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. Humpty Dumpty

    I have an idea. Get 1,000 religious people and 1,000 non-believers and have them all take an IQ test. I'm betting that the non-believers score significantly higher.

    January 18, 2013 at 8:33 am |
    • Damocles

      That may actually depend on who you get from both sides.

      January 18, 2013 at 8:48 am |
    • Saraswati

      It's been done, and on average non believers score higher, but the reality is a very mixed bag for,both groups. I'm a non-believer and will be the first to say we have some major idiots in our camp, too.

      January 18, 2013 at 8:54 am |
    • SImran

      @ Saraswati,
      I agree, but disagree too – since I don't know we had a camp!

      January 18, 2013 at 8:57 am |
    • Saraswati

      @SImran, just a lazy word choice.

      January 18, 2013 at 8:59 am |
    • pickle toes

      I love camping! Where do sign up?

      January 18, 2013 at 10:26 pm |
  2. ???????

    According to facts on the tread below she has made the right chioce. Fact.

    Reviewing the comments noticed someting interesting. Science PROVED it does not work the way the bible said it does.

    All the facts are here on this tread. Peer reviewed !!!

    January 18, 2013 at 7:03 am |
    • ???????

      Oops the tread
      http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/17/belief-blogs-morning-speed-read-for-thursday-january-17-2013/#comments

      January 18, 2013 at 7:08 am |
  3. Science

    Live4Him said.
    That's right, the earth is 6000 years old, the light from other stars that are billions of light years away was obviously placed in transit by God or maybe the speed of light isn't really constant

    Science peer reviewed says you are WRONG PERIOD..

    Have a common sense day.
    Peace

    January 18, 2013 at 6:55 am |
    • Science

      Brand new find peer reviewed
      500-Million-year-old animal looked like a tulip
      http://www.cbsnews.com/tech/

      January 18, 2013 at 7:19 am |
    • Saraswati

      @Science, there's really nothing you can do to *prove* a godlike being didn't create a world to fool us. It may counter the "all good" claim, but that's another story.

      January 18, 2013 at 8:58 am |
    • Live4Him

      @Science : maybe the speed of light isn't really constant

      Lets separate the facts from your mythology. We know the speed of light near a gravity well – i.e. the sun. We've never measure the speed of light outside of that gravity well. We've proven that gravity impacts the speed of light (i.e. red / blue shift). Now, what makes you think that the speed of light is constant outside of a gravity well?

      Scientists presume that it is constant, but realize this presumption. Those who pretend to be scientific don't.

      January 18, 2013 at 10:50 am |
    • the AnViL

      yes, science makes presumptions – based on evidence.

      science is very quick to posit what science does not know.
      science is changing – as new information is made available.

      science is in a state of continuous improvement.

      monotheistic religions make presumptions based on ignorance and non-knowledge.
      monotheistic religions are not in a state of continuous improvement.
      the adherents of monotheistic religions are resistant to education and embrace ignorance.

      unlike science, monotheistic religions make a huge leap from "how" to "god did it" in one single bound.

      q/hey! science! what caused the big bang?
      a/we don't know!

      q/hey! religion! what caused the big bang?
      a/goddidit!

      so yes, by all means – let's step away from the myths and stick with the facts.

      January 18, 2013 at 2:41 pm |
  4. Douglas

    Don't cast pearls before swine. You are just wasting your time.

    January 18, 2013 at 12:23 am |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      More "sound" cult logic from Doug.

      January 18, 2013 at 12:31 am |
    • Calgon

      The problem, Douglas, is that you don't have any pearls. What you have are just sweet-smelling, oily bath beads that dissolve in hot water.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:05 am |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      "WE NEED MORE CALGON"

      January 18, 2013 at 1:10 am |
    • sam stone

      Don't reason with the brainwashed. You will be wasting your time

      January 18, 2013 at 5:18 am |
    • sam stone

      more like rat dropping than pearls, doogie

      January 18, 2013 at 7:23 am |
    • bubbly memories

      Calgon take me away

      January 18, 2013 at 10:30 pm |
  5. Athena12

    As a mother I, too, struggled with many questions of how to raise our child. But with regard to religion, in retrospect I am glad I was raised with religion and a belief in God. Even in all it's heavy handedness, a faith filled youth beat the bleakness of life without it. So, our daughter has been raised with God, to accept or reject as she chooses.

