Support NeoGAF

[FieryBalrog]

Philosophical semantics. Atheism is a belief simply because you can't logically prove a negative. I can't prove that I'm not a chicken, or that you aren't all ducks. It doesn't mean that based on current evidence that I can't state that I'm not a chicken and you aren't ducks. By that rationale, every single thing is a belief as nothing is definitively provable. Cogito ergo sum, and even that's shaky.

You're working within a certain framework which is the wrong one to apply to the situation: the entity known as God by most sophisticated religions on the planet is not in the same epistemological category as, say, a unicorn, yet many atheists act as if it is.

Thus you can come out and say "unicorns don't exist as we don't have evidence for them", but when you're talking about God, the situation is not equivalent. To a theist, its the equivalent of claiming that the universe does not exist because there's no evidence for it. Its an error of category.

 

[Joel Was Right]

...how do they raise the child?

So my wife and I are generally kicking around the idea of kids in the future, and we discuss potential parenting methods and have a great time and casual debate about how to raise a child...until the issue of religion comes up.

My stance
I think that it's wrong to force a belief system on a kid that has no understanding of what they are being taught.

When I was raised as a Catholic, the education wasn't "this is what we believe, and this what others believe..." it was "this is right..." end of story. You send the kid to CCD classes and they learn about the Bible and Jesus and whatnot, all the while not being told "this is what some people believe", but "this is how it was and is...". It wasn't until the sacrament of confirmation that I was able to have an open and honest debate about religion and it's place in our own lives. At this point I was mature enough to be free-thinking and able to weigh everything I've learned against what makes sense to me.

I was able to reject religion from my life.

At this age I could have very well have decided that I wanted to keep religion in my life, but if I had, the odds of me choosing a different religion would be slim to none.

My argument is that if you force a kid into a belief system, you're not really giving them the choice to make their own decision for themselves. We're robbing them of that choice by pushing them into one belief system.

Her stance
If a child is never raised under a belief system, they will never truly understand how religion can play an important role in some people's lives, and will ultimately never choose religion because no child would willingly choose to wake up early and attend boring masses on the weekend. Not making a choice for them early in life is the same as teaching them that religion has no place in life.

Raising a child as a Catholic and exposing them to religion, they will have the benefit of understanding the religion very specifically. They will learn what it means to be religious. They will be exposed to a lot of other social activities through the church such as boy scouts or CYO sports leagues. They will have a stronger moral upbringing by being raised by good parents, but also having those morals reinforced by the church.

When the child is old enough to think for themselves, they can decided if religion is right for them or not. They'll be able to make an educated decision if religion is right for them or not (as I have done). Without being raised in a religion, it is very likely the child will never choose to enter one, as they won't have a strong understanding of what it can offer.

Potential solutions
I've proposed:

• She can take the kids to church, and I will stay at home. This sends a message to the children that there are those that follow religion and those that do not.

This to me is a great solution, as the child would start asking questions on their own. While I certainly wouldn't expect the child to grasp the subtle lesson I'm trying to teach them, creating this diversion in the household would at the very least expose to them that religion is not right or wrong.

Her problem with this is that it could make the kids think "Mommy is wrong" because they just don't want to wake up early and sit still for an hour or so every weekend.

She's proposed:

• Raise the child as a Catholic, and when they are of the proper age to make an informed decision on their own, allow them to stick with that religion, pursue other religions, or reject religion. The child will understand what it means to be religious, and can ultimately speak from experience if religion works for them or not.

This would mean I have to sit through mass myself and play along until they are of the proper age to start asking good questions.

The Question
Which of these makes more sense to you, or what would you propose as an alternative?

Serious thread if you could, please.

The wife's suggestion is the best solution. You should try to respect her faith and her wish to give her child the opportunity to be introduced into religion properly. As others have noted, this wouldn't contradict your principle of allowing the child to choose their faith when they mature and become more thoughtful.

 

[Srsly]

You're naive. When a kid is 2-5 years old you're indoctrinating them with a set of moral and ethical ideas. The kid isn't going to get into the metaphysics of it with you. You have this idea that you will simply sit back and gently "guide" a child to the path you consider correct, and that this is somehow qualitatively different (and superior!) from the behavior you are condemning (and not simply a variation thereof).

I will teach my kids impartial and logical reasoning skills they can apply anywhere, when they're ready. Before that, I will explain the possible consequences of their actions. Before that, I will try and prevent them from harming themselves or others. What I will not do is impose a belief system that is beyond reproach, which is what indoctrination is.

 

[Joel Was Right]

I wouldn't define religion as indoctrination by default

 

[Spirit of Jazz]

The wife's suggestion is the best solution.

