home
RSS
January 15th, 2013
08:28 AM ET

iReport: Why I Raise My Children Without God

Editor's Note: Deborah Mitchell, a mother of two teenagers in Texas, blogs about raising her children without religion. An avid reader of the Belief Blog, she said she shared this essay on CNN iReport because 'I just felt there is not a voice out there for women/moms like me. I think people misunderstand or are fearful of people who don’t believe in God.'

By Deborah Mitchell, Special to CNN

(CNN)–When my son was around 3 years old, he used to ask me a lot of questions about heaven. Where is it? How do people walk without a body? How will I find you? You know the questions that kids ask.

For over a year, I lied to him and made up stories that I didn’t believe about heaven. Like most parents, I love my child so much that I didn’t want him to be scared. I wanted him to feel safe and loved and full of hope. But the trade-off was that I would have to make stuff up, and I would have to brainwash him into believing stories that didn’t make sense, stories that I didn’t believe either.

One day he would know this, and he would not trust my judgment. He would know that I built an elaborate tale—not unlike the one we tell children about Santa—to explain the inconsistent and illogical legend of God.

And so I thought it was only right to be honest with my children. I am a non-believer, and for years I’ve been on the fringe in my community. As a blogger, though, I’ve found that there are many other parents out there like me. We are creating the next generation of kids, and there is a wave of young agnostics, atheists, free thinkers and humanists rising up through the ranks who will, hopefully, lower our nation’s religious fever.

Read Mitchell's 7 reasons she's raising her children without God

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Atheism • Opinion

soundoff (1,688 Responses)
  1. Brampt

    Personally, I don't blame totally atheists for there Godless ideas, counterfeit "christanism" has brought a lot of confusion, wars, and people doing stupid things that are never thought by God in the bible. Though atheism is not the answer.
    For the ones that say they know the "lord",
    Mat 7:21-23 – 21“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.22Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’23And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew ​YOU! Get away from me, ​YOU​ workers of lawlessness.
    For the atheists,
    2 thess 1:9 – Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels8in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance upon those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus.

    January 17, 2013 at 12:19 am |
    • tallulah13

      There isn't any proof that your god (or any god) exists. That's one of the main reasons for atheism.

      January 17, 2013 at 12:22 am |
    • Athy

      A bunch of bible babble doesn't prove anything. Why would any reasonable, thinking person believe otherwise?

      January 17, 2013 at 12:33 am |
    • Brampt

      I don't need to prove anything. That's up to you to choose which path you want to follow. But for me believing in God or in evolution requires faith.

      January 17, 2013 at 12:55 am |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Transalation,

      I don't blame only atheists for not agreeing with supersti.tion, many people who believe in supersti.tion are wrong too, and here is va.gue Bible quote that I will use to prove I am right, when in reality anyone could use the same Bible quote to "prove" their position with equal validity, and that makes my point rediculous.

      January 17, 2013 at 2:52 am |
    • sam stone

      Atheism is not the answer? Why is that? Because you can quote a book?

      January 17, 2013 at 6:20 am |
    • SImran

      "Personally, I don't blame totally atheists for there Godless ideas, counterfeit "christanism" has brought a lot of confusion, wars, and people doing stupid things that are never thought by God in the bible"

      Well, you seem to be quite certain of what the god in the Bible THOUGHT!. Does he speak to you?

      January 17, 2013 at 8:12 am |
    • Athy

      What's a "totally atheist?"

      January 17, 2013 at 10:58 pm |
  2. Brampt

    What heaven?? .
    Rev 21:3,4 – Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them.4And he will wpe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.”

    January 17, 2013 at 12:09 am |
  3. Ire Maiden

    Theists are the greatest idol worshippers of all time becos god is the longest serving idol that his feverish believers are willing to hurt, kill, burn, behead, bomb anyone who dun idolise his laws as they do. God is definitely male becos he has balls he needs his followers to carry and stroke his ego all the time. Its time to stop all these idol worship.

    January 16, 2013 at 11:50 pm |
  4. Betty Humphreys

    @ meifumado If it is adults brainwashing a child than explain when a adult gives his life to Christs, and his life is changed and he is a reformed person from all evil?
    I truly believe that the Bible is proven by science,.
    I believe in one God, but know there are many gods ( lower case denotes not the one true God). It is even talked about in the Bible.
    My God is real, my (could be yours too) God loved me so much that he sent his Son to die on the cross to cover my sins. God wants all his people with him in Heaven, but He gives us freewill to choose. In the end we will all answer to Him. I am so glad that I do not have to say to my God, I did not believe in you. He knows my heart and he knows my love for Him.

    January 16, 2013 at 10:31 pm |
    • Gir

      I dare anyone here to make sense of the comment above.

      January 16, 2013 at 10:46 pm |
    • Athy

      I give up.

      January 16, 2013 at 10:47 pm |
    • Saraswati

      It reads more clearly if you take each sentence as separate. It's not a paragraph but independent sentences.

      January 16, 2013 at 10:50 pm |
    • Athy

      Yeah, it holds together better that way. But it's still delusional nonsense written by a biblewashed religie.

      January 16, 2013 at 10:54 pm |
    • wjmccartan

      Not to begrudge your belief, as it sounds a lovely thing for you. I made a point earlier though and that was, if there is no knowledge of god, then a person can't be called a nonbeliever, because in order to be either a believer or not precludes knowledge of god. I like the woman who wrote the article, raised my children without the indoctrination of religion, I raised good young men, who know right from wrong and if its within their ability to correct the wrong. They have no bias as they look at other people and their believes, I'm not asking someone not to believe, use what you need to make it through this world. I wanted my children to remain free thinkers who use good personal judgement in their lives, but never to drink the koolaid of anyone's else's believe system. So that they might travel though this world with eyes wide open. Their story is mine as much as I could give, now they are writing their own as young men.

      January 16, 2013 at 11:00 pm |
    • tallulah13

      A good person is going to be a good person. A bad person is going to be a bad person. Religion really doesn't have an effect here, except to give the bad people an excuse for hateful behavior.

      January 16, 2013 at 11:09 pm |
    • Ummm...No

      After a few drinks it becomes clearer...but then, who cares after a few drinks

      January 17, 2013 at 5:58 am |
    • sam stone

      Betty: If god wanted all to be with him in heaven, he could do so by eliminating the necessity of belief in Jeebus

      January 17, 2013 at 6:22 am |
  5. Fallacy Spotter 101

    Posts by 'saraswati' are of the fly swatter up my ass fallacy.

    http://fallacyfarts.com

    January 16, 2013 at 9:26 pm |
  6. Douglas

    LGBTQ need support as they transition from fornication to celibacy.

    Pray for them at your place of worship.

    Reach out and let them know that they are not alone in their journey.

    Through prayer they will be made whole again.

    January 16, 2013 at 9:23 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Blow it out your ear, poe.

      January 16, 2013 at 9:27 pm |
    • Raina

      Douglas, why do you have that huge carrot inserted into your anus?

      January 16, 2013 at 9:28 pm |
    • sam stone

      So, Doogie, you want gays to refrain from s-e-x in this life for the promise of a s-e-xless eternity? Sounds like a real keen idea.

      January 17, 2013 at 6:24 am |
  7. LauraAg

    It's so crazy that this was flagged as "inappropriate." Inappropriate in someone's Sunday school class, maybe, but not in an opinion forum. My biggest objection to raising kids in a faith tradition is that it discourages them from using their critical thinking capacities. During my eight years of parochial school, I went from being obedient and meek to thinking critically, then doubting and questioning, then noticing the hypocrisy all around me. And I got slapped for questioning. That sure taught me about God's love! I have raised my kids to know that I believe in a life force and in a moral force, but that there isn't much evidence for it and that it's about feeling, not about thinking. And I've taught them to respect their relatives and others who have their own beliefs about God. And that there are many different ways to envision God. And that God doesn't micromanage. I consider God making a particular soccer team win a game to be a perfect example of micromanaging. I've told them that God is in you and maybe if you pray for something like that, you help yourself concentrate on the game and intensify your efforts that way, but that God isn't going to choose between you and the kid next door by judging whose prayer is best. I think the writer is correct to refuse to teach her kids things that she herself doesn't believe. But she could be softer and more consoling.

    January 16, 2013 at 8:19 pm |
    • niknak

      My folks made me attend Sunday school, but I was always asking questions because it all seemed like bunk to me.
      Of course, the nuns or priest did not have any aswers, just that god did it that way.
      I did not buy that at all, and kept asking.
      Finally, the Sunday school did what all religions do when someone won't brain wash right, and told my folks I was not ready for religion.
      Lucky for me this happend in the 20th century and not the 15th, as back then the religious just had you killed if you did not go along with the myth.

      January 16, 2013 at 8:23 pm |
  8. Guest19999

    I read the article and I was entertained, but her argument is riddled with internal inconsistencies. I know you all will take great joy in assaulting and insulting my belief in God and I am okay with this. I just want to point out that when she says she teaches her kids that they are "no more special then the next creature" and then turns as blasts God for not protecting the innocent children of Sandy Hook her paradigm fell apart. If a human is no more special than a rabbit the shooting at Sandy Hook was no more a tragedy than the first day of deer season in Virginia. Before you begin to insult me for this view and point consider the rebuttal I mentioned carefully.

    January 16, 2013 at 5:26 pm |
    • Gir

      So your argument is that reverence for human life only exists if it is endowed by sadistic gods from 2000 year old myths? My goodness.

      January 16, 2013 at 6:04 pm |
    • niknak

      Us non believers don't blast you believers because you believe in god.
      We blast you because you try to pass off your belief of god as fact that god exists.
      Then to make it worse, you believers try to pass laws that will force the rest of us to have to go right along with your myth.

      Belive all you want, but stay out of our government, our science, our medicine, our schools and our bedrooms.

      January 16, 2013 at 7:29 pm |
    • lancejz

      Inconsistencies? Where? Sure, legend should be myth, but that is just semantics. Means the same thing really. So, what are you talking about, explain. The rest of your comment makes no sense.

      January 16, 2013 at 10:37 pm |
  9. Milton

    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioLEFRZP-_A&w=640&h=390]

    January 16, 2013 at 5:09 pm |
  10. evan

    If Ms. Mitchell is really trying to raise free thinking kids then they should have the freedom to also believe in God. What she is really saying to her children by leaving out the possibility of God is: "you can believe in anything you want as long as it doesn't include God."

    January 16, 2013 at 4:05 pm |
    • Brian

      ""you can believe in anything you want as long as it doesn't include God.""

      And Christians raise their children to believe you can believe in anything you want as long as it doesn't include not believing in a God.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:10 pm |
    • JWT

      They can learn about god when they are teenagers and perhaps show an interest. One of mine did for a while before rejecting the idea of godd as silly.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:13 pm |
    • New Athiest

      Wrong.
      I don't believe in god either. I've always told my child that i don't think god exists.
      That is not the same as saying I know no god could exist because I'm never wrong.
      She doesn't believe in the christian god either, because she looked at what te bible really says and it doesn't make any sense to her either.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:15 pm |
    • BU2B

      Evan, I think you are putting words into her mouth. Raising a child without god, is simply not bringing "him" into the equation. Although sooner or later it will come up from the child's friends or whatnot.

      At least she is not threatening eternal damnation if they DO believe in god.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:16 pm |
    • ME II

      From the original article:
      "I want my children to be free not to believe and to know that our schools and our government will make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair..."

      January 16, 2013 at 4:20 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @ Brian, You only say that because you personally believe in god. However, how irresponsible would I be as a parent if I continued to allow my child to believe in fairies, leprechauns, Santa, and Zeus? I'm not saying they should have the right to pretend these things exist, but if they insist on their existence as they mature, this is a sign of psychosis and should be treated accordingly.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:26 pm |
    • Your opinion

      but what she is doing is allowing the children to think for themselves, sadly lacking in christian homes.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:26 pm |
    • JohnQuest

      evan, what does it say about "God" that if a person does not learn about "God" as a child, a person will most likely Not believe in a God?