    January 17, 2013 at 11:58 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Just keep in mind that children are taught about hell and are often terrified they will end up there, or a friend or family member will. Religion isn't all "lollipops and rainbows" and contrary to what you think life without god isn't necessarily bleak. I am much happier and more content now that I realize Christianity is bunk.

      January 18, 2013 at 12:30 am |
    • The Truth

      " a faith filled youth beat the bleakness of life without it."

      And how would you know? You only experienced one, so unless you were literally born again and raised without that faith or with another faith, Islam or Hindu maybe, you would not be able to compare and make that statement. Or are you really so self centered as to think that whatever you experienced as a child was the best and is the truth and is better than whatever the alternative might be without even looking aka a religious conservative American Christian...?

      January 18, 2013 at 12:58 am |
    • sam stone

      why do you feel that non believers have bleak lives? because they do not believe the same as you?

      January 18, 2013 at 7:27 am |
    • Saraswati

      @Cheese, not all religions, even Christian one's, involve a hell.

      January 18, 2013 at 9:01 am |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      I know not all teach in hell but most that I am aware of do, and they at least teach some form of annihilation. My point still stands.

      January 18, 2013 at 11:20 am |
  6. Ima

    I'm letting "God" take care of telling my kids that stuff if 'he' wants to. I'd just get it wrong anyway.

    January 17, 2013 at 11:14 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Ima

      Sound like a very good plan.

      January 18, 2013 at 12:56 am |
    • Saraswati

      Nice idea, but eventually you'll want to make sure they know the premises those around them, and around the world, are operating off.

      January 18, 2013 at 9:14 am |
  7. Reality

    AND THE INFAMOUS ANGELIC/DEITY CONS CONTINUE TO WREAK STUPIDITY UPON THE WORLD

    Joe Smith had his Moroni. (As does M. Romney)

    "Latter-day Saints like M. Romney also believe that Michael the Archangel was Adam (the first man) when he was mortal, and Gabriel lived on the earth as Noah."

    Jehovah Witnesses have their Jesus /Michael the archangel, the first angelic being created by God;

    Mohammed had his Gabriel (this "tin-kerbell" got around).

    Jesus and his family had/has Michael, Gabriel, and Satan, the latter being a modern day demon of the demented. (As does BO and his family)(As do Biden and Ryan)

    The Abraham-Moses myths had their Angel of Death and other "no-namers" to do their dirty work or other assorted duties.

    Contemporary biblical and religious scholars have relegated these "pretty wingie/horn-blowing thingies" to the myth pile. We should do the same to include deleting all references to them in our religious operating manuals. Doing this will eliminate the prophet/profit/prophecy status of these founders and put them where they belong as simple humans just like the rest of us.

    January 17, 2013 at 10:46 pm |
  8. raised Agnostic

    My mom left it in neutral. She said I could read anything I want, pick any religion I want or not, as long as I was happy. And I like that.

    January 17, 2013 at 9:09 pm |
    • End Religion

      not a bad choice. I'm still struggling with how overt I should be with my kid.

      January 17, 2013 at 10:33 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      ER,

      I understand, I have kids too. Teach them how to think critically and the reasons for your conclusions. As they get older you can hit them with the hard stuff.

      January 17, 2013 at 11:01 pm |
    • End Religion

      Mine's a teen and it wasn't until this past year, I think, that I even touched on religion aside from the "first death conversation", whenever that was. A part of me wants her to suffer through a day of church just to have that ridiculous experience under her belt.

      January 17, 2013 at 11:37 pm |
    • Roger that

      I agree. Let the children decide and respect their decision.

      January 17, 2013 at 11:48 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      ER

      I wish I had started the process of investigation earlier. I had plenty of suspi.cions but being heavily indoctinated it was hard to completely let go.