Really? She all out says she has to indoctrinate them when they're young and doesn't offer any leeway to him. I'd say not forcing beliefs upon a child as though they were facts and letting them go to church when they're old enough to think for themselves is equally, if not more reasonable a suggestion than hers. His reasoning is far better middle-ground, it shows the child that religion is clearly a belief and not fact.

 

[Grug]

Despite atheism and theism being placed at opposite ends on the spectrum on GAF, atheism is in fact the neutral position.

Adopt it and let your child make their own decision when they are older.

 

[Atilac]

...how do they raise the child?

Her stance
If a child is never raised under a belief system, they will never truly understand how religion can play an important role in some people's lives

Get her to watch jesus camp. I personally believe it is unethical to force faith onto someone, its important to choose to have faith, to weigh the options and decide whole heartedly: otherwise you are a drone, and prone to misinterpreting or resenting religion.

 

[Srsly]

Despite atheism and theism being placed at opposite ends on the spectrum on GAF, atheism is in fact the neutral position.

Adopt it and let your child make their own decision when they are older.

Yep

 

[FieryBalrog]

I will teach my kids impartial and logical reasoning skills they can apply anywhere, when they're ready. Before that, I will explain the possible consequences of their actions. Before that, I will try and prevent them from harming themselves or others. What I will not do is impose a belief system that is beyond reproach, which is what indoctrination is.

Quite a few people, including theists, are trying to do just that, they simply disagree with you what harm/not harm is. Presumably, for example, you will teach your children- indoctrinate them, in fact- that thoughts that might mock or exclude people of certain protected groups are sinful thoughts. None of that is automatic or somehow presumed. In fact, its very heavily modified by our current social obsessions and does constitute a belief system. That's just one example, too, raising a child is very much a process of indoctrinating what YOU consider correct and righteous and indisputably logical. You will instill in them your moral code, including certain basic rules you consider beyond reproach.

 

[Mgoblue201]

I personally know a woman who converted from Catholicism to Judaism, a man who did the same, a former Jew who became a Lutheran, 3 born-again baptists (surprisingly pleasant people despite the stereotypes) and a bunch of "found religion later in life" people who took up different philosophies after being raised informally secularly within some form of Christianity or Judaism. All the Muslims I know are pretty static though, although I've heard of many who converted to Islam, mostly writers or other popular figures who people bother paying attention to. Many people willfully choose religion. You could make the argument that they were programmed to be predisposed to religion, but then why would all of us atheists be here, when we should have been conditioned to believe in some form of god?

I know all about changing religions. You're talking to a former Christian. Unfortunately, I think that these tend to be precipitated by certain crises rather than accompanied by total rationality, but none of that is necessarily important. My intent was to show the problems with her reasoning: that attempting to raise a child as "religiously neutral" will discourage religion, but inculcating religion somehow won't discourage nonbelief, if she truly cared about the choice of the child. I didn't say anything about programming. I said that beliefs gain roots within one's mind. They are difficult to weed out but not impossible. Obviously, I did not literally mean that there is no such thing as religious motility. I was just attempting to show the absurdity of indoctrination.

 

[Jayge]

I will teach my kids impartial and logical reasoning skills they can apply anywhere, when they're ready. Before that, I will explain the possible consequences of their actions. Before that, I will try and prevent them from harming themselves or others. What I will not do is impose a belief system that is beyond reproach, which is what indoctrination is.

Do you believe impartial and logical reasoning to be beyond reproach? Or are you under the belief that you're not actually imparting a belief system on them by doing that? Kids are wired to imitate their parent's behaviors, or at least to learn from them. Religious or not, they're going to form a system of beliefs based on what they observe from you and the environment around them. It's part of how they form their consciousnesses. It's unavoidable. You will not be able to circumvent that. Just being around them while they grow up will cause that to happen.

 

[LCGeek]

Despite atheism and theism being placed at opposite ends on the spectrum on GAF, atheism is in fact the neutral position.

I don't think most deny it's a neutral position philosophically. What most go after is those taking such a position and attacking others form it. Once you cross that line you're no longer neutral.

 

[Keylime]

Get her to watch jesus camp.

I've actually never seen this. Any good or propaganda piece?

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I like that her viewpoint is that if the kids don't go while they're kids, they can't be brainwashed.

I also agree that if she's not willing to put these kids in a position to learn about and be involved in every major religion rather than only the one she's a part of, she's just full of it. It wouldn't be about teaching and respecting religion as much as it would just be a trap.

 

[FieryBalrog]

Both atheism and theism require philosophical assumptions. The idea that atheism is a "neutral" position is not true.