      January 16, 2013 at 4:28 pm |
    • HA....

      @ Evan

      Why do you need the children? If your message is so great, convincing an adult should be easy. Filling a child's head full of that crap should be criminal.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:31 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      I am raising my child to be aware of as many different gods as I can.
      Mythology is fascinating and often full of insight into the human condition.
      I do not tell her "there is only one God" – I tell her that some people believe there to be only one God while others believe in entire pantheons and still others say there are no gods.
      The more information she has, the better equipped she will be to make up her own mind whe she is capable.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:31 pm |
    • HA....

      @ Doc

      The Egyptian Gods sure had the mysterious feel to them – they had the Cosmic Power/ truly beyond man feel to them.
      The Norse Gods were a bunch of individual badasses.... The Greek/Roman gods felt like the Greeks took a human character flaw and assigned a God/Godess to them.

      Mythology is fasinating ...no doubt there.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:43 pm |
    • Brian

      @GodFreeNow I was being sarcastic.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:47 pm |
    • Gir

      Why should I expose my children to this god nonsense? There is a legitimate debate between classical liberalism and socialism, for example, so I expose my children to every side of that issue. There is no legitimate conflict between atheism and god, because the idea of god is so profoundly stupid that no sound arguments could possibly be made for it, and so there cannot be a fair, meaningful, worthwhile debate.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:52 pm |
    • meifumado

      Humans are not born believers, Children only believe because they listen to adults, this is brainwashing and should be considered child abuse

      January 16, 2013 at 4:56 pm |
    • GodFreeNow

      @ Brian, Sorry bro.

      January 16, 2013 at 9:45 pm |
  11. Bob

    Only a fool says in his/her heart, 'There is no God' This woman Deborah is a fool for saying that there is no God and wants her children to be raised like her?

    January 16, 2013 at 3:23 pm |
    • hal 9001

      I'm sorry, "Bob", but "God" is an element of mythology, therefore your assertions are unfounded. Using my Idiomatic Expression Equivalency module (IEE), the expression that best matches the degree to which your assertions may represent truths is: "EPIC FAIL".

      January 16, 2013 at 3:26 pm |
    • sam stone

      No, Bob, the fools are the ones who feel that they speak for god. Take yourself, for example.

      Now, boy, remove the bible from your rectum. It is obvioiusly interfering with your thought processes (such as they are).

      January 16, 2013 at 3:28 pm |
    • JWT

      She has no god bob – you may not agree but if it is a problem for you then I suggest you seek therapy.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:35 pm |
    • New Athiest

      Bob,
      your logic seems to be:
      I know the bible is right because it says it is. LOLOLOLOL

      January 16, 2013 at 3:49 pm |
    • JohnQuest

      Bob do you know the "genesis" of that saying (Only a fool says in his/her heart, 'There is no God' )?

      January 16, 2013 at 3:59 pm |
    • HA....

      yes ...how dare anyone resist the Cult..... at best religions use people as a free ATM at worst the use people as drones and cannon fodder to achieve more power and control.

      to run this scam you have to sell it.... religions start by smiling and using kind words. once you are sure you have the "fish" on the line, you set the hook.... the stories of hell, lakes of lava, demons, other religions and their barbarism... when that is done you can: demand cash, votes, even their lives..... when they resist or try and break away, remind them of hell...if not successful point them out and demonize them, then forget about them and move on to the next mark....

      January 16, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
    • Robert Brown

      I think this was from a Psalm written by David, which would put it about 3000 years ago. This was actually the first mention of atheists, so there is your heritage guys, the first atheists came on the scene about 3000 years ago. Everyone else either believed in God or a whole bunch of gods, but it wasn’t until David’s time that people began to claim there was no God.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:11 pm |
    • ME II

      @Bob,
      "...anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell." (Matthew 5:22)

      January 16, 2013 at 4:21 pm |
    • Gir

      Are you trying to say the Israelites were the only people in the world 3000 years ago?

      January 16, 2013 at 4:32 pm |
    • sam

      @Robert Brown: actually, the first christians were called atheists by the Romans for not believing in all the same gods. How's that grab you?

      January 16, 2013 at 6:41 pm |
  12. Chad takes on the belief blog solo and wins every single time!
    January 16, 2013 at 3:17 pm |
    • Bob

      This woman is a tool! A tool raising another tool

      January 16, 2013 at 3:19 pm |
    • frank

      Good one. Don't quit your day job.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:23 pm |
    • LOL

      Only an mental idiot would actually think Chad is in any way logical or actually uses their brain, they are good a googling and using wiki, doesn't mean their smart.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
    • fred

      LOL
      Chad knows more than I do !

      January 16, 2013 at 3:58 pm |
    • LOL

      "Chad knows more than I do !"

      Yeah fred you are a worse idiot than Chad so that makes sense that you would be dumb enough to admit it.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:02 pm |
    • rabidatheist

      This makes me wonder if Chad has to be double-jointed to take all of himself into his own mouth like that?

      January 16, 2013 at 6:28 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Well Chad is a master delusionist.

      January 16, 2013 at 10:07 pm |
    • Ayn Rand

      fred, My goldfish knows more than you do.

      January 16, 2013 at 10:12 pm |
    • fred

      Ann Rand
      Given the typical atheists world view based on naturalism it is that belief not Christianity that constrains his or her limits of knowledge. You are one in a bowl constructed of matter known to man. Why have you chosen to intentionally limit that which is outside current boundaries of scientific endeavor to baryonic matter? Those who know God have actual awareness of another form of matter you elect to remain ignorant about.
      Believers are not ignorant about evolution and quantum mechanics anymore than atheists necessarily are. Believers accept empirical evidence that produces consistent measurable results in those exposed to the power of the Holy Spirit as stipulated in the Bible. The effect and affect of that power is immediate and radical penetrating the mind, thought and body. The affect is the removal of deception which can be traced back to the earliest of believers.

      The deception is that man can figure everything out based on his or her own skills. As Hawking liked to say “no god needed”. The thing about deception is that we have not accomplished that goal or even made any headway towards it yet we have faith in the hope that someday someone will. In short you have faith in a hope that you will reach your promised land.
      That is what the patriarchs of old had; faith in a promised land. The difference is they reached the Promised Land because they were not deceived and knew their faith could not be in self but that which is bigger than the gold fish bowl that surrounded them.

      January 17, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
  13. S-3B Viking

    @ Chad...

    Now, let’s see if I can post this:

    You said:

    @Chad "was driving Germany back immoral? Ja pan? Is defending myself with deadly force immoral?
    i simply can not see how you can say that. Killing is always horrible, but immoral? No.

    When one considers the waste that warfare brings (including the environme ntal destruction) and the illegitimate reasons for its waging (political/religious/male egotism) I can only conclude that all war is immoral and hope that it will one day be understood to be such by all humans.

    You say that the wars against Germany and Ja pan were justified...and they WERE in the context of our national immaturity. However, wars don't spontaneously co mbust: the unnecessary humiliation of the German nation at Versailles set the stage for Hitler's Germany. Our arrogant superiority co mplex (vs. Asian culture), beginning with Admiral Perry, WW1 and how hypocritically we demanded that Ja pan not be allowed to become an empire created the conditions of the WW2.

    Korea, Vietnam...the same.

    As with Bin Laden and Iran, for cur rent examples, the United States has long been in the business of creating the monsters which, years later, we then have to manage or kill.

    Our foreign policy is evangelical. Much like its Christian form, it demands that everyone be like “us," or else.

    Chad, war and defending yourself are two different animals. And when I consider all the Christians in the US arming themselves and going into survival mode, I just have to laugh when I read about the reactions of the 11+1 to persecution and to death in the book of Acts.

    I would argue that, no, you shouldn't be defending yourself at all...you are supposed to rely on God to not only protect you, but to allow his will to be done which might include the slaughter of you and your family...after all, his purpose might have some later effect...but Christians are notorious for not applying their own beliefs to their own lives.

    An oddity, to say the least.

    Again, I appreciate your responses, your time, and our exchange.

    January 16, 2013 at 3:09 pm |
    • Chad

      I definitely completely reject this notion that the USA creates it's enemies and if we would just be more caring and respectful there would be no conflicts. I'm sure there are times when we make bad worse, but we dont create bad.

      ========
      @S-3B Viking "I would argue that, no, you shouldn't be defending yourself at all...you are supposed to rely on God to not only protect you, but to allow his will to be done which might include the slaughter of you and your family...after all, his purpose might have some later effect...but Christians are notorious for not applying their own beliefs to their own lives'

      @Chad "not at all, you simply arent familiar with the biblical injunction to do our part. God expects us to do our part, which includes active defense:
      But when Sanballat, Tobiah, the Arabs, the Ammonites and the people of Ashdod heard that the repairs to Jerusalem’s walls had gone ahead and that the gaps were being closed, they were very angry. 8 They all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and stir up trouble against it. 9 But we prayed to our God and posted a guard day and night to meet this threat. Nehemiah 4

      Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?” “Nothing,” they answered. 36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’[b]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.” 38 The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.” “That’s enough!” he replied. - Luke 22

      January 16, 2013 at 3:32 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @Chad...

      One of the reasons I served, Chad, even as a conservative Christian at the time, was to ensure that all Americans could believe, say and think whatever they wanted...so I applaud your thoughts and I am not at all surprised that you would think that about the United States...your kind of thinking is mirrored in your presentation of your faith.

      And I didn't say that we had to be caring and respectful as a nation...in the world that the West had created centuries before 1776, the US can't be respectful and caring.

      Regarding the second part, I want to thank you for using the Jewish scripture, Chad. Many Christians seem to think that the OT is irrelevant because of the NT.

      Why, then, Matthew 6 andPhilippians 4 "My God shall supply all your needs according to his riches in glory"?

      Regardless, Christians should be setting the example for the world. In a world of destruction and hatred and greed, what if Christians actually were kind, caring, peaceful...all traits found throughout scripture.

      To truly be "set apart," to truly be "holy," why not be the contradiction to the norm...and to suffer greatly or die if necessary.

      But Christians don't have that kind of courage..that is why such a high percentage of Evangelicals are for torture of terrorists...telling me that they don't believe in the efficacy of prayer and in the ability of their God to prevent a nuclear suitcase from destroying Chicago, for example.

      By the way, Chad...these are more reasons why I don't believe the God of Israel exists.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • The Truth

      "I definitely completely reject this notion that the USA creates it's enemies"

      US foreign military sales have shot over $50 billion. Another record-breaking year is expected thanks to US ally Saudi Arabia, which accounts for three-fifths of the sum. "We have already surpassed $50 billion in sales in the fiscal year 2012," Andrew Shapiro, assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, told journalists on Thursday. – rt.com/news 6/15/2012

      USA Foreign Military Sales programs are assigned two-word code-names beginning with the word PEACE, indicating oversight by USAF Headquarters. The second word in these code-names is often chosen to reflect some facet of the customer, such as MARBLE for Israel or ONYX for Turkey. Code-names appear in all capital letters. Also, not all countries use this program, a notable one being Canada and most other Western nations who negotiate directly with the manufacturer. Current US Air Force FMS cases include military sales to Pakistan, Iraq and Egypt. FMS cases that are in pre-award status (as of 2nd Quarter FY 2011) are India & Saudi Arabia and formerly Iraq which we armed heavily during the 1980's.

      No, we have nothing to do with "creating" any enemies...

      January 16, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ The Truth....

      Thanks.

      I as sume Chad is an American and like most Americans, he is typically and dangerously naive about his country and its history. But for most, historical understanding and memory is convenient and short.

      Democracy is a sad synonym for "Bread and Circuses"

      January 16, 2013 at 4:10 pm |
    • It is Called

      The new go-d brand new F- 35 fighter plane ...

