OK atheist parents - how do you deal with The God Thing?

[Bibulus]

DH and I aren't believers but we don't make a big thing out of it. We made the decision early on to be as neutral as possible in the way we talked about religion with DD, i.e. 'some people believe this, some believe that....'

She prays at school, she knows all about baby Jesus and his mother Mary, although she's probably a bit sketchy on the details of it all and has barely ever set foot in a religious building.

Anyway, this evening she asked to visit the local churchyard, so we had a little walk around, and she was asking lots of questions about the people buried there, why people brought flowers to them etc. Then she wanted to go into the church, and it was open so we poked our head in.

DD was spellbound by it - she said breathlessly, 'why is it so pretty in here mummy?' and asked a million questions about how you talk to god, what does heaven look like, who are the pretty ladies with wings on the wall.....! Then we got collared by the vicar, who was very pleasant and sweet to her and showed her round the church which enchanted her even more.

Am now regretting taking her in there a bit! I didn't want to ruin it for her so I haven't said anything to undermine the idea of god or praying or heaven. Now she is sitting next to me on the sofa practising praying. DH will do his nut!

So anyway, I'm interested to hear how other non-Christian, non-believing parents handle all this stuff?

"or 3. Because the non church schools are crap."

I think that's covered by my point 2!

ProfessorSunny as an atheist I do not want to send my DS to a religious school.

However I have no choice but to send him to a Christian school as there is no such thing as a secular school in the UK. All state schools are required by law to provide worship of a Christian nature (this often takes place in assembly).

An important consideration for us - among others - is how loosely a school interprets this requirement, and our top two choices in our current town for DS both interpret this requirement very loosely. (e.g. they encourage DCs to think about wonder and awe, rather than specifically asking them to pray or sing hymns).

However we are house hunting. If a lovely house in the country which we can afford comes up it will most likely only have CofE schools in the vicinity.

I'd really rather DS didn't go to a school which tries to indoctrinate him with religion, but I wouldn't rule a CofE school out completely if there are other benefits to consider (e.g. growing up in the countryside).

So no, I'd much rather DS didn't go to a religious school, but it's not always straightforward.

What I would draw the line at would be pretending we're religious to get him in. I would never place that burden on him. We are solving that problem by moving to be near a good school.

Disappointed to see a 'science is the opposite of religion' post up thread. No it isn't and the two are not mutually exclusive. Science is based on accumulated evidence, religion on faith, the two are different not contradictory.

E.g my dad was a theoretical physicist and believes in god. I'm some sort of biologist and don't. That's a bit of a scientific cliche - physicists accept (as best current knowledge) a lot of things they can't see. A surprising number of them believe in god. Biologists are interested in what they can see.

""or 3. Because the non church schools are crap."

I think that's covered by my point 2!"

Er...no it isn;t.

I hate that you don't have secular schools. :( I am religious, as stated, and would have to pay through the nose to send DS to a religious school, which I believe is good. (I'm not going to, btw, we're two blocks from a lovely secular elementary school :) )

I would hate it if, for instance, DS had to go to a school run by the Westboro Baptists. I don't think you should have to send your children to school and have them be taught things you don't believe.

But maybe it's just not what I'm used to. :)

"physicists accept (as best current knowledge) a lot of things they can't see"

Of course they can't see atomic particles, but they (1) infer their presence from experiments and with equations, and (2) prove their presence with experiments (like with LHC).

It is not the same thing as believing in things you have no evidence for.

Surprisingly, my last comment wasn't just about you, but a general observation. There is a clear push to present religious/non-believer viewpoints as equally valid, just to be more PC.

SGB, if you're interested in seeing what Christinas do with the difficult bits of the Bible, Texts of Terror is a great book to read.

Cheerful, don't worry! C of E schools are so laid back...many get criticised by the C of E for not being explicitly religious enough. The Westboro Baptists wuold not send their dc to a UK CofE school!

cote I know is's not the same, that was my main point - scientific 'belief' based on evidence and always open to change is utterly different from religious faith and the two should not be confused.