 

[Joel Was Right]

Really? She all out says she has to indoctrinate them when they're young and doesn't offer any leeway to him. I'd say not forcing beliefs upon a child as though they were facts and letting them go to church when they're old enough to think for themselves is equally, if not more reasonable a suggestion than hers. His reasoning is far better middle-ground, it shows the child that religion is clearly a belief and not fact.

I think people are confusing the terminology here. The method of teaching religion uncritically is certainly tantamount to what you would describe as indoctrination however you are certainly allowed, and encouraged even, to ask questions and discuss the subject at hand. It's just that on occasion when people use this term of indoctrination in this context it suggests children are being programmed without any basis or foundation for these 'truths'. That's not true. Through such discussions they can come to their own conclusion on whether or not they actually agree with scripture and from personal experience these teachers realise the more robust these discussions and questions are, the better the children will understand. I just disagree in this suggestion that these religious institutions are trying to negate the intellectual development

I don't think most deny it's a neutral position philosophically. What most go after is those taking such a position and attacking others form it. Once you cross that line you're no longer neutral.

Wonderfully put. This is why some, including me, have described some of atheist opinions here on GAF as almost fanatical in their criticism of the opposite

 

[Jayge]

I've actually never seen this. Any good or propaganda piece?

It's the originator of this:

In it, you see fanatics enticing children to pray to a picture of George W. Bush and shed mass tears for all of America's slaughtered unborn fetuses (if I remember correctly) among other things.

 

[jamesinclair]

Some of these people talking about "indoctrinating" your kid etc are just crazy.

Y'all are thinking of crazy evangelicals.

Your wife sounds like the average catholic. She probably doesn't follow lent, couldn't quote a scripture and eats meat on friday.

Right? How many crucibles are around the house? Does she wear a head scarf in church?

So even if she "forces" her beleifs onto the kid....what's the big deal?

While some of the atheists here may hate religion, it's not all bad. Religion was pretty much created so people would follow social norms. Don't kill. Don't cheat. Don't lie. All good lessons to be learnt.

Can the kid learn them without religion? Absolutely. But why go out of your way to find a new way to teach the kid how to be moral and responsible. Let the wife take the kid to church, and you can read him some non-religious fairy tales.

And also, if you want your kid to appreciate LOST at it's fullest, then the wife teaching him catholisism is a good thing. You can help by teaching him egyptian mythology. Our society is based on the bible, and knowing your josephs from your jacobs and ricardus's makes appreciating western culture easier.

 

[timetokill]

If you're agnostic theist, I think this shouldn't be as hard as you're making it out to be. At the very least, you don't believe that religious people are morons for believing in God, which apparently most of atheist-GAF does (and yet they love the president! How?? )


Here's what you do:

- Go to Church. Not because you believe it's important to God, but because you believe it's important to support each other as a family. You're conveying that because it's important to your wife, and your child's mother, that you are willing to sacrifice a couple of hours a week. And it's also important to you because your child will be being told things which you will want to discuss with them later. You are going because you are invested in your child's development.

- At the same time, do not hold back on your feelings that you're not sure there is a God, but that there may be one -- and if he does exist, you don't believe he's actively involved in a person's life. Emphasize that you don't believe your wife is wrong, but that you personally are not convinced there is a God. Be sure to explain that you feel religion is a personal thing. Also, I would emphasize the positive aspects of religion -- acceptance, the drive to be a good person -- and point out your affinity with those aspects (I'm assuming you can identify with some of the positive teachings of religion).


Personally I was raised in a Catholic household and yet my family has been very accepting and supportive of me, including when I explored some other religions (Buddhism, for example). At the same time, while I can probably be best described (right now) as something of a mild deist perhaps... I still go to church with my family on days like Easter because I support them as well.


On the other hand, religion could end up being a very positive influence on your child. If you can say now that you are happy with your child being whatever they want to be, you need to consider whether that included being a priest for a religion you don't necessarily believe in. If you can be happy with them doing that, then there is no reason to try and cut out religion entirely. Your child's upbringing will rely far more on their family environment. Your voice will always ring louder than that of their priest.

 

[Atilac]

I've actually never seen this. Any good or propaganda piece?

I'm Christian, I'm a Penecostal; the sect being shown in the movie. I was fucking terrified by that movie. This movie is the origin of some pretty remarkable gifs. Do yourself a favor, show your wife this movie.

 

[Keylime]

It's the originator of this:

Oh I'm well aware that Raptor Jesus comes from this movie.