      January 16, 2013 at 4:31 pm |
    • Chadwatch

      S-3B Viking
      For your info, much of the Chad's opinions are mirrored in the web site Streetapologetics, although the Chad claims that it has had no influence on him, honestly.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:33 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ It is called:

      and like God(s)...the F-35 is out of date, irrelevant, too costly, for one purpose – the destruction of lives and simply not necessary.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:36 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Chadwatch

      Thanks for the site...I was old school...I read Josh Macdowell and Francis Schaeffer, among others.

      Apologetics has always been and will always be only for the believer.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:39 pm |
    • Sir Francis Drake

      I have been called upon to demand that the poster known as Chad, research to the point of gaining full knowledge of the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster so that this Chad has some evidence of how he could possibly reject the FSM as the one true God. Should he fail to comply, I urge him to refrain from placing such demands on others.
      RAmen

      January 16, 2013 at 4:42 pm |
    • It is Called

      @S-3B Viking

      I agree 100 % all issues. should of stated some might think this is the new god(s).
      The OH – 58 was my bird back in the 70s

      January 16, 2013 at 5:07 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ It is Called:

      Outstanding! They were the replacement for the OH-6? Were you in Vietnam? Did you still fly with the Cobras as a "Pink Team" I think they called it?

      I had the pleasure of riding left seat in an ANG OH-58 at NAS Willow Grove, PA when I was initially training in the USNR P-3Bs...If I had been a better swimmer I would have loved to have been a rescue swimmer, thus in helos instead of fixed wing...a great way of life!

      Thanks for your service.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:17 pm |
    • It is called

      I was lucky was able to serve when our country was at peace 75- 78 Ft Hood Tx. 6th ACCB . Flew them all except
      the sh-ithook.
      Thanks
      Even was able to sho-ot the big guns on AH-1Hcobra

      January 16, 2013 at 6:07 pm |
    • It is Called

      @S-3B Viking

      Like your commont about the sit down and emotions, we are hard wired for hope at birth.
      Example about emotions, when we buy a car most of process is based on emotion.
      Won't name names but i would love to take a few people up in the OH-58 with out the doors and just fly NOE
      for awhile and see there emotions roll...

      January 16, 2013 at 6:33 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @It is Called

      I like the taking some folks for a NOE ride...I remember a quote that said something like: You finally meet the real person when they are at the extreme of their existence...

      I can't imagine flying NOE in a helo...my low levels were enough and my airplane had an ejection seat...but at low level that is irrelevant when you can't get above the mountain or through the high tensions wires your charts didn't indicate!

      My extreme moment, besides the near misses, was my experience in SERE...I met a person, a "me," there I didn't know and didn't care to meet again.

      Regarding the "sit down and emotions"...this forum is safe...I'm happy it exists because of the world it opens up, but it remains superficial, like us in the US...

      January 17, 2013 at 5:03 am |
    • It is Called

      @S-3B Viking
      I remember a quote that said something like: You finally meet the real person when they are at the extreme of their existence.. Been there a few times in my life, .

      Your sttatment above is the theory I used for all newbies to see if they wuld make a good crewchief or mechanic.
      The stories behind the faces in those circ-umstances of the exetreme noe flight were some good times

      I always had the big bag for newbies but only one person lost it in my bird thank who ever for that.That one person just happened to be a General . He had asked me to take him on the newbie route he had heard about So we proceeded
      up the hill ( flight is NOE all the way last 15 min. at about 110 mph) over the trees down the hill to the jacksters (texas jack rabbit field and there holes) and then I would pick one out keep it away from it's hole for awhile or until the newbie had enough. Then it was back to flight line all noe up the creek by grandma house (old bunker) under bridge (that is where the Gen. lost it) up the hill and land safely at the pad. 15 min of extreme fear for the newbies.

      The true emotions came out on those rides. Just kidding but by the time I made it to top of hill they were calling out for ther other thing in the sky, they never found. Sort of like when you hit thumb with hammer. That phrase was heard alot in those flights. The Strories from long ago. Brings back the chuckles.

      On other note about the numbers that the debaters (believer) go on is something like this 99.9999999 there is none
      it is that 00.000001 that they are holding on to for eternity.

      Thank you for your service too.S-3B Viking .Going flying Sat. should be fun. Life is Great

      I, have to keep religion out of politics they do not make good bed fellas. My opinion the churchs that get into politics like last election should have no more tax exemption. IRS has rules and codes to enforce that would help with the tax problems.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:05 am |
    • It is Called

      @S-3B Viking
      Seperation of Church and State
      Creationism/ID can't be taught in public schools in the US according to cort records.
      NOVA | Intelligent Design on Trial – PBS
      Nov 13, 2007 – Featuring trial reenactments based on court transcripts and interviews with key participants, including expert scientists and Dover parents,
      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html

      January 17, 2013 at 8:23 am |
    • It is called

      Oops dang thumb did not work forgot the u in court.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:25 am |
    • It is Called

      to S-3B Viking
      The 3 root causes ,
      It is Called

      Ethics and religion do not make good bed fellas
      Religion and politics do not make good bed fellas either.
      Mix all three and what do we get ?

      Something I do not want ...

      My opinion G factor is with us every day, depending how we react to the G factor will determine
      the path our lives will take.
      Greed.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:59 am |
    • It is Called

      to S-3B Viking still waiting for reply from RB Chad and RB they are like twins maybe
      Maybe a good read thanks agian used noe stuff above on the forunm below wth RB
      http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/17/belief-blogs-morning-speed-read-for-thursday-january-17-2013/#comments

      January 17, 2013 at 12:39 pm |
    • Science

      @S-3B Viking
      It is Called topher too science had fun today was aroe scout !!

      to S-3B Viking still waiting for reply from RB Chad and RB they are like twins maybe
      Maybe a good read thanks agian used noe stuff above on the forunm below wth RB
      http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/17/belief-blogs-morning-speed-read-for-thursday-january-17-2013/#comments

      January 17, 2013 at 1:26 pm |
    • It is Called

      @to S-3B Viking
      Forgot 1 live4him this is where it is left so far today.
      waiting for reply from RB
      It is Called

      It is called

      BU-LLSH-IT ! Dotors say otherwise so does a PEER REVIEWED paper pub. back in the 90's
      Robert Brown
      We are hard wired for hope, peace, and joy, through our desire for God.

      January 17, 2013 at 2:36 pm

      It is Called

      It is Called take god(s) religion out of it all you have left RB is ethic and politics = dirty money = g factor not god(s)

      another for you RB
      Wont' have peace till we face the facts of life

      @RB This is what is REAL !!!

      Brand new F-35 fighter plane cost over 1 billion dollars for 1.
      What was that made for?
      God9s) did not make it.
      But it will take 1,000's of lives not good.
      No god(s) required

      Or RB who made the F-35 ?????

      January 17, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
    • Science

      At its best here and peer reviewed .No go-d(s) required. Proven right here on this tread!!!

      http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/17/belief-blogs-morning-speed-read-for-thursday-january-17-2013/comment-page-2/#comment-2107898 Finally RB replied.

      January 18, 2013 at 9:51 am |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ It is Called:

      Hey, sorry I missed your posts...been at work (12 hour shifts). Hope you have a great flight today.

      January 19, 2013 at 3:50 am |
  14. S-3B Viking

    @ Chad:

    Chad, thank you for your kind words about my service. I'm going to provide my answers to part of your questions...having problems posting...I'll provide the the other part when I figure out which words aren't acceptable.

    You said:

    @Chad "two questions:
    1. upon what evidence have you based your rejection of God.
    2. how would God honoring your choice make Him immoral??

    To answer the first question would require a sit-down, face-to-face discussion...I cannot display the emotion of 40+ years of my experience in a brief blog response...I will provide two points. My reasons for abandoning the faith began with a book written by a Baptist author who challenged my Charismatic/Pentecostal beliefs which created a domino effect that went well beyond my walk with God, but changed my conservative political views as well. I bring this up to say that it was from within the flock that created the congnitive dissonance...like you, I would never have taken seriously any argument from without.

    Secondly, my untransformed life, and the lives of Christians throughout the spectrum of my experience confirms for me the non-existence of God. But that is my evidence. To provide you with what you are asking, particularly my evidence against scripture, I will have to defer to a later date...you and the atheists here have challenged me to solidify these particular whys.

    Finally, to answer your second question, I don't agree that God honors my choice to reject him...for one to truly love another and to provide them with a choice, that other choice cannot be to harm them or allow them to enter into an eternal punishment (since you don't agree that God is doing this to sinners who reject him). By providing the Lake of Fire as the alternative to rejection of Jesus as savior, it is not a choice...it is an ultimatum and that is why I say God is immoral for that.

    I appreciate that we don't agree.

    I also appreciate our exchange. I wish that more believers would at least exercise their brain as you have. As I've said, I don't think you have displayed the courage to go far enough and consider the way that your opponents think, but that is you and I respect that.

    January 16, 2013 at 2:46 pm |
    • Wordsmith

      S-3B,
      ".I'll provide the the other part when I figure out which words aren't acceptable."

      Considering Chad's other post, maybe the words 'Ja-pan' or 'Ja-panese' are hanging up the word filter.

      Excellent comments from you, however.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:55 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Wordsmith...

      Thanks much...appreciate your co mment.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:05 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Word...

      You were completely correct...I was ignoring my own use of "Ja pan." Thanks!

      January 16, 2013 at 3:10 pm |
    • Chadwatch

      S-3B Viking
      Again good stuff, but trying to be logical and reasonable with Chad is a lost cause. He is a christian apologist that scoures the many web sites for paste and post arguements to back his position and his only position is that the god of Isreal is real. Just to let you know being honest with Chad is like a dog chasing his tail, futile.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:12 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Chadwatch...

      I see so much of who I used to be in most of the Christians here, even in the angry, terrified ones...You are correct, though. As with me, the only way an apologist can be influenced (if ever) is from within his or her own ranks.

      And Pascal's Insurance Policy pretty much ensures (insures? :0) that most won't.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:20 pm |
    • Wordsmith

      S-3B,

      You're welcome!

      (sort of like that sappy "Little Drummer Boy", I have no gifts to bring to your excellent arguments; so I'm glad that I could be of some help)

      January 16, 2013 at 3:21 pm |
    • Chad

      @S-3B Viking "Chad, thank you for your kind words about my service."
      @Chad "you're welcome, thanking is much easier than doing that which others thank one for.
      ===
      @S-3B Viking " My reasons for abandoning the faith began with a book written by a Baptist author who challenged my Charismatic/Pentecostal beliefs"
      @Chad "what was the name of the book?"

      ===
      @S-3B Viking " Secondly, my untransformed life, and the lives of Christians throughout the spectrum of my experience confirms for me the non-existence of God"
      @Chad "well, I complain about insufficient transformation, but the answer is always "well, perhaps you should heed the advice of Romans 12 and provide God with some more opportunities for said transformation.
      What did He tell you when you complained?

      ===
      @S-3B Viking " for one to truly love another and to provide them with a choice, that other choice cannot be to harm them "
      @Chad "it is an oxymoron to say "I am granting you the freedom to do as you choose, but wont allow you to choose certain things"
      Freedom can have terrifying consequences.

      ===
      BTW, I grew up in an agnostic home, it was by Grace alone that I was dragged to the foot of the cross.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:42 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Who's Grace, Chad? And why do you let her push you around that way?

      January 16, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Chad

      Hi, Chad...Happy Wednesday.

      You said:

      @Chad "what was the name of the book?"

      The book was Charismatic Chaos by John MacArthur...I had encountered John prior to reading the book and had much respect for him...so for him to challenge my Charismatic/Pentecostal certainties was unavoidable...

      You said:

      @Chad "well, I complain about insufficient transformation, but the answer is always "well, perhaps you should heed the advice of Romans 12 and provide God with some more opportunities for said transformation.
      What did He tell you when you complained?