      January 18, 2013 at 12:41 am |
    • End Religion

      I bet, Cheese. I admire your courage. I have often wondered if I could shake severe indoctrination or not. I think my natural inclination to be inquisitive, to be a smart ass, to poke my thumb in authority's eye, means I would've been able to but who knows. Thankfully, while I was forced to go to church until 13 it was a very liberal UCC church. The day I joined the church and had my first communion was the last time I ever went.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:02 am |
    • 0G-No gods, ghosts, goblins or ghouls

      I've told our children they are free to believe whatever they want. I have also told them that if they become religious they will not inherit a single cent.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:02 am |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      I just stopped practising, When I had kids I figured I better learn more about it and that's what did it, there is a reason Christianity does not teach its history.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:07 am |
    • Aliana

      I was lucky to have a mom that begrudgingly took me to (Catholic) Sunday school but didn't subscribe to any religion herself, as she was ticked to be excommunicated for being divorced. She didn't make me pursue Sunday school at any time, but indulged me since my friends went. Once I reached high school, she let me take the reins, and I chose not to go for a while, then became very interested in grade 11 or 12 for a while, then decided it wasn't for me. I still feel a connection to the religion but cannot respect the Church. While my community wasn't exactly multicultural, it was at least good to be included in my friends' Jewish holidays. I don't think early religious education can hurt a kid much, unless it's forced or threatening. Pretty much every religion has a basis in "be true to others and yourself" so no harm there. Being exposed to other religious traditions can be a great way for kids and teens to gain an appreciation of the similarities among faiths, but it seems like this could go terribly awry if the parents involved on either side are steadfast in their belief that theirs is the only way to be unless you want to be hell-bound. I think that earlier exposure to (and explanation of) different religious traditions and celebrations would be a very worthy addition to the curriculum.

      January 18, 2013 at 2:00 am |
  9. pjpinsak

    Clearly this woman has ZERO understanding of God and Christianity.

    January 17, 2013 at 8:56 pm |
    • Gir

      Having ANY understanding of the flying sky wizard and his delusional followers is enough reason to stay away from them.

      January 17, 2013 at 9:03 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      Considering Christians argue with other Christians about their understanding of Christianity I don't think Christians understand it either.

      January 17, 2013 at 10:24 pm |
    • Roger that

      'Clearly this woman has ZERO understanding of God and Christianity.'

      Clearly, because if she had complete understanding of God and Christianity then she and her kids would be devout Christians and drinking the kool aid like you. I bet she has a better understanding than the average Christian.

      January 17, 2013 at 10:29 pm |
    • HA....

      I think she understands God and religion perfectly.....you WISH she didn't understand, as most people who dont understand pack into churches on sunday.

      January 17, 2013 at 11:04 pm |
    • LinCA

      @pjpinsak

      You said, "Clearly this woman has ZERO understanding of God and Christianity."
      No, you got it backwards. She clearly has a pretty good understanding. She would have been a christian otherwise.

      Understanding gods and religion leads to rejection of both. Inevitably.

      January 18, 2013 at 1:07 am |
    • sam stone

      that's why there is a one christian christian church, right pjjpinsak

      January 18, 2013 at 5:20 am |
  10. Live4Him

    I'm signing off for tonight

    January 17, 2013 at 8:20 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      G' night Chad.

      January 17, 2013 at 10:38 pm |
  11. Live4Him

    @hawaiiguest : That's just ridiculous. You cannot take the bible as an authority without actually establishing credibility.

    This is an apriori conclusion. When you begin, you don't have evidence for or against any source. After we begin the process, we see some evidence for establishing credibility – we can PROVE some of the history beyond doubt (i.e. existance of Israel for example). Thus, to discredit it, we must find supporting evidence – evidence, not opinions.

    January 17, 2013 at 7:54 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      And New York is real, therefore we can say spiderman exists until we find evidence otherwise.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:58 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @hawaiiguest : And New York is real, therefore we can say spiderman exists until we find evidence otherwise.

      There is also evidence that spiderman is a fictional character. Why do you ignore that evidence?

      January 17, 2013 at 7:59 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      Do you realize that you're building your apriori assumption based on an argument from ignorance that you explained away earlier with your supposed apriori assumption?
      This is logically invalid, and no amount of nu-uh's are going to make it valid.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:01 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @hawaiiguest

      FYI – I plan to sign off in about 15 minutes.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:01 pm |
    • Free Nuts

      Free nuts all around today

      January 17, 2013 at 8:07 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @hawaiiguest : Do you realize that you're building your apriori assumption based on an argument from ignorance that you explained away earlier with your supposed apriori assumption?

      You're doing it again. You're building a strawman to counter my position. First, YOU want to ignore evidence without justification. THEN, you want to claim a logic fallacy. What's next?

