educating yourself in science and mathematics—which shows all of the amazing things god ISN'T doing.

      June 25, 2012 at 7:04 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      @Paul S: Finally someone read some sense into Erik's comment – thank you. If Erik would've simply asked "why does God allow suffering?" his comment would've been perfectly clear from the beginning, rather than injecting a political tone into what he said.

      Btw, my take on this question is that God allows a lot of suffering, not only in the 3rd world, but also in the richest nations.
      No nation is a paradise, some only seem so by way of comparison.
      Also, other than natural phenomena, most of Man's suffering is brought on by the hands of other men.....

      June 25, 2012 at 9:59 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      Yes, i have asked these questions. I'm not as altruistic as most i guess, bcause i get more emotional over my wn suffering than that of a stranger that i dont know. So i got mad at God, but i know that it's not his fault.
      If i were a Brit and i thought the queen was callous, i'd still have to admit that she's the only queen of england. Kinda my thots on the matter.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
  18. Ariel

    Read what God is doing http://theresurrection.ca

    June 25, 2012 at 6:46 pm |
    • JWT

      Why would I care what any "god" is doing ?

      June 25, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
    • Erik

      what is god doing? ignoring hunger, disease and catastrophe. guess your god is American

      June 25, 2012 at 7:07 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      @Eric: The US is the most generous nation on Earth spending time, money and energy to fight hunger, disease and catastrophe worldwide.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:32 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      @b4big

      That's not a god, that's just the government.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:33 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      I took Erik's comment to be that ignoring hunger, etc is an American hallmark.
      Why else would he bring America into his statement?
      Therefore i ignored the god part and commented on his American referrence.
      If you understand Erik's comment another way, as to leave America out of it, then i'd be interested in reading it.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:39 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      I didn't see the american thing in eriks post.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:42 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      Then why would Erik come to the conclusion that, since ths so-called god is ignoring hunger, etc, he must be American?

      June 25, 2012 at 8:46 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      Hell if I know, I was just responding that people did that, and not a god. I didn't see the actual word in Eriks post until you pointed it out.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:47 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      Yeah, he might be a pi s sed off Canadian.....

      June 25, 2012 at 8:51 pm |
    • HawaiiGuest

      Well I don't wanna make any kind of assumption on his character.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:52 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      True, but people of all character-types get p i ss ed off, at least occasionally, i think.

      June 25, 2012 at 8:55 pm |
    • Smurfette

      Why would Canadians get p-issed off? They're happy and contented folk. Probably comes from living in the best country in the world, one could surmise.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:00 pm |
    • John Eh MacDonald

      @b4bigbang – didn't you mean to say "spending time, money and energy to BRING hunger, disease and catastrophe worldwide."

      June 25, 2012 at 9:04 pm |
    • H-a-r-k!

      b4, Let's no t go overboard.... your statement that the US is the most generous nation on Earth spending time, money and energy to fight hunger, disease and catastrophe worldwide is not exactly fitting reality! Besides, it has been known that those who help others, often neglect their own household! ...That's definitely the case over here!
      ..... And definitely, NO, God is NOT American!

      June 25, 2012 at 9:25 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      Oops i posted this in the wrong place, but here it is:

      The US as a country and American citizens as both taxpayers and donors to charities spend more than the rest of the world combined. You are going to have a hard time getting specific numbers however. Save the Children, for example, digs community wells and provides training in well digging, clean water/water safety in almost every community where they've had a sponsorship program going during the past 70-80 years, but the "clean water" numbers are not broken out as such. Many other charities (e.g. I believe Christian Childrens' Fund is among them) do water projects, but might not specify water and well digging among their community projects.

      My question to you is: the US has serious water problems of our own, including serious drought, water supplies in many areas contaminated by prescription drug residues and other contaminants, problems with aging water treatment facilities and sewer systems, depleted ground water resources. Why should a country that has a current account deficit of $9.5 trillion be spending money on other countries' water problems when we are so seriously neglecting our own infrastructure?

      Americans are the most kind, generous and caring people in the world, and we want to help others, but too many people take Americans for granted and take us to the cleaners while we have serious needs of our own that need to be addressed.

      http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080527153645AAoRDJr

      Just one person's opinion.
      You know what they say about opinions however.....

      June 25, 2012 at 9:49 pm |
    • Paul S

      @bforbigbang Maybe Erik was not insulting Americans but was referring to the fact that in other places of the world people are starving and if we want to pretend like there's a god who is watching out for us, we might have to conclude that god has a nationality in order to explain why some people seem to be watched out for while others can just bugger off and die even before they've had a chance to consider religion.

      June 25, 2012 at 9:51 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      @Paul S: Finally someone read some sense into Erik's comment – thank you. If Erik would've simply asked "why does God allow suffering?" his comment would've been perfectly clear from the beginning, rather than injecting a political tone into what he said.

      By the way, my take on this question is that God allows a lot of suffering, not only in the 3rd world, but also in the richest nations.
      No nation is a paradise, some only seem so by way of comparison.
      Also, other than natural phenomena, most of Man's suffering is brought on by the hands of other men.....