      From 8 years old to 28 years old, Chad....plenty of "opportunities" for said transformation. And silence was the response to all of my inquiry of God.

      @Chad "it is an oxymoron to say "I am granting you the freedom to do as you choose, but wont allow you to choose certain things"

      I don't understand this comment, Chad. Rephrase, please.

      You then said:

      Freedom can have terrifying consequences.

      Amen! Chad. And what is passed off as freedom in the country you love so much is terrifying as well.

      Finally , you said:

      BTW, I grew up in an agnostic home, it was by Grace alone that I was dragged to the foot of the cross.

      I understand...that is the experience of many...I only hope that you are caring, kind, and are actually doing more than just butressing your faith...there are so many hospitals filled with patients that are desperate to have someone take time out of their lives and spend time listening to their life stories...to be there amid such intense suffering and dying...my hospitals are void of caring Christians, Chad...yet, the Wal-Marts, Targets, etc. are filled with them...

      January 16, 2013 at 4:06 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Tom Tom

      ...haven't stopped laughing...

      January 16, 2013 at 4:16 pm |
    • Chad

      @S-3B Viking "The book was Charismatic Chaos by John MacArthur."
      @Chad "i'll take a look and get back to you on it."

      ======
      @S-3B Viking "From 8 years old to 28 years old, Chad....plenty of "opportunities" for said transformation. And silence was the response to all of my inquiry of God."
      @Chad "what kind of transformation were you looking for?"

      ======
      @Chad "it is an oxymoron to say "I am granting you the freedom to do as you choose, but wont allow you to choose certain things"
      @S-3B Viking "I don't understand this comment, Chad. Rephrase, please."
      @Chad "If I restrict the choices another person can make, I am not giving that person free will, the freedom of choice.
      Free will means having the ability to do what I want, regardless of the consequences (good or bad). If I choose to do something that is going to result in harm to me, then I should be allowed to make that choice.

      ====
      I give lots of money, but not lots of time.. crappy excuse but hopefully that will change when I retire (if I ever get to..)..

      January 16, 2013 at 5:40 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      I guess I don't understand either, Chad. If I allow you to choose freely one of the integers 0 or 1 are you denied freewill?

      If I wish to choose nil but am only offered heaven or hell am I denied freewill?

      January 16, 2013 at 7:12 pm |
    • Chad

      Free will means having the freedom to chose from the range of real options without any restriction. It doesnt mean you get to opt out and invent your own reality.

      January 16, 2013 at 11:42 pm |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Chad

      Let me start with the free will issue...again, I (and others) define it differently than you...I agree with Tom Tom's response...we are given two choices and that doesn't equate to free will...and God should apply 1 Corinthians 13 to his expression of how he loves the world...when humans can perceive of a love and mercy that is more moral than God, then he needs to take a lesson from his creation.

      You said:

      Free will means having the freedom to chose from the range of real options without any restriction. It doesnt mean you get to opt out and invent your own reality.

      You are correct...freedom is to choose from a range, but we are restricted in the "choices" given. And you are correct, we don't get to create our own reality...if your God exists, we have been dumped into his reality and, in my view, it is immoral.

      It's funny that Christians rely so heavily on our responsibility before God but don't take the further step that the mind we are given, when we exercise it, can question the way things have been presented...and somehow, that is considered wrong or sinful.

      In the movie Chariots of Fire, there is a great line by (I think) a Calvanist pastor who claimed that God is an absolute monarch...in response someone said "so God is a dictator?" and the pastor responded "...he is a benevolent dictator."

      Of course, the Christians in the theater (myself included) cheered...but today, I now understand that this God is not benevolent...just a dictator and a monster.

      January 17, 2013 at 5:30 am |
    • S-3B Viking

      @ Chad

      You said:

      @Chad "what kind of transformation were you looking for?"

      Let me start with asking you, as a Christian, what you think transformation is in the context of salvation.

      Part of the answer lies with what God/Jesus said was the purpose of his covenant; what salvation does; and what the lives described in Acts and the hints we get from the rest of the NT says.

      There is an expectation that the "old man" has pas sed away to become the "new." That is defined differently among the various denominations...and among the various occupants of the pews.

      When I visit churches today, I find that over 30 years not much has changed. Evangelicals spend a ridiculous amount of time begging Jesus to forgive their sins commited over the previous week..and they are the same ones, week after week.
      One would have to question the efficacy of the blood of Christ in this context....and considering these facts (among so many others):
      *****
      It is widely known that por no graphy is a prevalent issue in today’s society, but its po tential of addiction is not isolated to the secular world. Charles Swindoll calls it “the no. 1 secret problem in your church.

      According to a ChristiaNet survey, 50 percent of Christian men are addicted to por no graphy. And it’s not just a “guy-thing;” 20 percent of Christian women are addicted to por no graphy, and 60 percent of Christian women admitted to significantly struggling with lust.

      And yes, por no graphy is in the pulpit, too. Christianity Today found that 37 percent of pastors admit that they struggle with Internet por no graphy, and 51 percent say it’s a source of temptation. And more than half the pastors surveyed (57 percent) said that addiction to por no graphy is the most se x ually damaging issue in their church.
      ******

      ...I would expect that these issues would have been resolved early in their relationship or, not encountered at all.

      Lives transformed means being focused on being a life-changing presence in the world...one person, one neighborhood, one city, one county, one state one country at a time...but 2000 years have proven the inefficacy of the blood because the lives of christians are ineffectual in these places that matter.

      I applaud Caholics for at least having a confession booth where they can get over their sins and move on, but not many Catholics do more than rely on Catholic charities and the monastics to do what ALL of them should be doing.

      Changed lives, Chad...and not just for the first few months or year that the new convert stops beating his wife...

      January 17, 2013 at 5:51 am |
    • Christianity is a form of mental illness- FACT

      S-3B Viking

      "From 8 years old to 28 years old, Chad....plenty of "opportunities" for said transformation. And silence was the response to all of my inquiry of God."
      .
      Same here...I tell people I took a walk into the wilderness and talked to god.......and what did I hear.....*crickets*. It of course was more of a process over the years how I came to my decision and threw my bibles in the trash and pawned my cross for a few bucks. Best decision I ever made...felt better ever since

      January 17, 2013 at 1:40 pm |
    • Chad

      @S-3B Viking “we are given two choices and that doesn't equate to free will...and God should apply 1 Corinthians 13 to his expression of how he loves the world...when humans can perceive of a love and mercy that is more moral than God, then he needs to take a lesson from his creation”
      @Chad “regarding only two choices, just because we don’t like the fact that there are only two choices, doesn’t mean we can ignore that reality. John 3:16 certainly satisfies 1 Corinthians 13.
      God provided only one way to reconcile, we can complain that there should be another, but there isn’t. Better to just deal with the reality we find ourselves in.

      ======
      @S-3B Viking “And you are correct, we don't get to create our own reality...if your God exists, we have been dumped into his reality and, in my view, it is immoral.”
      @Chad “well, you can complain about that very thing to God (and I have), but it doesn’t change the fact that that’s where we find ourselves. Not liking that fact doesn’t mean we get to successfully deny that God exists.

      ======
      @S-3B Viking “In the movie Chariots of Fire, there is a great line by (I think) a Calvanist pastor who claimed that God is an absolute monarch...in response someone said "so God is a dictator?" and the pastor responded "...he is a benevolent dictator."
      @Chad “It’s His way or the highway, that’s reality.”

      ======
      @S-3B Viking “I now understand that this God is not benevolent...just a dictator and a monster.”
      @Chad “again, feeling that way towards God doesn’t mean we get to successfully deny that God exists. Better to ask Him what’s going on.”

      ======
      @S-3B Viking “Let me start with asking you, as a Christian, what you think transformation is in the context of salvation.”
      @Chad “being conformed to the image of Christ, having “wants” changed for the better basically.”

      ======
      @S-3B Viking “One would have to question the efficacy of the blood of Christ in this context....and considering these facts (among so many others):”
      @Chad “I don’t disagree that the Church is astonishingly immature and untransformed. However, I have found that transformation does indeed occur, just not the way that I wanted it to occur see James 4. That IS the biggest issue, and the reason for a lack of transformation.
      Don’t forget, this lack of transformation according to our viewpoint is nothing new, Paul complained about precisely the same thing (and if Paul made up the entire religion, he certainly wouldn’t have included Romans 7:19)
      Our walk today is the same as the walk the original disciples experienced 2000 years ago.
      Good discussion!

      January 17, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • End Religion

      viking, thank you for posting.

      January 17, 2013 at 6:39 pm |
  15. TheRationale

    These are good reasons for not being Christian. It's odd, though, because you just need to emphasize being a good person and such – you don't necessarily need Christianity as a counterpoint around which you build everything. You should build around a positive, not a negative.

    January 16, 2013 at 2:14 pm |
  16. Black Beard

    Chad
    What invetigation have you done to determine if the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not the creator and only true God? Have you even bothered to read HIS Gospel as written by the prophet Bobby Henderson? Pastafairians know the answers to the big questions as they are clearly spelled out, not buried in parables, inconsistancies and ritual dogma. What are your reasons for denying that the FSM is the only one real GOD?

    January 16, 2013 at 2:07 pm |
  17. Chris

    Thank you so much for saying this, for putting yourself out there, and for letting others like you know that they're not alone. It is difficult to raise children without gods in our religion-obsessed culture, but we don't do it because it's easy, we do it because it's right, and because we want more for them than mythology, blind dogma and wishful thinking can offer.

    Thank you.

    January 16, 2013 at 1:26 pm |
  18. Pedro

    "Really", I don't think you know what your talking about

    January 16, 2013 at 1:05 pm |
    • ed

      It's true. Pedro doesn't think.

      January 16, 2013 at 1:09 pm |
    • sam stone

      Interesting how Chard quotes himself rather than answering a question. Just another wrinkle in the "mind" of a fanatic

      January 16, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
  19. Chad

    I would like to know why she is raising her children not to believe in God, when she hasnt done the investigation to determine if the God of Israel is real or not.

    January 16, 2013 at 12:56 pm |
    • Eric G

      Others have investigated. That god, like all other gods worshiped throuought human history, has had no verifiable evidence presented supporting it's existence.

      January 16, 2013 at 12:59 pm |
    • SImran

      And you think she hasn't investigated that bcoz.....

      Oh right, bcoz she came to a conclusion different than yours!

      January 16, 2013 at 1:00 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @Chad,

      as delighted as I am to see you not railing against abiogenesis today, this "have you fully investigated the God of Israel" nonsense is truly tedious.

      While will grant you that people who are not raised in a Christian home, won't have a strong grasp of Christian dogma, much like I suspect your grasp of Hindu dogma is pretty weak, given the pervasiveness of Christianity in our society, most adult atheists are people who have specifically rejected Christian dogma.

      Of course you know this is the case.

      January 16, 2013 at 1:04 pm |
    • Christ

      Chad
      Same fvcking BS out of you every day, go read the full article. The woman got over the supernatural delusion that was forced upon her as a child, as most atheists have done. Do you own homework/research on every other man made religion on the earth or apply your stupid question to yourself.

      January 16, 2013 at 1:19 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Chad,

      How much investigation does one have to do to determine that astrology is garbage?

      January 16, 2013 at 1:26 pm |
    • wjmccartan

      Someone who never knows the existence of a god, can't be called an unbeliever, your presuming knowledge of god.

      January 16, 2013 at 1:40 pm |
    • Chuckles

      Chad

      It's a little sad that just because people have come to a different conclusion than you, you accuse them of not having done the research, whether that's rejection of religion based on dogmatic evidence (see: you claiming that the person hasn't read the bible) or historical rejection (see: your legless claims of an empty tomb, people dying for faith and the impossibilty of creation without a creator).

