Atheist kids these days...

[naz]

cyrano: I didn't realize you'd gotten hitched. Congrats, dude.

/threadjack

OT: I agree with you about Hinduism. It's really not so much a monolithic religion as a set of related belief systems and cultural mores, some which are rooted in mythology and some not. As such, there are even atheistic branches of Hinduism (Naastik Hinduism), the most well-known of which is the Charvaka philosophical system. And Jainism, a hugely popular religion in India, is also technically atheistic.

eta: My point being (and cyrano's point, obviously) is that even in a country that is arguably one of the most religious in the world, there is a tolerance for atheism. Or any -ism, really.

[Sci-2]

And Jainism, a hugely popular religion in India, is also technically atheistic.

I thought the point of Jainism (and some strains of Buddhism) was not that the gods weren't real, but that they were irrelevant to enlightenment?

[naz]

That's the point of Buddhism, for sure. The Buddha did not address a creator or supreme being in his teachings at all. Neither for nor against. For Jainism, the point is more that the cosmology is not dependent on a supreme creator (the universe always existed and always will exist) but allows that humans may, through enlightenment, become god-like. Maybe I should clarify that Jainism is atheistic in terms of creation, but polytheistic in terms of souls and "divine" beings (who are essentially enlightened humans).

[TerraPrime]

I know, Cyr, congrats! :)

[Every]

I'm cynical towards human nature. I have some nihilistic views when it comes to the place of humans in the grand scheme of things. I don't believe in any supernatural stuff whatsoever and I can't be bothered about vehemently denying this, hence apathetic.

I win a lot at scrabble.

Not by making up words, you don't! That's what we call cheating :P

[Francis Buck]

That's the point of Buddhism, for sure. The Buddha did not address a creator or supreme being in his teachings at all. Neither for nor against. For Jainism, the point is more that the cosmology is not dependent on a supreme creator (the universe always existed and always will exist) but allows that humans may, through enlightenment, become god-like. Maybe I should clarify that Jainism is atheistic in terms of creation, but polytheistic in terms of souls and "divine" beings (who are essentially enlightened humans).

That's interesting, I never knew that. A fantasy based on a universe like that would be pretty cool.

[Castel]

You really should back up a step. 99% of the people in this thread are having very open and honest discussion about this topic. You want to go there with an O'Reilly factor attack, creating sides that need to fight. I think you missed my point about not worrying about it.

If you think that going "Bill O'Reilly" shuts down discussion what do you think accusing someone of going "O'Reilly" and being confrontational does? You haven't even seen me when I'm confrontational. That's the post I edited down three times and sanded into a question for you to answer in order to avoid this very problem.

And let it be noted that you never answered the question, you just skipped past it with some criticism of my tone.

I agree that ID needs to be fought as it's not equivalent to science and shouldn't be taught that way. But it's perfectly fine taught as a book (the bible that is) in an AP English class. Instead of ID, religious people should get a clue and realize this is an atheist wedge issue. The majority of believers will want this in public schooling, while enough moderate (and I argue rational) atheists like myself will agree with its teaching as an elective or AP course, not just in college where it already exists, but in high schools and below.

Well, why would you fight though? Isn't being an atheist about relaxing and not having to worry about it?

Urban legend, although the story did cause a lot of people to declare that as their religion on the 2001 census (IIRC, it revealed Britain had more Jedi than Jews).

Very unfortunate. I was hoping to find a refuge in Britain, somewhere to hide from the oppression of the Sith but now...I guess it's Tatooine for me. They'd have probably extradited me anyway.

[Sci-2]

Maybe I should clarify that Jainism is atheistic in terms of creation, but polytheistic in terms of souls and "divine" beings (who are essentially enlightened humans).

Ah, gotcha.

I recall Mahavira being handed a pure white robe by the storm god Indra upon ascended [ascending] to heaven, which is why I asked.

[Nacht en Ontij]

Not by making up words, you don't! That's what we call cheating :P

I wasn't talking about made up words. I'm the kind of pedantic, snobbish person who's not afraid to use the word triskaidekaphobia if I have to. :)

[Merentha]

I wasn't talking about made up words. I'm the kind of pedantic, snobbish person who's not afraid to use the word triskaidekaphobia if I have to. :)

Lies, that word is impossible to make on a scrabble board. Are you adding letters? :P

[Nacht en Ontij]

Lies, that word is impossible to make on a scrabble board. Are you adding letters? :P

I have a custom-made scrabble board with a 150 x 150 grid. :D

[Honey Badger]

You haven't even seen me when I'm confrontational.

Oh God. I mean, really? Fuck me ... :rolleyes:

[Weeping Sore]

A good, clean, atheist upbringing and a wellspring of masculine prowess made Vlad the man he is today.