      1) It is beyond dispute that the Bible begins with the creation of matter, energy and time
      2) It is beyond dispute that this universe is composed of matter, energy and time.
      3) It is beyond dispute that some parts of the Bible have been supported through scientific observations (i.e. archeology)

      Therefore, your claim of 'argument from ignorance' is invalidated. The only way you can logically reject the conclusion is to falsify one of the supporting premises. The only alternative is to follow an apriori conclusion.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:07 pm |
    • Gir

      We have all heard the ridiculous tales of talking donkeys and snakes turning into wood. There is no need to establish the lack of credibility of the bible to this group of people. There is no one who here who can logically argue that talking donkeys are a part of the collective human experience. An a priori conclusion is perfectly valid, because there is no conflict over the issue.

      Now, to Live4Him's three points.

      "1) It is beyond dispute that the Bible begins with the creation of matter, energy and time"

      So? What else would it begin with? The creation of ectoplasm?

      2)2) "It is beyond dispute that this universe is composed of matter, energy and time."

      a. Correlation does not prove causation.
      b. "Lamarckism offers an explanation for biodiversity. There is biodiversity. So Lamarck was right." See what's wrong with this statement?

      3) "It is beyond dispute that some parts of the Bible have been supported through scientific observations (i.e. archeology)"

      Beyond mentions of cities where biblical myths are supposed to have taken place and scriptural manuscripts from that were written decades before (old testament) or after (new) christ's death, (which aren't proof at all) what other evidence is there? Give us details if you have any.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:27 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      No to your number 3. That's why I brought the spiderman analogy up. A factual thing in one part of the bible does not make everything else true by default. Every single claim needs its own evidence, especially when you go into the supernatural aspects. I am not building a strawman, I am giving you what you said.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:29 pm |
    • psych ward staff

      "YOU want to ignore evidence"

      what evidence? so far there is none.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:32 pm |
    • The Truth

      "Ho.mo floresiensis ("Flores Man", or "hobbit") is a possible species, now extinct, in the genus Ho.mo. The remains were discovered in 2003 on the island of Flores in Indonesia."

      Well that proves it, everything in the Lord of the Rings really did happen a long long time ago...

      January 17, 2013 at 9:18 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      "3) It is beyond dispute that some parts of the Bible have been supported through scientific observations (i.e. archeology)"

      It is beyond a doubt that large parts of the Bible (very important parts) that we can apply science to are complete bunk. The flood, the earth stopping its rotation, people rising from the dead. You don't get to claim it is partially scientifically supported, therefore giving it credibility, and ignore the parts that are scientifically proven to he hogwash thereby destroying its credibility.

      January 17, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
  12. niknak

    OK, I will step off your board now fundies.
    A cold brew is calling my name.
    I have some Three Flyods Alpha King ready to be consumed.

    Have a good nite all.

    niknak out.......

    January 17, 2013 at 7:47 pm |
  13. Live4Him

    @it is Called : Geology and climate have shaped the development of life tremendously.

    How do we test this theory scientifically? We cannot observe the past. We can only observe the evidence of today and presume how the past was impacted.

    January 17, 2013 at 7:39 pm |
    • niknak

      We observe the past all the time.
      Everytime you look into the night sky, you are looking at the past.

      Even for a fundie you are dumb.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:41 pm |
    • Free Nuts

      Free nuts all around today

      January 17, 2013 at 7:46 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @niknak : Everytime you look into the night sky, you are looking at the past.

      SIGH.... Yes, we are looking at the past, but we don't know how far into the past. Second, [last time I checked] we don't look at earthly events by looking at the night sky.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:49 pm |
    • End Religion

      L4H: there is no "present." Even if some one is standing right in front of you and they give you the finger, you're seeing an event that happened in the past. Fortunately light travels fast enough it seems instantaneous, otherwise I couldn't shoot aliens while playing Halo. Some stars you see in the sky tonight may already be dead – the light you see could be billions of years old. You are looking into the past.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:55 pm |
    • End Religion

      Sorry l4h, our posts crossed paths.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:56 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @End Religion :
      Live4Him "Yes, we are looking at the past"
      End Religion : 'L4H: there is no "present."'

      I've acknowledged that point. So, what's your point?

      January 17, 2013 at 7:58 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @End Religion : Sorry l4h, our posts crossed paths.

      No problem.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:00 pm |
    • End Religion

      If we have a "standard candle" we can measure distance and therefore time.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_distance_ladder

      Measuring time on earth is often dependent on the decay rate of certain elements. Radiometric dating, yadda.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

      January 17, 2013 at 8:02 pm |
    • Gir

      Through the Law of Uniformity, we can correctly posit that the same laws shaping the earth today are those that were in effect in the past. Then, models based on the conditions that would have been around then based on our knowledge of physics, geothermics and chemistry are proposed, and hypotheses can be tested.