      Countless people have already challeneged you on every aspect of your religion that you bring up ad nauseum in order to bolster your own bias and assumptions about god, christianity, jesus etc.,.. and yet you still not only refuse to listen, you refuse to even acknowledge that people have provided the evidence to you. Why is that? It can't simply be because you dislike the answers, there is something more there.

      You claim to have grown up in an agnostic household and come to christ of your own freewill and through your own study. Methinks you just have a rebellious streak a mile wide and disliked being singled out for growing up in a secular household. You were jealous of your friends having church groups, celebrating christmas and having a ginned up sense of self worth that they claimed was endowed to them by their creator that you never had the chance to experience and reject yourself, so you decided to join your friends instead of convert them.

      Chad, I won't ask you to change your mind, your cognitive dissonance is too great and your rebellion against logic is too profound to change over a message board, however I do ask that instead of monotonously repeating the same tired excuses and accusing atheists and theists alike for not having done their research, you accept that people can and have doen the same or more research than you and have come to the opposite conclusion.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:09 pm |
    • Chad

      @GOPer "specifically rejected Christian dogma.'
      @Chad "interesting word to use as the subject of the rejection, it indicates a rejection for reasons other than specific issues with the reality of the God of Israel and His Son as revealed in the bible.
      That is consistent with atheist supplied reasons such as "The bible is stupid", "Christians are horrible people" "you cant tell me that I am a bad person in need of a savior" "The church has done horrible things" "it's all made up" "God is not logical" "God is not fair""

      nothing specific.. which indicates no real due diligence having been done.

      ========
      @Cheese "How much investigation does one have to do to determine that astrology is garbage?"
      @Chad "quite a bit if you are going to make that assertion. Otherwise you commit the fallacy of argument from ignorance.
      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 a sserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa).

      January 16, 2013 at 2:15 pm |
    • Chad

      @Chuckles "It's a little sad that just because people have come to a different conclusion than you, you accuse them of not having done the research, "

      @Chad "I dont accuse people of not having done the research unless it is extremely obvious that they havent.

      the person who wrote this did NOT do their due diligence, the author is asking questions that are clearly addressed in the bible.
      Now, if she had instead said "the bible tells us that God does not answer answer prayers that arent in line with His will", then I believe she did some investigation.

      God is not fair.
      If God is fair, then why does he answer the silly prayers of some while allowing other, serious requests, to go unanswered? I have known people who pray that they can find money to buy new furniture. (Answered.) I have known people who pray to God to help them win a soccer match. (Answered.) Why are the prayers of parents with dying children not answered?
      If God is fair, then why are some babies born with heart defects, autism, missing limbs or conjoined to another baby? Clearly, all men are not created equally. Why is a good man beaten senseless on the street while an evil man finds great wealth taking advantage of others? This is not fair. A game maker who allows luck to rule mankind’s existence has not created a fair game.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:23 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Chad

      Still with the same assertion day in and day out. Who knew you were so well informed on the entire life of every atheist you come across, even in an article online.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:24 pm |
    • ralph

      Chad – "God is not fair."

      Many actually think he had dark hair and skin.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:27 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @Chad

      "I dont accuse people of not having done the research unless it is extremely obvious that they havent." – That's a lie, you've accused me of that very thing on countless occasions, usually when we come to two separate conclusions about a moral of a specific story and I must not have read the bible because my conclusion is different than yours.

      Secondly, you reject her research because she phrased her question in a way that wasn't to your liking and you accuse the author of having not done her research based on that. That's foolish chad.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:28 pm |
    • Chad

      @Chuckles "That's a lie, you've accused me of that very thing on countless occasions, usually when we come to two separate conclusions about a moral of a specific story and I must not have read the bible because my conclusion is different than yours."
      @Chad "no.. you must not have read the bible if you consistently display ignorance of its contents 🙂

      same as her

      January 16, 2013 at 2:30 pm |
    • Jack Sparrow

      Why do you reject the Flying Spaghetti Monster as the one true God? What research have you done? Pastafairians know that the prophet Bobby Henderson has provided conclusive evidence in the Gospel of the FSM, have you done the research? If not why not, we of the Pirate community call you out as a hypocrite of the worst kind.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • Cal

      Muslim says: I would like to know why she is raising her children not to believe in God, when she hasnt done the investigation to determine if the my God is real or not.

      Hindu says: I would like to know why she is raising her children not to believe in God, when she hasnt done the investigation to determine if the God of Israel is real or not.

      Jungle cannibal says: I would like to know why she is raising her children not to believe in God, when she hasnt done the investigation to determine if the God of Israel is real or not.

      Chad's mom says: I would like to know why she is raising her children not to believe in God, when she hasnt engaged in an online debate with my son?

      January 16, 2013 at 2:34 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Chad

      What I find interesting is that you merely cannot admit that you pull that "you haven't read the bible" crap if the person comes to a different conclusion than your interpretation. Your transparent and dishonest defense mechanism for backing up anything in the bible is pathetic.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:34 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @Chad

      First, you have completely ignored the main meat of my initial post, should I assume then that's EXACTLY the reason why you reject atheism, because of your rebellion?

      Second, saying I "displayed ignorance" is a largely subjective claim when that "ignorance" is simply disagreement on the morality of a specific story and not the specifics outlined in the story itself. You also keep hiding behind the baseless claim in order to somehow invalidate questions, comments and rejections of the bible, god, jesus, etc... instead of addressing them head on because either a) you can't actually refute what's being presented so you decided to attack the validity of the person rather than the question itself (which we all know is a major fallacy) or b) you are so wrapped up in your own cognitive dissonance and bias that you literally refuse to see whats right in front of you, instead only being able to see selections that don't jive with your mindset and trying to address those selections in a lame attempt to refute the entire statement.

      Chad, I ask again, instead of ignoring (whether on purpose of accidentally) all the evidence that has been presented, you at least acknowledge that people have shown you the evidence and proof or research and you reject based on your own research rather than rejecting the evidence saying it's not evidence at all. I know the subtly here might escape you, but I have hope you might actually be able to figure this out.

      January 16, 2013 at 2:38 pm |
    • William (Captain) Kidd

      Who is this ignorant Chad?
      You obviously have a complete ignorance of the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Do you reject the FSM as a God without doing the research? What kind of double standard are you peddling here? Our mate doesn't claim raising people from the dead, resurrection, miracles and all that other supernatural mumbo jumbo, so why do you reject our God?

      January 16, 2013 at 2:52 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Wrong Chad,

      There is no evidence that planets and their position have any effect on humans so there is very little to investigate, same with your religion.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:01 pm |
    • mama k

      uh.. my goodness, the same old argument. Now the way you've left this, Blessed, might seem odd. I mean, I like to think of life on Earth as being the result of the fine tuning, and that we don't know enough to necessarily attribute that set of conditions across time to anything. Maybe I missed part of the discussion – I do see about the FSM, but I'm not sure if you mean a varying effect or that life erupting here at all was not affected by planet position, etc. So I'm a bit confused.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:20 pm |
    • sam stone

      What investigation have you done into other religions to know if they are real, Chard?

      January 16, 2013 at 3:29 pm |
    • sam stone

      "Same fvcking BS out of you every day, go read the full article"

      Chard can read?

      January 16, 2013 at 3:32 pm |
    • Chad

      @Chuckles "It's a little sad that just because people have come to a different conclusion than you"
      @Chad "I accuse people of not having read only if it is very plainly obvious that they havent. See above for why the author hasnt read the bible"

      ====
      @Chuclkes Countless people have already challeneged you on every aspect of your religion that you bring up ad nauseum in order to bolster your own bias and assumptions about god, christianity, jesus etc.,.. and yet you still not only refuse to listen,"
      @Chad ???
      I listen to and discuss (virtually) every point that is brought up, right?
      your only complaint could be "and yet you arent convinced that atheists are correct", and, yes, I am not. 🙂

      "refuse to listen" and "refuse to be convinced" are two very different statements.

      ====
      @chuckles "you refuse to even acknowledge that people have provided the evidence to you. Why is that? "
      @Chad "because I dont consider "no it isnt" and "the bible is stupid" and "it's all made up nonsense" and "God doesnt exist" and "Jesus never existed" to be any kind of evidence by any definition of the word "evidence".

      ======
      @chuckles " Methinks you just have a rebellious streak a mile wide and disliked being singled out for growing up in a secular household. You were jealous of your friends having church groups, celebrating christmas and having a ginned up sense of self worth that they claimed was endowed to them by their creator that you never had the chance to experience and reject yourself, so you decided to join your friends instead of convert them."
      @Chad "methinks your imagination has got the best of you 🙂
      I had no Christian friends, I incessantly mocked Christians. The only Christians that I knew I considered hopelessly nerdy and gullible.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:58 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @Chad,

      how does a rejection of Christian dogma, indicate:

      "a rejection for reasons other than specific issues with the reality of the God of Israel and His Son as revealed in the bible.
      That is consistent with atheist supplied reasons such as "The bible is stupid", "Christians are horrible people" "you cant tell me that I am a bad person in need of a savior" "The church has done horrible things" "it's all made up" "God is not logical" "God is not fair"'

      Would it have helped you if I had said "the rejection of Christian and all other religious dogma"? I left off the "all other" because we were speaking about Christianity.

      Christian dogma includes a belief that there is a God, (for most Westerns sects) specifically a trinitarian view of God. Rejecting Christian dogma means disbelief in the God of Israel. How can this be made any plainer?

      The "reality of the God of Israel" is a non-sequitur to someone who does not believe in God. It is not reality. Your assertions that follow are all over the map:

      The bible is stupid ....................... 'stupid' is not a characterization I would use
      Christians are horrible people ..... only some of them
      "you cant tell me that I am a bad person in need of a savior" ... who can say?
      "The church has done horrible things" ...................................... that is irrefutably true
      "it's all made up" .......................... I concur
      "God is not logical" ...................... should s/he exist, then evidently so
      "God is not fair"' .......................... should s/he exist, then evidently so

      January 16, 2013 at 4:00 pm |
    • Chuckles

      "I listen to and discuss (virtually) every point that is brought up, right?
      your only complaint could be "and yet you arent convinced that atheists are correct", and, yes, I am not.

      "refuse to listen" and "refuse to be convinced" are two very different statements."

      - And yet you keep trotting out the same points and when people ask you why you keep using the same tired points your response is almost always, "because I haven't been provided with sufficient evidence to the contrary" – You have, you just refuse to believe it for whatever reason, again I'm sticking with rebellion. Maybe I don't like your phrasing or maybe it's because you don't provide any "new" points to discuss, but by completely ignoring the conversations about the various points, it's more of a refuse to listen rather than be convinced. See the difference?

      "@Chad "because I dont consider "no it isnt" and "the bible is stupid" and "it's all made up nonsense" and "God doesnt exist" and "Jesus never existed" to be any kind of evidence by any definition of the word "evidence"." A perfect of example of what I stated above AND not to mention you ignoring your earlier point. I won't deny that many people have used the the same tired responses like " the bible is stupid, no it isn't, god does not exist" etc... as much as you have used your points, however it's astounding that you deliberitly ignore the amount of information that is obviously more refined and deeper. When people discuss evolution, big bang theory, life at conception, and so on with you and cite sources, engage in real debate with you, those are the ones I'm talking about that you refuse to listen or even ackowledge.

      "@Chad "methinks your imagination has got the best of you
      I had no Christian friends, I incessantly mocked Christians. The only Christians that I knew I considered hopelessly nerdy and gullible."

      Pish tosh, no christian friends? I don't believe it. Considering I grew up very jewish in the jewish part of town and all that, I found it impossible NOT to have christian friends. Granted I didn't have friends who were super religious, but I would still say even with all my jewishness going on, avoiding christianity in this country is near impossible unless you live under a rock. I guess I should clarify though, when I say christian in this specific instance, it was anyone growing up in a christian home, apologies for that because I realize that generalizes things too much.