[Honey Badger]

Urban legend, although the story did cause a lot of people to declare that as their religion on the 2001 census (IIRC, it revealed Britain had more Jedi than Jews).

Seems like wagging the dog here. I did remember reading a BBC article about it. Enough people penciled it in for "other," which I had assumed was an online prank where brits were curious whether writing it in works.

[UVA]

Someone up thread asked about what's so scary about oblivion, the void, nothingness. It's funny because my husband and I were arguing about this very thing last week irt to how to approach this issue with our three children.

Briefly, I was raised by parents alienated from the Catholic church. It was almost too much, for example my dad attended all-Catholic institutions through law school. I think they became desensitized to organized religion, and probably a bit lazy too. I was baptized (late) because my mother had a moment of crisis about my soul but never forced the issue thereafter. Growing up I sort of thought of God like Santa Clause, a myth, a cool story. I took it for granted. Then things changed when I was ten and my mother was diagnosed with advanced breast cancer (she was 41). She lived nineteen months following her diagnosis and during those nineteen months God was like Santa where I prayed, foolishly asking God-whatever-higher-power that I would give my life, limbs in exchange for her health.

Well, Christmas never came and over the years I spent a lot of time searching (a.b. and pursed an ma/phd in philosophy before I took what I thought was a more practical path to law school). Yes, I've read Kierkegaard and other existentialist Christians like Jaspers. Most of my heroes (Kant, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger) were also 'church folks' who largely struggled with the idea of God. But despite all of this, it has never, ever rang true to me. I don't not believe in any god because my mother died. A belief in a supra-reality is not possible for me. In fact, I can't recall the author, but I remember reading years ago about the psychological basis of faith and that some minds aren't wired in that way. I fall squarely in that camp and I'm OK with that.

Problem is, I married into a very Christian family. My husband has no desire to go to church, or raise our children as Christians (I won't have it) but there's the in-laws, the cultural pressures living in the American South. I'll fake it, go along with a prayer at Thanksgiving meal or whatever. Fine. It's these larger issues that a conflict arises because my children (my oldest who turned ten today, and another daughter (age eight) and son (age five) who often ask me questions that generally deal with 'when bad things happen to good people'. This happened last week where I told my oldest daughter that I don't believe in God. After this incident, my husband raised the hypothetical that if one of our children was terminally ill, why wouldn't we perpetuate the lie that is life everlasting for their comfort. Honestly, I didn't know how to answer this and still don't.

Until recently I have largely hidden my atheist views from my children and from my husband's family. While we live in the Bible Belt, we also operate in a relatively secular milieu and among other things: we live in-town Atlanta which is far more diverse in all realms than the rest of Georgia, and the children have attended a private Montessori school since the age of three -- a program that is devoted to all kinds of diversity. So I feel ok about that. What I don't feel comfortable with is not educating my kids about non-belief and that they can affirm this life, be moral and hopeful beings without a belief in a supra-reality (be Christianity, Judaism, certain schools of Buddhism et. al.).

[TerraPrime]

This happened last week where I told my oldest daughter that I don't believe in God. After this incident, my husband raised the hypothetical that if one of our children was terminally ill, why wouldn't we perpetuate the lie that is life everlasting for their comfort. Honestly, I didn't know how to answer this and still don't.

They're your kids, so you know what's best for them.

But here's my take.

Yes, telling them that the people they love will wait for them in heaven so they can meet them again might indeed bring them comfort. But that's probably not the only thing that can comfort them. There are other forms of emotional comfort that we can provide to children that do not involve betraying your own core belief. I think, for instance, that they would like to know how *you* cope with it, since you and your husband are probably their best role models right now. I think if they later on find out that what you tell them is not what you yourselves believe it might be more problematic.

[Every]

I think that particular hypothetical changes things - if the child had a terminal illness they might not have a later in which to find out what their parents believed. Death is no longer an abstract in that situation, it's something which will or could overshadow that child's remaining life. In that situation I might agree with UVA's husband, that it might be kindest to give the child whatever comfort they can find in the idea of eternal life. If not, perhaps you could just tell them that you don't know what happens after death, but whatever it is, you're all going to be in it together one day.

[Exa Inova]

the movie "the invention of lying" adresses this point..in a way..

[SevenHells]

My mom tried to raise me Catholic. I got as far as my 1st communion and told her I wasn't having it. I have 2 kids that my MIL is desperately trying to turn into mini-christians and that really gets on my nerves. I can raise them myself, thank you very much.

[IheartTesla]

Yeah I got hitched. It was after the age of 35, but there were no bridges nearby.

Thanks guys :)