...I'm 10 minutes into this movie and I can already tell this movie is going to be an atheist's nightmare. Holy shit this is more of a horror film than a documentary :lol

 

[Srsly]

Both atheism and theism require philosophical assumptions. The idea that atheism is a "neutral" position is not true.

A = not. Theism = belief in God. Atheism = the lack of belief in the existence of a God. The lack of a belief in the existence of a God doesn't necessarily mean you preclude the possibility of his existence. Further, someone can be an atheist simply by virtue of never considering religion in the first place, one way or the other.

 

[jjasper]

Oh I'm well aware that Raptor Jesus comes from this movie.

...I'm 10 minutes into this movie and I can already tell this movie is going to be an atheist's nightmare. Holy shit this is more of a horror film than a documentary :lol

Fuck that movie is a horror movie to everyone not just atheist's.

 

[SundaySounds]

Just coming into this thread:

At first glance your proposal sounds perfect, giving the child the choice of going to church or not, and showing them that religion is not the only option. but I think that what you'be got laid out so far is too harsh a contrast. I believe that doing that would create too large of a rift between you, your wife, and your children.

But then again, you can't be expected to go to church... Does her proposal involve you attending mass? Obviously you would attend religious ceremonies like their first communion and what-not.

I really don't know what I would do if I married a Christian woman. You've got yourself in quite a pickle.

 

[Jamesfrom818]

Both atheism and theism require philosophical assumptions. The idea that atheism is a "neutral" position is not true.

I haven't gotten around to reading the entirety of this thread but has someone actually suggested this? Agnostic is neutral.

 

[Pandaman]

I haven't gotten around to reading the entirety of this thread but has someone actually suggested this? Agnostic is neutral.

agnostics are atheists.[usually, there are some who are theists]

 

[Count Dookkake]

Both atheism and theism require philosophical assumptions. The idea that atheism is a "neutral" position is not true.

No.

All babies are atheists.

 

[Jamesfrom818]

agnostics are atheists.[usually, there are some who are theists]

Agnostics aren't sure one way or another. Atheists are sure there is no god. Big difference.

 

[jjasper]

agnostics are atheists.[usually, there are some who are theists]

Really? I don't know why but I have always though agnostics were theists but didn't agree with/like any of current religious systems.

 

[Srsly]

Anti-theism is the categorical rejection of the possibility that God exists, not atheism.

 

[SundaySounds]

Agnostics aren't sure one way or another. Atheists are sure there is no god. Big difference.

QFT

Atheism is just as bad as theism, IMO. Because they both have that certainty that just seems ignorant, to me.

 

[Count Dookkake]

Agnostics aren't sure one way or another. Atheists are sure there is no god given the current lack of evidence. Big difference.

fixed for accuracy.

 

[Jamesfrom818]

fixed for accuracy.

Fair enough.

 

[SundaySounds]

Anti-theism is the categorical rejection of the possibility that God exists, not atheism.

a⋅the⋅ism  [ey-thee-iz-uhm]
–noun
1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Antitheist - A disbeliever in the existence of God.

.

 

[Arthrus]

The nice thing about church is that it is not the only aspect of a child's life that involves faith. Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, and other figures that a child eventually realizes are fictional (telling them straight up isn't as good, imo) encourage children to double-check their faith in other things. It can inspire religious doubt, but it won't necessarily destroy their faith.

I'm not sure what the best solution to your problem would be, but whatever you do, please make sure they understand that the Bible should not be regarded as the word of God. If your wife believes it is more than a collection of guidelines to Christianity written by some people a long time ago...well she and I would be in strong disagreement. The reason why I mention this is because yesterday one of my friends told me "apparently the New Testament is the most historically accurate text in existence." I didn't challenge him, but I was so amazed that I asked him to repeat what he said for clarification. Turns out he believes that the New Testament is a perfect book of truths because that's what he learned in church.

 

[Karakand]

You can't join the Cub/Girl Scouts if you're atheist?

You have to swear an oath to god and country, so yes.

 

[Jayge]

QFT

Atheism is just as bad as theism, IMO. Because they both have that certainty that just seems ignorant, to me.

I'm atheist and I have no certainty. I don't pretend to know anything about the existence of anything. I just don't think there's a god. I also don't pretend that my reasoning is any better than any religion's, this is just what I choose. Most atheists I've met who weren't also bitter jaded assholes who hate humanity and do nothing but grumble about it all day seem to be the same, generally.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Oh I'm well aware that Raptor Jesus comes from this movie.

...I'm 10 minutes into this movie and I can already tell this movie is going to be an atheist's nightmare. Holy shit this is more of a horror film than a documentary :lol

I love religious/atheist documentaries but the trailer for this movie wasn't interesting at all. Having seen 10 minutes of it, will you watch the rest of it?