      Of course, creationists would know nothing of this, because they have been unable to produce ANY conditions or viable hypotheses to test their beliefs. All they do is quote-mine, file frivolous "intelligent design" lawsuits, and spout lies and fallacies everywhere.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:07 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @Gir : Through the Law of Uniformity, we can correctly posit that the same laws shaping the earth today are those that were in effect in the past.

      Wrong. Lets restate your posit.

      1) Given that the past is sufficiently long enough, and
      2) Given that there have been no "continuum shifts"
      3) Given the law of uniformity,
      Therefore, "we can correctly posit that the same laws shaping the earth today are those that were in effect in the past."

      You've provided no evidence for either of your first two premises. Since there is evidence contrary to both premises (i.e. Biblical 6000 years, dino soft tissue, etc.), your posit has been falsified.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:12 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @End Religion : If we have a "standard candle" we can measure distance and therefore time. ... decay rate

      Again, conjecture. Your unstated first principle is the presumption that no daughter element existed at the beginning of the decay. Goggle “Excess Argon" for more information.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:19 pm |
    • Saraswati

      @Live4Him,
      No, he's saying the Law of Uniformity (premise 3) IS the conclusion...look it up.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:19 pm |
    • Saraswati

      @Live4Him, To clarify, that's the definition of the law of uniformity...not something derived.

      January 17, 2013 at 8:20 pm |
    • Gir

      The assumption being that the 6000 year old age of the earth is valid?! I'll need a few minutes to laugh that one out of my system.

      .................................................................................................................................................................

      Good lord!

      January 17, 2013 at 8:50 pm |
    • Gir

      The "Excess Argon" nonsense is just that: nonsense. Another example of creationists quote-mining legitimate scientists instead of doing some SCIENCE themselves.

      http://noanswersingenesis.org.au/mt_st_helens_dacite_kh.htm
      http://www.oldearth.org/blind.htm

      How are we supposed to have a debate here when one side prefers to lie and stay out of touch with new developments in the field? I mean, a 6000 year old earth? REALLY? And how dare you give us links to pseudoscientific filth like ICR? ( Pigliucci, Massimo (2002). Denying Evolution: Creationism, Scientism, and the Nature of Science, James Stambaugh. "Hugh Ross, ICR, and Facts of Science". )

      January 17, 2013 at 9:02 pm |
    • Live4Him

      That's right, the earth is 6000 years old, the light from other stars that are billions of light years away was obviously placed in transit by God or maybe the speed of light isn't really constant. The evidence of dinosaurs was obviously placed there by Satan after he tricked Eve. The sediments, the DNA evidence, vestigial organs even I still carry were all obviously faked by Satan to mislead because if the bible says it, then it's true and there is nothing anyone can say to change my mind, neener neener nanny nanny boo boo.

      January 17, 2013 at 9:39 pm |
    • End Religion

      Excuse me while I cut to the chase on this: every young earth argument debunked years ago.
      http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc

      January 17, 2013 at 10:50 pm |
  14. Live4Him

    @hawaiiguest : Says the one who was challenged on his list earlier in the week and didn't even respond to logical challenges to it.

    Really? Then repost it – if it was that creditable. Otherwise, its just hot air.

    January 17, 2013 at 7:37 pm |
    • It is Called

      Principles of Evolution, Ecology and Behavior (EEB 122)

      Geology and climate have shaped the development of life tremendously. This has occurred in the form of processes such as the oxygenation of the atmosphere, mass extinctions, tectonic drift, and disasters such as floods and volcanic eruptions. Life, particularly bacteria, has also been able to impact the geological makeup of the planet through metabolic processes.

      00:00 – Chapter 1. Introduction
      02:16 – Chapter 2. The Oxygenation of the Atmosphere
      09:08 – Chapter 3. Evidence of Climate Change
      17:36 – Chapter 4. Geological Impact on Life
      29:37 – Chapter 5. Mass Extinctions
      42:19 – Chapter 6. Earthquakes, Eruptions, and Floods
      46:38 – Chapter 7. Conclusion

      Complete course materials are available at the Open Yale Courses website: http://open.yale.edu/courses

      This course was recorded in Spring 2009.
      Category

      Education not hot air.
      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6Dl_Vs-ZkY&w=640&h=390]

      January 17, 2013 at 7:43 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      Oh I've started below, but I'm not going to post a refutation of all 4 points at once since I don't know if your going to repond or not.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:45 pm |
  15. Grimble Grumble the gnome

    Charles Darwin was a pedophile and was into incest

    January 17, 2013 at 7:21 pm |
    • screaming christard finder123

      Because he married his cousin in a time when that was acceptable, perhaps?