      June 25, 2012 at 10:03 pm |
    • Smurfette

      @ b4 – then I'll ask: why does god (a-ssuming god exists, which point we disagree on) why does god allow suffering when god a-ssumedly has the power to stop it. I'm talking the suffering of absolute innocents – children caught in war, in disasters, through absolutely no fault of their own. Innocents that have no say in their particular circ-umstances – they just are in their own hell. Why does god allow that?

      And why would any moral person follow that god?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:13 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      @Smurfette: That's an excellent question, however i'm a lo usy source for a good answer on that one.
      You might want to read some Augustine, Calvin (assuming you've already read the pertinent Bible sections). I heard somewhere that one or both of those theologians wrote about that question.
      Also, a little-know scholar, Dr Floyd N. Jones has an audio that's online called "T itle Deed to Planet Earth" and i think maybe he also weighs in on the question. I haven't heard it in years however, so cant recall much of it.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:22 pm |
    • Smurfette

      @ b4 – would you agree that god (again, the a-ssumption) does allow suffering of innocents? I'm not asking why god allows this – just asking if you agree that god allows this suffering. And if you DO agree, and if you do follow/believe in/worship such a god that allows suffering, don't you think it's inc-umbent upon yourself to take a good hard look at the question, and also ask yourself why you would follow such a god.

      And I understand the catchphrase that the lord moves in mysterious ways, but we're talking about undeniable suffering, and a supposedly caring, loving god that has the power to stop or prevent such suffering, yet doesn't. Have you asked yourself these questions?

      June 25, 2012 at 10:32 pm |
    • b4bigbang

      Sorry, i keep posting in the wrong place. Yes, i have asked these questions. I'm not as altruistic as most i guess, bcause i get more emotional over my wn suffering than that of a stranger that i dont know. So i got mad at God, but i know that it's not his fault.
      If i were a Brit and i thought the queen was callous, i'd still have to admit that she's the only queen of england. Kinda my thots on the matter.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:44 pm |
    • Smurfette

      b4 – I'm curious – you said that [the suffering] wasn't god's fault. But if god has the ability to stop the suffering, and the knowledge that the suffering will take place, doesn't god have a moral obligation to stop the suffering before it happens? In that sense it absolutely IS god's fault. Or is god so hung up on not interfering with free will that he allows horrific things to happen to innocents. Of all players, why should god get a free pass?

      And why follow/worship/believe in a "god" who either cannot or will not stop the suffering of innocents.

      June 25, 2012 at 10:55 pm |
    • billdeacons

      People seem to want God to stop the suffering. But where does "stop the suffering" end. Once everyone is fed and housed will thise who lack color tv and cell phones be "suffering". Ostensibly so since thye will be deprived of life enhancing apparati the rest of us take for granted. So, is God to be our eternal and inexhaustable errand boy to "ease or suffering"? This is not love it is enabling. So what is presented as a requirement for God to "love us more" is, in actuality a request for God to love us less but give us what we want. God's love is not the molly coddling kind of love of the guilty parent. His love is the fierce and extraordinary kind of love that seeks us out in our suffering and demands to enter into that suffering with us. C. S. Lewis explains it a lot better and i would have thought most would have read him by now. It's very basic Christianity.

      June 25, 2012 at 11:33 pm |
  19. EnjaySea

    News flash! Impressionable youth falls for the slick sales pitch the church has been using for 2000 years to increase its membership, thereby increasing its cash flow, gold, gems, and real estate holdings.

    Wow... when has that ever happened?

    June 25, 2012 at 6:40 pm |
  20. tommytee

    I think her blog was becoming irrelevant.. So she thought of a way to increase readership, a little shock therapy if you will. Not unlike that conservative mouthpiece Rush Limbaugh.

    June 25, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
    • Sue

      That's pretty cynical. Almost like saying that Katy Perry is only going into pop music while she's still young, but with the plan of returning to Christian music later on, when her career now dies out.

      June 25, 2012 at 6:31 pm |
    • wekurtz

      Agreed. No one rational would make the switch. Someone bucking for ratings might though.

      June 25, 2012 at 6:34 pm |
    • Petrograd

      She had a total lifetime hit count of 5,000 before this. She was not only irrelevant but totally invisible.

      I don't she intended to sell out for fame. I doubt that based on her tiny readership that she thought anyone would care much. Based on her CNN interview, she does seem to be digging on all the publicity, though.

      June 25, 2012 at 6:38 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      It's possible, but I think it's more likely that she never reasoned her way to atheism. If she had, it would have been impossible to reason her way back out. This is something we're going to have to get used to as atheism grows. Many people will claim atheism because they following a trend or rebelling, but never did the work to arrive at the conclusion like most of us did. I don't know this person, but I suspect that 15 minutes of conversation would expose exactly how she arrived at atheism and that path was most likely the weak stone which allowed her to convert to religion.

      June 25, 2012 at 7:02 pm |
    • Just Claims, No Truth

      GodFreeNow,

      Couldn't agree more, I had never heard of her and after checking her background and reasons given for her change of mind it was apparent she had not examined her reasons for her non-belief.

      June 25, 2012 at 7:26 pm |
    • One one

      I never heard of her either. After reading the article, I took her story seriously. After watching her interview I doubt her credibility and wouldn't be surprised if she was pitching for a book deal.

      June 25, 2012 at 7:46 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.