 

[345triangle]

my dad's catholic, my mum's atheist; dad took me to church until i was old enough to legitimately say no. result: i'm an agnostic with a healthy respect and understanding of religion, without having been brainwashed or anything. i think they did an okay job really!

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Both atheism and theism require philosophical assumptions. The idea that atheism is a "neutral" position is not true.

Atheism is the natural state of man.

Edit: Also, atheism is not a belief that there is no God. It is the absence of belief in God. Big difference.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

QFT

Atheism is just as bad as theism, IMO. Because they both have that certainty that just seems ignorant, to me.

It's not ignorant to say that there's no such thing as rainbow colored grass. I've never seen it, and no one has ever proven it exists, so I've formed a logical viewpoint on its existence.

 

[SundaySounds]

I'm atheist and I have no certainty. I don't pretend to know anything about the existence of anything. I just don't think there's a god. I also don't pretend that my reasoning is any better than any religion's, this is just what I choose. Most atheists I've met who weren't also bitter jaded assholes who hate humanity and do nothing but grumble about it all day seem to be the same, generally.

I'm not trying to tell you what you believe in, but what you describe sounds more like agnosticism than atheism

ag⋅nos⋅tic  [ag-nos-tik]
–noun
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.

When people say they're atheists, that kinds carries the connotation that you believe that you know there is no god. Just as theists know there is a god.

 

[Keylime]

I love religious/atheist documentaries but the trailer for this movie wasn't interesting at all. Having seen 10 minutes of it, will you watch the rest of it?

Horror movie type stuff, but I'm interested if there's a reasonable conclusion or message from this movie.

Right now it looks like they are just going to jump from one extreme christian family to the next, showing how insanely devout they are and how loopy they sound.

Hoping that this is more than just a shock-film and it goes somewhere.

I'll watch it to the end for no other reason than I'm bored and my wife isn't getting home for another couple hours. :lol

When people say they're atheists, that kinds carries the connotation that you believe that you know there is no god. Just as theists know there is a god.

I identify myself as an Agnostic Theist, but no one knows what the fuck I'm talking about so I just say Agnostic to people that are religious and atheist to people who aren't :lol

 

[Jayge]

I'm not trying to tell you what you believe in, but what you describe sounds more like agnostics than atheists.



When people say they're atheists, that kinds carries the connotation that you believe that you know there is no god. Just as theists know there is a god.

Not really. I believe that there is no god; it's just that I also think that there's no way of proving me right, that's all.

 

[SundaySounds]

It's not ignorant to say that there's no such thing as rainbow colored grass. I've never seen it, and no one has ever proven it exists, so I've formed a logical viewpoint on its existence.

Yes, but just as you have no evidence there is a god, you have no evidence to show there is no god. Except for the lack of evidence of there being a god. And then you just find yourself in a loop of endless unevidence. lol

 

[Srsly]

Anti-theism is a subset of atheism that absolutely rejects the possibility of the existence of God. Atheism is a blanket term that covers anything fitting "the lack of belief in God", from merely never considering the existence of God in the first place(how we're born) to thinking that God most likely doesn't exist given the available evidence(but open to change pending new evidence) to definitively claiming that God doesn't exist and there will never be any evidence to change this.

 

[Jamesfrom818]

I'm not trying to tell you what you believe in, but what you describe sounds more like agnosticism than atheism



When people say they're atheists, that kinds carries the connotation that you believe that you know there is no god. Just as theists know there is a god.

Its just a matter of semantics so I wouldn't care too much about the term.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Horror movie type stuff, but I'm interested if there's a reasonable conclusion or message from this movie.

Right now it looks like they are just going to jump from one extreme christian family to the next, showing how insanely devout they are and how loopy they sound.

Hoping that this is more than just a shock-film and it goes somewhere.

I'll watch it to the end for no other reason than I'm bored and my wife isn't getting home for another couple hours. :lol

I guess I will watch too then, its up on google vids for whoever wants to watch it too.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Yes, but just as you have no evidence there is a god, you have no evidence to show there is no god. Except for the lack of evidence of there being a god. And then you just find yourself in a loop of endless unevidence. lol

I know there aren't sub-microscopic sharks with helicopter propellers flying through the air and entering the pores in my skin. I don't need evidence to know this isn't real.

Burden of proof, etc etc.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Yes, but just as you have no evidence there is a god, you have no evidence to show there is no god. Except for the lack of evidence of there being a god. And then you just find yourself in a loop of endless unevidence. lol

You misunderstand atheism. Atheism is not THERE IS NO GOD. It is "I don't believe in God".