      January 17, 2013 at 7:27 pm |
    • screaming christard finder123

      Now let's take a look at Lot.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:28 pm |
    • Gir

      God allegedly impregnated Mary ( a girl of 12-14 years at the time) so she could give birth to himself.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:47 pm |
    • sam stone

      and the christian god knocked up a 13 year old

      January 18, 2013 at 5:23 am |
  16. Live4Him

    @niknak : Why does it bother you fundies so much that we don't believe in your god?

    Why do you think it does? Are you so special that your beliefs override ours? Our complaints are that you want to mock, without logically pointing out any flaws in our beliefs. But, that is too challenging for those without the facts.

    January 17, 2013 at 7:19 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      Says the one who was challenged on his list earlier in the week and didn't even respond to logical challenges to it.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:23 pm |
    • Free Nuts

      Free nuts all around today

      January 17, 2013 at 7:26 pm |
    • it is Called

      @l4h
      Peace

      Principles of Evolution, Ecology and Behavior (EEB 122)

      Geology and climate have shaped the development of life tremendously. This has occurred in the form of processes such as the oxygenation of the atmosphere, mass extinctions, tectonic drift, and disasters such as floods and volcanic eruptions. Life, particularly bacteria, has also been able to impact the geological makeup of the planet through metabolic processes.

      00:00 – Chapter 1. Introduction
      02:16 – Chapter 2. The Oxygenation of the Atmosphere
      09:08 – Chapter 3. Evidence of Climate Change
      17:36 – Chapter 4. Geological Impact on Life
      29:37 – Chapter 5. Mass Extinctions
      42:19 – Chapter 6. Earthquakes, Eruptions, and Floods
      46:38 – Chapter 7. Conclusion

      Complete course materials are available at the Open Yale Courses website: http://open.yale.edu/courses

      This course was recorded in Spring 2009.
      Category
      Education

      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6Dl_Vs-ZkY&w=640&h=390]

      January 17, 2013 at 7:31 pm |
    • niknak

      I posted that in response to the usual fundie hate us atheists get because we don't go along with the hoax.
      It seems you fundies have issues with people who won't believe is all.

      And I know why too.
      When one believes something that cannot be proven, they have one of two choices....
      Admit they have no evidence and it is just conjecture.
      Or force everyone else to believe as you do thus making it "true."

      You fundies did that for eons by forcing or killing those that did not want to play along.
      But you can't do that anymore as we have laws and live in a secular nation.
      Your fundie homies in the middle east are still able to kill anyone who does not go along with the allah myth.
      And they get harems of woman too.

      You must be seething that they can still get away with all that.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:35 pm |
  17. niknak

    Come on out fundies!!!
    The atheists are all over your blog making fun of your imaginary friend!
    Annie, get your gun!
    Can't let those heathens make fun of the creator without some kind of retribution using your gun!
    And if not that, since this is cyberspace and your guns can't shoot thru the wires, at least quote us some babble verses and tell us how we are going to go to hell and how much you will relish god casting us down.

    Curb your god!!!!

    January 17, 2013 at 7:15 pm |
    • Live4Him

      ere are the premises that I base my conclusion upon for the Biblical God / Jesus.

      Is God Necessary?
      a) Given the lack of a natural explaination to create matter, energy and time,
      b) Given the lack of a natural explaination to create life,
      Therefore, this implies some supernatural being (i.e. God) is necessary, but not necessariuly the Biblical God.

      Which God Did It?
      a) Given the Biblical account that begins with the creation of matter, energy and time,
      b) Given no other religions (other than the Abrahamic branches) begins with the creation of matter, energy and time,
      Therefore, this implies that only the Abrahamic religions are worthy of consideration.

      Did the Judism God Do It?
      a) Given accurate transmission of the Jewish Bible,
      b) Given the fulfillment of foretold specific prophecies (incl: Eze 37) in the Jewish Bible
      Therefore, the God of the Jews is a viable answer contender.