      I will however stand by my original statement that you decided to become a believer in christ, and an ardent one at that, because you wanted to rebel against your upbringing, the same way that my atheism first began. I will freely admit that my foray into atheism wasn't with a pure heart and I did it more to rebel against my judaism. However, with my newfound "atheism" I was able to study judaism on a more objective level and soon my rebelliousness gave way to sincerity. After reading literature by both jewish scholars and atheist ones, delving into the other abrahmic religions and going into the eastern ones as well, it wasn't a choice to not believe anymore, the same way I don't "choose" to believe that 2+2=4.

      Sorry for my little tangent there, but fess up Chad, I cannot believe that you just stumbled upon a bible one day in your agnostic household and the spirit of christ pervaded your soul, it was out of rebelliousness that you chose to switch sides.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:15 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @Chad,

      "BTW, I grew up in an agnostic home, it was by Grace alone that I was dragged to the foot of the cross."

      Ah, this explains a lot. ... the zeal of the converted.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:23 pm |
    • fred

      GOPer
      There is only one reality and it exists regardless of how you see it or I see it. You wish to argue about what I see vs. what you see yet you limit your possibilities to that which can only be seen by a minority of humans over the entire course of history. Sorry but that is not rational or logical by any stretch.

      Further you respond to your environment as do I thus we participated in the same reality. Any effect we have on reality generally follows our core belief or world view. In this regard God and of course Jesus real or delusional has had the greatest effect on the perception of reality for all humans regardless of belief and thus represents the most significant determining factor on reality. Sorry, but it is irrational or illogical by any stretch to claim God was not in fact the single greatest force in reality.

      “In the beginning God” (the first 4 verses of the Bible) set the absolute limit of our known reality to this date as to origin of our universe and that limit has held for all time. Not any branch of science or philosophy can contest that or establish any acceptable point of origin other than first cause or causation. That is reality.

      The rest of the chatter is simply about how we “see” it and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That’s reality.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:26 pm |
    • Chad

      @Chuckles “And yet you keep trotting out the same points”
      @Chad “because they are excellent points. reflective of that which God has done and therefor easily defended and not easily attacked.”

      =======
      @Chuckles “and when people ask you why you keep using the same tired points your response is almost always, "because I haven't been provided with sufficient evidence to the contrary" – You have, you just refuse to believe it for whatever reason, again I'm sticking with rebellion. “
      @Chad “rebellion.. lol
      No, it is simply because I don’t consider these refutations: “no it isnt" and "the bible is stupid" and "it's all made up nonsense" and "God doesnt exist" and "Jesus never existed" “

      ======
      @Chuckles “however it's astounding that you deliberately ignore the amount of information that is obviously more refined and deeper. When people discuss evolution, big bang theory, life at conception, and so on with you and cite sources, engage in real debate with you, those are the ones I'm talking about that you refuse to listen or even acknowledge.”
      @Chad “I believe in common ancestry (theistic evolution). Regarding the origin of the universe, it is atheists that consistently refuse to acknowledge that our universe had a beginning despite their being a proof that it is the case. I do believe life begins at conception,.
      I listen to all of them, but I am simply not convinced by your arguments. Why do you find that so astonishing??

      ========
      @Chuckles “Pish tosh, no christian friends? I don't believe it. “
      @Chad “well, add that to the list of things you are getting wrong. It’s a fact. I had none, I mocked the ones I encountered. To acknowledge that you were a Christian in my high school would have been a social death sentence. College was of course different, but I hung out with a decidedly non-Christian crowd.

      =====
      @Chuckles “I will however stand by my original statement that you decided to become a believer in christ, and an ardent one at that, because you wanted to rebel against your upbringing, the same way that my atheism first began.
      @Chad “1. You are 100% wrong
      2. What in the world makes you think that you could possibly divine my background?
      3. you seem to find it impossible to believe that a thinking, rational person could hold a different view on things than you do. That says a lot about you.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:32 pm |
    • Chad

      oh and as further proof that rebelliousness had nothing to do with it, I was deeply hurt that my family ridiculed, and continues to ridicule my Christian beliefs.

      January 16, 2013 at 4:34 pm |
    • Hmmm!

      You must enjoy being ridiculed, not only on this blog but by your family. What does this say about you? What do you think you accomplish by repeating the same silly questions and offering the same false conclusions day after day?

      January 16, 2013 at 4:49 pm |
    • mama k

      OK, I will most likely have more to say later in response to fred, but, for starters, wouldn't his first couple of paragraphs be a fallacious argument? (argumentum ad populum?)

      January 16, 2013 at 4:51 pm |
    • Christ

      fred
      You give Dad and I too much credit. Like we are still 5 billion or so short of religious domination, Actually there are a whole load of people that hate our christian guts for all the damage done in our name. Still delusional dipsticks like you are our bread and butter, keep trying, your bud jesus.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:06 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @fred,

      anything that cannot be measured reliably and repeatably is conjectural. Who can say what const!tutes reality. Truth and beauty are both influenced by perception.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:07 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @Chad

      "“because they are excellent points. reflective of that which God has done and therefor easily defended and not easily attacked.”
      – That's clearly a straight up lie. If they were excellent points, they would a) be used to convert more people b) be acknowledge by theist and atheist alike as good points and c) are obviously as seen on the countless threads here, easily attacked. That was a foolish comment to make Chad,

      "@Chad “rebellion.. lol
      No, it is simply because I don’t consider these refutations: “no it isnt" and "the bible is stupid" and "it's all made up nonsense" and "God doesnt exist" and "Jesus never existed" “
      - In our conversations, who has said these things without at least try to qualify these statements? I promise you I have not nor will I make a statement like, "Jesus never existed" without at least trying to follow up that statements with evidence and reason why I believe that to be true. Considering you are attacking the basest form of commentary on this forum and not the higher level debate that you have a lot of the time speaks leagues about how much you actually acknowledge of your opponents side.

      "it is atheists that consistently refuse to acknowledge that our universe had a beginning despite their being a proof that it is the case. ....I listen to all of them, but I am simply not convinced by your arguments. Why do you find that so astonishing??"
      WOW!!!! Look at that you claim to listen and then make the claim that the "atheist" refuses to acknowledge the beginning of the universe? ASTOUNDING considering that every atheist on here will agree our current universe DID have a beginning, where we disagree is if that beginning needed a creator or not and what exactly conditions were like before the big bang. That statement right there perfectly encapsulates what exactly I've been hammering on here and I think it's becoming clearer now that you have eithre a) honest to god bad reading comprhension or b) you honestly ignore whats been presented and you don't realize it.

      "“well, add that to the list of things you are getting wrong. It’s a fact. I had none, I mocked the ones I encountered. To acknowledge that you were a Christian in my high school would have been a social death sentence. College was of course different, but I hung out with a decidedly non-Christian crowd....3. you seem to find it impossible to believe that a thinking, rational person could hold a different view on things than you do. That says a lot about you."
      –Hmmm, so lets see here, and this is a complete guess, but you grew up in.... Deerfield, MI? Or maybe in the Bronx of NYC. Seriously what part of the country did you grow up in that your highschool was comprised of very few to no christians? Honest question here because everywhere I've gone and lived (which has been a solid number of places) Christianity dominates the landscape, whether it's incredibly religious or secular, christianity is the de facto religion of almost every highschool in the US.
      2. I also do not find it impossible that a rational, thinking human being could hold a different view on life than me. For a guy who just got all huffy for having someone as.sume something about him, you sure don't mind being hypocritical about it.
      Why I am surprised that you would choose to become a follower of christ after growing up in an agnostic household is that your feverent need of validation by coming to this blog, by using the same points without deviation (regardless of how many discussions you have on the same topic with different atheists) and your constant need to point out that you grew up agnostic is what points me to believe that this is more out of rebellion than it is a genuine belief that struck you walking down the street one day. You validate your claims by debating a shadow atheist on this forum as a way to reject what you believe the atheist always argues, your stringent adherence to the same points with deviation and your need to make sure everyone knows you grew up agnostic show that your faith needs bolstering more than anything else, that it only is strong as long as you need it to fight against the unbeliever. You said, "..., I was deeply hurt that my family ridiculed, and continues to ridicule my Christian beliefs." – This shows that your family not only has rejected religion, but mocks those of faith, in tihs case you. I think you come to this blog to take our issues and rebelliousness towards your family on complete strangers because lets face it, strangers on the internet can say really horrible, mean things but we are all aware that it's just words from someone who doesn't know anything about us, so you can in turn hurl insults right back, bounce ideas of people and say generally whatever you want. With family however, you have to watch what you say, they do you know you and can say really hurtful things that last.

      Chad, I'm just calling it like I see it, and you, my friend, are one rebellious boy.

      I'm just calling it as I see it.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:08 pm |
    • fred

      mamma K
      The first paragraph is not ad populum because the size itself is the object and makes no statement regarding value of what was seen.
      The second paragraph is an observation of fact that stands on its own. In addition the effect is the determining factor not the veracity of the object relative to the effect.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:10 pm |
    • Brian

      "There is only one reality and it exists regardless of how you see it or I see it. You wish to argue about what I see vs. what you see yet you limit your possibilities to that which can only be seen by a minority of humans over the entire course of history"

      Some of our best inventions and greatest minds where created by a minority of humans that refused to follow the crowd.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:10 pm |
    • mama k

      Well then fred, let's just start with this: "There is only one reality "

      What's your proof of that?

      January 16, 2013 at 5:16 pm |
    • fred

      GOPer
      Exactly what in my statements cannot be measured? Is it necessary to measure the height of an ant hill relative to Mt. Everest to say which is greater?
      No, truth without absolutes is without foundation. Those who cannot comprehend or see God must default to relativism. Take Pilate who saw the difference between Jesus and the Priests asked “what is truth”. Only one who is blinded would not be able to tell.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:22 pm |
    • fred

      mamma k
      What reality are you in? Are you aware of another one....or did you just take the red pill?

      January 16, 2013 at 5:25 pm |
    • mama k

      You didn't answer my question, fred.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:31 pm |
    • fred

      Brian
      Agreed and Jesus was just such a person that set the secular / Jewish dominated middle east on its head and the wave he set in motion has not stopped 2,000 years later.
      Never forget the impact of the Hebrew and Christian on science (good and bad).

      January 16, 2013 at 5:33 pm |
    • fred

      momma K
      This is the only known reality based on baryonic matter known to man at this time.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:36 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @fred,

      "you limit your possibilities to that which can only be seen by a minority of humans over the entire course of history"

      I 'limit' what I accept as real to what can be reliably and repeatably measured by ALL humans.

      For the sake of argument I accept that anything is hypothetically possible, from multiple coincident universes to super intelligent shades of the color blue, but still think that God(s) remain imaginary.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:43 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @fred,

      "No, truth without absolutes is without foundation. Those who cannot comprehend or see God must default to relativism."

      There are no absolutes. By your logic here, (with which I agree) there is only relativism. That was and continues to be my point.

      January 16, 2013 at 5:46 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @fred – I'll post this again since it states my case:

      I don't believe in absolutes. Everything, including truth and beauty and time, is relative (lunchtime doubly so*).

      There are facts:
      We breathe oxygen. There are 7 billion humans living today. We will all die. George Washington was the first President of the United States, etc.

      There are proofs:
      The sum of two even numbers is even. Any number subtracted from itself equals zero. Any number divided by itself equals one.

      There are natural laws:
      Bodies in motion remain in motion. Bodies at rest remain at rest. F=ma. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The absolute pressure and volume of a given mass of confined gas at constant temperature are inversely proportional. PV = nRT. Matter cannot be created or destroyed. E=mc²

      There are theories, backed up by evidence.
      Our universe began with the big bang, 13.8 billion years ago. The earth is 4.5 billion years old. Humans evolved from primates. The end of the dinosaurs was coincident with a meteorite collision 65 million years ago.

      There are opinions:
      Raising tax revenue from the richest 1% will help reduce the deficit. The French Navy won the American War of Independence. Banning semi-automatic rifles will reduce mass killings.