      Did the Islamic God Do It?
      a) Given inaccurate transmission of the Koran Bible,
      b) Given the factual inaccuracies (i.e. members of the Trinity)
      c) Given the lack of specific prophecies in the Koran
      Therefore, the God of the Muslims is not a viable contender.

      Did the Christian God Do It?
      a) Given accurate transmission of the Christian Bible (i.e. Jewish / OT and NT),
      b) Given the fulfillment of foretold specific prophecies (incl: Eze 37, Rev 13) in the Christian Bible
      Therefore, the God of the Christian is a viable contender for the answer to how we got here. Since it includes the Jewish beliefs as well, it is the better answer.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:16 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      Still posting this shit? Why post it if you aren't willing to defend it when challenged? Oh that's right, self-righteousness, and the superiority complex. Got it.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:20 pm |
    • niknak

      Pretty weak, even by your low standards die4him.

      What you are saying is that if there is not an explanation for something, then it must be god.
      So, when a child is born with cancer, that must be god's work, right?

      And what happens when something that previously had no explaination but now does have one?
      You religious types back in the day used lightening, and solar ecclipses and earthquates as your "proof" of god.
      We now know god has nothing to do with those natural events. Does that mean god does not exist now?

      Keep up that bad work, and keep wasting your time with your fairy tale.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:23 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @hawaiiguest : Why post it if you aren't willing to defend it when challenged?

      Mockery and logically disputing a posit is two different things, even if you consider them both as "challenges".

      January 17, 2013 at 7:24 pm |
    • niknak

      Don't know what you are reading, but every religion that has ever existed has a creation story.
      In fact, your religion ripped off it's creation story from other older religions that existed in that region.
      Plus, most other religions have much more colorful creation stories then whats in your creepy book.

      Christianity is not only wrong, it is mindnumbingly boring.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:29 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @niknak : What you are saying is that if there is not an explanation for something, then it must be god.

      You've obviously have trouble following the facts to a logical conclusion, so let me spell it out for you.

      1) Matter, energy and time exists.
      2) There are two possible reasons for their existence: Natural and Supernatural.
      3) There isn't any evidence for a natural cause – and in fact current evidence suggests otherwise
      4) There is evidence for a supernatural cause – The Bible starts off creation with the creation of these three elements.
      Therefore, "it must be god".

      January 17, 2013 at 7:32 pm |
    • psych ward staff

      I would stick around and "play" with Live4Him more, but I'm allergic to her scented tissue.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:33 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @niknak : Don't know what you are reading, but every religion that has ever existed has a creation story.

      Sure, even the naturalist have a creation story – The Big Bang. However, only ONE begins with the creation of matter, energy and time.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:34 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @niknak : Christianity is not only wrong, it is mindnumbingly boring.

      So, why do you feel driven to post on articles that are dedicated to Christianity?

      January 17, 2013 at 7:35 pm |
    • lying christard spotter123

      "@niknak : What you are saying is that if there is not an explanation for something, then it must be god."

      niknak didn't say that. liar.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:35 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      Your entire list begins with an Argument from Ignorance. The lack of a naturalistic explanation that you accept (We have no evidence that matter and energy didn't exist at some point. And time would depend on which definition of time you're using. We have also shown within a lab that the building blocks of life, amino acids, can arise through purely naturalistic means.) means absolutely nothing for your assertion of "therefore god".

      This is standard apologetics, and built on a fallacy.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:38 pm |
    • niknak

      Sure, even the naturalist have a creation story – The Big Bang. However, only ONE begins with the creation of matter, energy and time

      Sigh........

      I am glad we have actual scientists who figure things out and not you die4him.
      Cause if it was only up to you, we might still be living in caves.

      But go ahead and enjoy all the comfort and security that scientific discovery has provided you with to make your life easier.
      I am sure god would have gotten around to it eventually.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:39 pm |
    • Live4Him

      @hawaiigues : Your entire list begins with an Argument from Ignorance.

      You really don't understand the fallacies yet, do you. Oaky, lets take this from the site that it often quoted from on this forum.

      QUOTE:
      If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence.
      ENDQUOTE

      Do we have other reasons for accepting it? Yes – The Bible starts off with the creation of matter, energy and time. This evidence cannot be ignored to reach an apriori conclusion – if you want to be objective about it. Therefore, the Argument from Ignorance does not apply in this situation.

      What's your next challenge?

      January 17, 2013 at 7:45 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Live

      That's just ridiculous. You cannot take the bible as an authority without actually establishing credibility. You are also assuming creation to prove creation. That's just circular reasoning.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:48 pm |
    • Gir

      "Lack of a natural explanation for matter, energy, and time."

      Just because you shut your eyes to the evidence does not mean it doesn't exist.

      Even babies develop object permanence at some point. Yet religionists lack it.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:50 pm |
    • Gir

      How many religions have you researched, Live4him? How do you know the Fulani ethnic group of West Africa or the Maoris of New Zealand don't posit their own supernatural explanation of "matter, energy and time?"

      And this Natural explanation vs Supernatural explanation nonsense is an example of a False Dilemma. What is your basis for claiming that a SUPERNATURAL, untestable mumbo-jumbo explanation is a viable, and indeed, the ONLY alternative to a NATURAL explanation for a NATURAL universe?

      January 17, 2013 at 7:58 pm |
    • WASP

      @him: physics explains energy, that one you learn in grade school.
      "energy can not be created nor destoryed"
      thus all the energy in the universe now, whether in solid form as matter , pure form as plasma or in it's original form just energy; it has always been the same and will remain so forever.

      no god needed to create/ run the universe.

      January 18, 2013 at 6:26 am |
    • ???????

      ???????

      Reviewing the comments noticed someting interesting. Science PROVED it does not work the way the bible said it does.

      All the facts are here on this tread. Peer reviewed !!!

      http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/17/belief-blogs-morning-speed-read-for-thursday-january-17-2013/#comments

      January 18, 2013 at 6:45 am |
  18. Grimble Grumble the gnome

    All u liberal, Communist, murderers, idiot, stupid atheists beleive in a philosophy that was based on racism. U stupid tards!

    January 17, 2013 at 7:12 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      Someone get me a jar for this poe. I only need one more turn in.

      January 17, 2013 at 7:16 pm |
    • niknak

      Dude, is that all you gotz?
      Even the creepy hindu guy has more original material and is more intersting to read then what you are posting.
      Seriously, you are starting to bore us, which is even worse then believing in fairy tales.
      God does not like boring people, get it?

      January 17, 2013 at 7:26 pm |
  19. Sense0326

    Also Richard Dawkins is a very entertaining and informative writer regardless of your beliefs.

    January 17, 2013 at 6:46 pm |
    • niknak

      I have only read snippits of his work, and agree that he writes well and is informative.
      Funny thing is that the fundies think we atheists somehow "worship" people like Dawkins and other prominent atheists and get some sort of marching orders from them about how and what to believe.
      I was an atheists long before those guys were even on the radar screen.
      And I had not heard of Dawkins or the others until just recently.
      I guess like most non believers, we don't need some authority figure to tell us how and what to believe.
      Unlike a fundie, who has to have someone be their sheperd and lead them like a herd animal.

      January 17, 2013 at 6:53 pm |
  20. Grimble Grumble the gnome

    All you stupid idiots read Richard Dawkins. Atheists are drunks, liberals, pot smoking tree Huggers, gay, pro choice, evolution is a philosophy that has racist origins, you people lie, cheat, steal, immoral, IDIOTS

    January 17, 2013 at 6:11 pm |
    • Akira

      Congratulations!
      You have won the award for "mose baseless generalization ever,
      Feel good about your prejudice?
      Pat yourself on the back, but please don't injure yourself while doing so...

      January 17, 2013 at 6:17 pm |
    • Sense0326

      you say pot smoking tree hugger like I should be insulted?

      January 17, 2013 at 6:44 pm |
    • niknak

      Why does it bother you fundies so much that we don't believe in your god?
      You know, we could care less that you don't believe in evolution.
      In fact, we don't care that you believe in god.
      The only thing we care about is you pushing your god and your stone age morals on us.

      I am so happy I don't have to live around someone like you.

      January 17, 2013 at 6:48 pm |
    • Albert Camus

      @niknak- Why does it bother you fundies so much that there are those that believe in a god?

      January 17, 2013 at 8:27 pm |
    • Sense0326

      @albert
      Your belief in god doesn't really bother me as by itself it's pretty much harmless (albeit irrational). However the damage that organized religion can (and has) done does bother me and so does most religious people's determination to indoctrinate children who are too young to say no.

      January 18, 2013 at 10:35 am |
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.