      There are morals:
      Killing, lying and stealing are wrong.

      There are beliefs:
      There is one God – the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit. There is one God – Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet. If one sows goodness, one will reap goodness; if one sows evil, one will reap evil.

      Each of these will be considered as ‘true’ by a great number of people, but the search for “truth” belongs in the philosophy department.

      None of these are absolute – except perhaps for death and taxes.

      * Douglas Adams: "Time, is an illusion, lunchtime doubly so."

      January 16, 2013 at 5:53 pm |
    • mama k

      fred: "This is the only known reality based on baryonic matter known to man at this time."

      Yes, fred. I like that word known; I also liked that you qualified it with "at this time".

      And because of that qualification, we don't know for sure (100%) that the first part of that initial statement of yours above is true. We only suspect it's true. Unless of course we could agree on some proof that has been put forth about such a notion, but is there one? It makes me think of the popular belief centuries ago that the world was flat. At one time, it was the best theory, but they too didn't have proof. Well we see how that wound up.

      January 16, 2013 at 6:00 pm |
    • fred

      GOPer
      Does not everything you base your belief upon begin with a known singularity? The limit of knowledge as to cause for existence begins with causation or first cause. Your world view is based on biological evolution that is assumed to begin with a single sourced organism. There is one universe and one intelligent race that we know. Your very view of life is an extension from oneness and oneness is what Jesus preached.
      Now, if everything you know is based on one how could you possibly argue that everything you know was not based on an absolute?

      January 16, 2013 at 11:12 pm |
    • jill

      fred, don't obfuscate the primary prenuptials with rasberries. Often, the pertinent cat presents fabled necessities in the parking chamfer. Realize your net precedent. Triangulate! Save the best for the alligators. Ever the bastille notches the orchestra but Wendy is not green and horses will capitulate. Filter out the log from the turnstile and cry prevalently. So there brown stare. Feed your inner walnut and resolve. Subject your lemon to the ingenious door in the presence of snow and animals. Aisle 7 is for the monetary cheese whiz. Faced with the kitchen, you may wish to prolong the sailboat in the cliff. Otherwise, rabbits may descend on your left nostril. Think about how you can stripe the sea.Regale the storm to those who (6) would thump the parrot with the armband. Corner the market on vestiges of the apparent closure but seek not the evidential circumstance. Therein you can find indignant mountains of pigs and apples. Descend eloquently as you debate the ceiling of your warning fulcrum. Vacate the corncob profusely and and don’t dote on the pancreas. Next up, control your wood. Have at the cat with your watch on the fore. Aft! Smarties (12)! Rome wasn’t kevetched in an autumn nightie. (42) See yourself for the turntable on the escalator. Really peruse the garage spider definitely again again with brown. Now we have an apparent congestion, so be it here. Just a moment is not a pod of beef for the ink well nor can it be (4) said that Karen was there in the millpond. Garbage out just like the candle in the kitty so. Go, go, go until the vacuum meets the upward vacation. Sell the yellow. Then trim the bus before the ten cheese please Louise. Segregate from the koan and stew the ship vigorously.

      And remember, never pass up an opportunity to watch an elephant paint Mozart.

      January 16, 2013 at 11:19 pm |
    • Which God

      Careful, fred. Getting jilled is a messy, sticky experience. Better take a hot soapy shower.

      January 16, 2013 at 11:22 pm |
    • Chad

      @Chad “rebellion.. lol No, it is simply because I don’t consider these refutations: “no it isnt" and "the bible is stupid" and "it's all made up nonsense" and "God doesnt exist" and "Jesus never existed" “
      @Chuckles “In our conversations, who has said these things without at least try to qualify these statements?”
      @Chad “By “qualify” you mean something along the lines of “Jesus never existed, He is a figment of your imagination”?
      No.. I don’t consider that a qualification.

      =========
      @Chuckles “ASTOUNDING considering that every atheist on here will agree our current universe DID have a beginning”
      @Chad “are you new here? “We don’t know if the universe had a beginning” is an extremely common atheist claim.

      =========
      @Chuckles “Hmmm, so lets see here, and this is a complete guess, but you grew up in.... Deerfield, MI? Or maybe in the Bronx of NYC”
      @Chad “ok, add another thing to the list of things you got wrong 🙂
      No, I grew up in neither.

      =========
      @Chuckles “Why I am surprised that you would choose to become a follower of christ after growing up in an agnostic household is that your feverent need of validation by coming to this blog, by using the same points without deviation (regardless of how many discussions you have on the same topic with different atheists) and your constant need to point out that you grew up agnostic”
      @Chad “I ONLY ever mention that upbringing to refute the constant inaccurate claim from atheists that I am a Christian because I grew up in a Christian home.

      Rebellious.. lol

      January 17, 2013 at 12:01 am |
    • Chad

      @GOPer "There are beliefs:"There is one God""
      @Chad "Note, tomething that is believed can in fact be objectively true."

      January 17, 2013 at 12:09 am |
    • Chuckles

      @Chad

      "@Chad “By “qualify” you mean something along the lines of “Jesus never existed, He is a figment of your imagination”?
      No.. I don’t consider that a qualification."

      – Purrrrlease! by "qualify" I clearly mean that when someone says, "Jesus never existed" they usually follow it up by saying, "There may have been a man named Joshua bar Joseph, a itinerarnt preacher who defied Roman law, but there is not sufficient enough evidence that proves the jesus of the bible was exactly how he was described" – This is generally where you start to defend the bible and yada yada yada, my point is, the people you actually debate with don't just say, "Jesus never existed" and leave it at that, only the people you ignore do or the "shadow atheist" that you seem to debate with more than anyone else on this forum.

      "@Chad “are you new here? “We don’t know if the universe had a beginning” is an extremely common atheist claim. "
      – No, and I'm beginning to think that your stubborness is really and truely just bad reading comprehension. The usual claim is such, "We know that our current universe began at the big bang when a singularity began rapidly expanding. What we don't know is conditions before the big bang, whether it includes a multiverse, or a previous iteration of this universe that either had contracted back into a singularity or if it was just "nothing" which is a loaded where as there is no such thing as "nothing" before the big bang". The thing here is chad, no one can refute that this current universe we reside in began around 13.5 billion years ago. We have solid evidence that proves that. What you and others nitpick about isn't that the this universe had a beginning, but whether that beginning involved a sentient creator being and that creator being is the god of the bible.

      "@Chad “ok, add another thing to the list of things you got wrong
      No, I grew up in neither. "

      – It was to prove a point. Deerfield has the biggest islamic population in the US, the Bronx has a very large jewish population, had you grown up in those places and said you went to a school with a very small number of christians, that's entirely believable. Considering you did not, you should READ (I highlight this word because I don't know if you actually know what it means or not) the latter part of my question which is, what part of the US did you grow up in where there weren't christians?

      "@Chad “I ONLY ever mention that upbringing to refute the constant inaccurate claim from atheists that I am a Christian because I grew up in a Christian home. "

      – I noticed you didn't address my other points about you frequenting this blog to trot out the same old points without even changing them to fit a conversation you had the day before, or a week before or a month. So what would you call a person who does what you do?

      I'll give you an example of your behavior. I tell my kid that we don't allow ice cream in the house. He gets his license and has a lot more freedom of choice, so he decides to go to the mall. At the mall he goes to Ben and Jerry's almost every day, gets a cone and then heads to a gym around the corner and starts chatting up strangers trying to prove to them that ice cream is good for you. Every day he is constantly berated by the gym patrons, giving him studies, showing people who eat ice cream and are very unhealthy and much more, but my stubborn kid doesn't listen, even more, he just keeps saying, "You're wrong, ice cream is delicious, the government allows it to be sold and you can get it in low fat, thus case closed, ice cream is healthy" When gym goers accuse my son of thinking this way because he grew up in a house where ice cream was always allowed he says, "No! It was banned in my house, in fact, as a child my family used to go and make fun of all the people who ate ice cream and now that they know I eat it too, they make fun of me!" As if that solidifies his point that ice cream is healthy. .... In case senario what would you call my kid? Enlightened or stubborn? Rebellious or free spirited?

      January 17, 2013 at 12:13 pm |
    • End Religion

      Chad, your bible is a known fraud. Your god and his only be-rotten son jesus never existed.

      January 17, 2013 at 1:32 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @End Religion

      Thanks for that. I write a freaking novel explaining to Chad that a lot of people try to actually follow up and qualify statements and then you play right into his hand. Really, marvelous job. Any progress I've now made gets completely reset.

      Bang up job buddy, you're really doing all us atheists a service here.

      January 17, 2013 at 1:37 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @Chad,

      "@Chad "Note, tomething that is believed can in fact be objectively true.""

      "Objectively" true? No. Perceived as true certainly, which was my point.

      But in the case of beliefs, the only thing we can objectively say, is that the beliefs exist and are meaningful for the people who hold them. That doesn't make them true for everyone, or everyone would hold the same beliefs. (Which clearly they don't.)

      January 17, 2013 at 1:40 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @fred

      "Does not everything you base your belief upon begin with a known singularity?"

      Not necessarily. I can happily tell you that I have no idea what happened before he first nanoseconds of what we call the big bang. I don't hold that time is absolute or that nothing existed prior to that. It is simply not known. (It might not be unknowable however.)

      Is the speed of light an absolute limit?
      Is -273°C absolute zero?

      So far, but one thing that science consistently demonstrates is that it is subject to revision when a newer more accurate model evolves.

      January 17, 2013 at 1:46 pm |
    • End Religion

      @chuckles:
      1) like you, people have been writing chad love novels for many months. We each take a turn. He then dodges/evades, lies and otherwise circumvents any point you've made. It isn't about truth or reality. He has a belief and he will do or say what he needs to keep it. It astounds me others continue to try: it is the mythological "definition of madness" to repeat the effort. The only reason I can find that people actually pretend to continue to have a conversation with him is for others who may read it. It is quite pointless otherwise to pretend it is a conversation, or that you are doing your community a service by conversing with him.
      2) fuck you. I will do and say as I please on "the CNN Chuckles Blog". I, like anyone else including you, do not speak for an entire group, you self-righteous dingleberry on the asshole of life.
      3) I summed up your entire pointless ineffectual blathering in about 10 factual words. Feel free to eat the corn kernels out of my shit . I fart in your general direction.

      January 17, 2013 at 2:45 pm |
    • fred

      GOPer
      Correct the model you base your faith on is relative to the current state of knowledge and changes. This means your belief is presently a lie or will be a lie in just a matter of time (based on your construct)

      January 17, 2013 at 3:34 pm |
    • Todd

      "current state of knowledge and changes"

      So has the interpretations in the bible over time, so based on the logic you just used it too is a lie.

      January 17, 2013 at 3:39 pm |
    • fred

      Todd
      Interpretations of the Bible change as do interpretations of scientific theory. These different interpretations do not change the scientific evidence behind the theory. Invalidating a theory requires specific methodology which does not include interpretation. This is why empirical evidence such as observation alone is not acceptable to proof God exists.
      The core doctrine of the Bible has not changed since the beginning (genesis). The truth as revealed by God through the Word has not changed since the beginning. This has never been done except by God. Our interpretation of the Serpent behind the tree or the great flood does not change the truth expressed therein as it is the same today as it was 3,400 years ago or tens of thousands of years ago if you extend this to oral traditions.

      January 17, 2013 at 4:05 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @End Religion

      Well it looks like somebody *cough * you *cough* has a tiny pe.nis. I don;t know what other people say, I converse with chad to bounce ideas off of an articulate yet crazy christian apologetic.

      When did this become the CNN Chuckles Belief Blog? Did I miss a name change? Say whatever the heck you want, it's your rep. It's cute though that you tried to tack on a completely unnecessary post and then just go ape sh.it to defend it. Congrats though, you've now made chad just seem a little more sane, so kudos.

      Since I gave Chad a free pysch examination, it seems only right you should get one too. From some of your posts and your little note to me, I'm guessing you're the youngest child and never got enough attention from mom and dad. Toss in that you probably have a small pr.ick, an oediple complex and some rage problems and it would make perfect sense why you would frequent the belief blog to berate perfect strangers, whether they agree or disagree with you.

      January 17, 2013 at 4:11 pm |
    • iReport

      these atheists are always sizing each other up 😉 what's up with that?!?!

      January 17, 2013 at 4:15 pm |
    • fred

      iReport
      Atheists then to be relativists so size matters ……….today anyway.

      January 17, 2013 at 4:18 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @iReport

      Grown ups are talking, go outside and play with the other 9 year olds.

      January 17, 2013 at 4:19 pm |
    • End Religion

      @chuckles: "I converse with chad to bounce ideas off of an articulate yet crazy christian apologetic."

      Please stop back pedaling – you want honesty from nutters then deliver it yourself. You said I stopped your progress. That's not "bouncing ideas off Chad," that's an attempt to prove something to him to advance your cause, which you expressed I interfered with.

      ***
      "When did this become the CNN Chuckles Belief Blog?"

      It didn't, so you can see why I will continue to say what I want, when I want, whether Chuckles likes it or not. Further, the name will soon be changing to the "CNN End Religion's Beliefs Blog" so not only are my opinions welcome but yours will become unwelcome.

      ***
      "Say whatever the heck you want, it's your rep. It's cute though that you tried to tack on a completely unnecessary post and then just go ape sh.it to defend it. Congrats though, you've now made chad just seem a little more sane, so kudos."

      Ah, the benevolent Chuckles the Cunt has allowed me to speak. How regal of you. Your piety stinks of religion.

      ***
      "Since I gave Chad a free pysch examination, it seems only right you should get one too."

      By all means, please. In these tough economic times even I must consider amateur psych evals from the Chuckles Free Clinic of Top Notch Psychiatry & Shoes store. I'm sure it'll be earth-shattering and creative.

      ***
      "From some of your posts and your little note to me, I'm guessing you're the youngest child and never got enough attention from mom and dad. Toss in that you probably have a small pr.ick, an oediple complex and some rage problems and it would make perfect sense why you would frequent the belief blog to berate perfect strangers, whether they agree or disagree with you."

      Rats... I was hoping for creative, but you went right for the "tiny dick" comment (twice no less) and the banal "rage problems". I will give you a gold star for creativity on "oediple" however, although that too gets overused by internet bumpkins such as yourself, at least you had the temerity to give it a twist by misspelling it with a flourish I haven't seen before.

      So you're clear, here's a few among those I berate:
      – imbecilic lower life forms who lash out at my opinion as somehow beneath them yet who cannot even spell 'Oedipal'
      – religious people who without a shred of proof believe in imaginary creatures, and who also believe those imaginary creatures deserve any more respect than hobgoblins or leprechauns
      – those who demand their imaginary deity deserves respect and that their belief in it deserves anything other than ridicule
      – any and every fascist motherfucker who tries to tell me what I should or should not be posting on a public blog. You want to control someone, have a kid and torture it all you want. You want to control me you better pay my fucking mortgage, my utilities, buy me a computer, pay me for my time and at least give me a reach around. Then I will post what you feel is appropriate.

      January 17, 2013 at 5:10 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @ End Religion

      You got a real way with words – said my 12 year old self.

      Seriously, that's an adorable post though. It goes zig-zags between going after my spelling (which we all know is the best way to argue with people) and then, and I'll paraphrase here, you saying, "YOU DON'T OWN ME!" and getting all pis.sy about someone having told you that you can't write things on this forum (certainly wasn't me, but I guess that doesn't really matter).

      Listen baby dic.k, write whatever you want. Hell, write another reply to this one raging at this imaginary censor thats told you that you can't write this or that, label it "Chuckles Facist Censored Belief Blog" I would love another ti.tle (I think I've already racked up 3 from you). You are pretty funny, I will give you that, and you've certainly got passion. So now you have 2 points, which will buy you a crappy yoyo or a chinese fingertrap.

      Keep on the good fight champ!

      January 17, 2013 at 5:29 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @fred,

      You said:
      "Correct the model you base your faith on is relative to the current state of knowledge and changes."

      Let's say instead "the model my understanding is based on, is relative to the current state of knowledge and changes".

      Well, of course it is!

      You further said:
      "This means your belief is presently a lie or will be a lie in just a matter of time."

      Belief? My comprehension of what I accept as real is subject to refinement – yes. This is not a 'lie'. The earth isn't flat either. This approach is pragmatic. Deliberately believing in a delusion simply because you think it is constant is still delusional.

      There isn't any such thing as absolute truths. You don't think slavery is acceptable after all.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:48 pm |
    • fred

      “There isn't any such thing as absolute truths. You don't think slavery is acceptable after all.”
      =>It was not acceptable to God either as God made it clear he punished Egypt for their oppressive treatment of slaves. God punished the Assyrians for their oppressive treatment of slaves. Further, mistreating any other person has always been wrong subject to punishment. That is the consistent position from the Bible. Moses, Noah, Solomon, David etc. all did things that were not acceptable to God but allowed in order that the true nature of God and the man was revealed.
      Slavery in Egypt allowed man to see what wrong was and how God is faithful in freeing the slaves.

      January 17, 2013 at 11:10 pm |
    • Chad

      @Chuckles “by "qualify" I clearly mean that when someone says, "Jesus never existed" they usually follow it up by saying, "There may have been a man named Joshua bar Joseph, a itinerarnt preacher who defied Roman law, but there is not sufficient enough evidence that proves the jesus of the bible was exactly how he was described" – This is generally where you start to defend the bible and yada yada yada, my point is, the people you actually debate with don't just say, "Jesus never existed" and leave it at that, only the people you ignore do or the "shadow atheist" that you seem to debate with more than anyone else on this forum.”
      @Chad “are… you new here?
      If someone says “I believe a man named Jesus lived, but we don’t know if the claims He made were true” I ALWAYS rejoin with “correct, the debate is as to His divinity”.
      Many atheists on this blog, in NOT STOP FASHION, claim that Jesus never existed. That’s just reality.
      =========
      @Chuckles “I noticed you didn't address my other points about you frequenting this blog to trot out the same old points without even changing them to fit a conversation you had the day before, or a week before or a month. So what would you call a person who does what you do?”
      @Chad “Consistent!
      And, your contribution? And those like you? Non stop mockery? Incessant name calling? What is your contribution here? Inventing new ways of calling Christians stupid?

      I continually have to clean up atheist responses when I quote them. amazing.

      Atheists are the most non self-aware people I have ever met.

      January 17, 2013 at 11:15 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @Chad

      "Many atheists on this blog, in NOT STOP FASHION, claim that Jesus never existed"
      -Not really sure why I have to keep pointing out again and again that I'm not saying no atheists make that claim without qualification, I'm talking about the people that you chose to actively debate with. There are both believer and non believers alike who just post nonesense stuff on this forum with no intention of following up or engaging in conversation. Look at End Religion, or truth be told, etc... both just come to troll. Can you honestly not understand the difference? Chad, I know I keep pointing out your abyssmal reading comprehension, but what started out as more of a jab now is becoming a serious question, do you have reading comprehension problems?

      "And, your contribution? And those like you? Non stop mockery? Incessant name calling? What is your contribution here? Inventing new ways of calling Christians stupid? " – Are you really asking what my conribution or the shadow atheist that you debate with?
      It sounds to me the real reason you intentionally ignore content is because it's presented shrouded in mockery. The sad part is, when new people have engaged you in debate it's usually YOU who instigate matters and then fall back on your prosecution complex.

      Also, your "consistency" isn't something to be proud of, I as.sure you. Holding a consistant position is admirable, but you go beyond consistancy straight into stubborness by the simple fact that you don't or can't accept new pieces of information, that's just idiocy, which is not a virtue kiddo.

      PS @ Fred

      The slavery that god wasn't so jazzed about in the bible was only when it came to israelites being subjugated, he had no problem with the other way around when israelites would enslave others. It's also common knowledge among jews that the 10 commandments only relate to us, so when it says something like, "Thou shalt not kill" it's implied "thou shalt not kill another jew", god was perfectly a-ok with killing other heathens. GOPer's question is still valid, we've decided ALL slavery is wrong, god was ok with slavery, just not in some instances.

      January 18, 2013 at 11:19 am |
    • Christianity is a form of mental illness- FACT

      Chad "questions that are clearly addressed in the bible."
      ..
      And all Mormon question are clearly addressed in their book
      .
      And all Muslim questions are clearly addressed in the quran
      .. .
      By what authority is one book over the other? We are all atheists to the ones we do not accept as real or relevant. A god's relevance and authority is only applicable in the minds of its followers..

      January 18, 2013 at 11:53 am |
    • Chad

      @Chuckles,
      your post bears no relationship to reality that I can see..

      ======
      @Mental illness- FACT "By what authority is one book over the other?"
      @Chad "each has to stand on its own.

      The atheist who states claims that "all gods do not exist" shoulders the burden of demonstrating that.
      The Christian who states that "The God of Israel does exist" shoulders the burden of demonstrating that.

      Belief in the God of Israel is mutually exclusive with belief in other gods.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
    • Chuckles

      @Chad

      What a weak and cowardly response

      January 18, 2013 at 2:34 pm |
    • I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

      @fred,

      as we've discussed more than once, Leviticus is abundantly clear that slavery was permitted and encouraged for the Israelites.

      How did that moral absoutism work out again?

      January 18, 2013 at 9:35 pm |
    • fred

      GOPer
      Leviticus speaks to where bondmen and bondmaids may be acquired. “And as for thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, whom thou shalt have; of the nations that are round about you, of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.”
      The absolute truth and word of God on the subject of Slaves (I give you this wording benefit so that we do not get side tracked on the difference between economic and moral relevancy) is God will deal with the nation that oppresses others as slaves:
      Genesis 15:13-14
      13 Then He said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years.
      14 “And also the nation whom they serve I will judge

      Now, God did hit Egypt hard and in Exodus freed the slaves under that oppression and bondage.
      That is absolute and has never changed.

      January 18, 2013 at 11:37 pm |
  20. Pedro

    Federal judge John E. Jone's decision in the Kitzmiller V. Dover case was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design.

    January 16, 2013 at 12:55 pm |
    • Eric G

      Vote for Pedro

      January 16, 2013 at 12:56 pm |
    • Really??

      Since Intelligent design is NOT a scientific theory, your point is moot.
      To be a scientific theory, it would be able to be tested and observed. Since it is BS, testing it is impossible, therefor not scientific at all.
      Thanks for playing though.

      January 16, 2013 at 12:59 pm |
    • Pedro

      So mutations have been observed to create new species? The answer is NO

      January 16, 2013 at 1:03 pm |
    • Eric G

      Sorry Pedro, "the answer is no" is a statement of fact. Please present verifiable evidence that supports your claim.

      ID is a hypothesis at best.

      No points for you this round, but thanks for playing!

      January 16, 2013 at 1:07 pm |
    • ME II

      @Pedro,
      "So mutations have been observed to create new species? The answer is NO"

      Sorry, but what does this have to do with ID?

      January 16, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
    • meifumado

      You have no clue do you Pedro?

      Non-existent evidence? Are you blind?

      A serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design ? LOL The guys who invented it represented it in that case.

      ID has nothing to do with real science and is an insult to intelligence

      January 16, 2013 at 1:45 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      ID isn't even a hypothesis. It makes no testable claims. At its best, ID is an argument from personal incredulity.
      Pedro, yes, actually, we have observed speciation in a lab with fruit flies.

      January 16, 2013 at 1:48 pm |
    • Which God?

      Pedro, if god designed you, and gave you that much ignorance, clearly your god fukked up.

      January 16, 2013 at 3:18 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
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.