People can hold both sorts of belief. The religious physicists will have to explain themselves but they illustrate this point well.

The 'things we can see' point is an interesting cliche, I think and just helps show that people and their beliefs can be complex and unpredictable. Just throwing it in for fun!

It is outrageous that we don't have secular schools. And I have to say that the smug " it's the Law- and anyway it doesn't do any harm" of Christians getting their way and happily riding rough shod over the wishes of others is a most unedifying phenomenon.

Going back to the points made about science, while I agree with lottiegb that science and religion are not mutually exclusive, I would like my children inspired by the natural world and to see that the universe is a pretty amazing place. I want them to be interested in science from the point of view of encouraging logic and reason. I want to encourage them to be interested in and able to think rationally and critically and ask and investigate "why?". I hope that this will encourage them to be better people, by not simply believing what they're told (apart from the "you must eat your veg" bit). What we "know" should move and change all the time as we learn more, get new evidence. I don't intend to try to "stop" them being religious at all, but to me, this way of thinking makes it harder to believe that something that's written by a few people, thousands of years ago can be right, or insist that faith X is better than faith Y.

I would probably deal with the Christian stories, like Christmas etc, by explaining that these are very old stories and very important part of what a lot of people believe- and this is one of the reasons we have christmas (as well as the pagan winter festival bit) and even though not everyone believes the stories really happened, we can still celebrate them anyway. I want them to understand about different religions, so they can see that there are such a wide range of beliefs out there, and while people fight about it, none of them are better than the next.

I bet you tell I've not got any kids yet! All this idealistic nonsense will no doubt get turned upside down when my bump gets old enough to ask the big questions!

I imagine the religious scientists think the universe is pretty amazing too and are just as interested in understanding how it works. They just have a different sense of purpose, it doesn't mean that everything isn't as open to discovery as for an atheist.

The idea of science as a 'faith' equivalent to religion has come, in Christianity, only from a tiny proportion of Christians who take the bible unusually literally and see no need for investigation of anything as everything is as god intends it. Most people perceive a far more 'hands off' god who lets all sorts of things happen.

I think most Christians understand the difference between faith and being convinced by evidence, which is why i was surprised to see a 'science is against us' comment up thread. I thought part of the magic and loveliness of faith was that you have let go of your scepticism and ego and accept there is something bigger that you are not capable of understanding fully.

That's why asking religious people for an explanation will generate something about feelings and we would not be reasonable to expect them to be able to provide evidence for their belief, in a scientific sense.

Science explains the how, religion tries to explain the why. Science is not expected to answer the question of why the universe is self understanding through the process of a relationship between human consciousness and what we perceive as 'reality'. Science is the set of instructions in the toy box that tells you how to assemble the toy but it's not the toy. But getting back to the OP, how would your dh feel if he heard a neighbour had 'done his nut' because his child said he or she was an atheist or might not believe in God ? Would he not feel that was an over reaction ? I am fully expecting ds to be interested in atheism at some point maybe even a strong believer but ultimately what happens is not within my control.

Sorry delete my post - I came to it through main page and did not realise title of the thread ! Definitely proves believers are wooly minded !

OP hi,
We are both atheists and have a five year old who has recently started asking questions about religion, well basically asked me what is God etc. My answer was that some people believe in God (and I mentioned 4-5 different religions so she doesn't think the one she asked about is the only one), but told her that we think it is a lovely story but that it is just a story and not true and that she should wait until she is a bit older to decide if she believes in God and if so which one to believe in.

The whole concept of 'belief' is an odd one. I'm not sure I've ever even gotten into 'belief' with the DCs.

I suppose I break it down into:

A. Is there a God? It is impossible for anyone to know. So that then leads into concepts of what kinds of things it is possible or not possible for humans to know and how we know them.
B. What is God? God is supernatural. That then is a question of what something is, and the difference between something that is natural and something that is supernatural, and that the 'paranormal' does not fall into either of these categories because it is a category of knowledge claims not one of supernatural vs. natural.
C. What is it like to experience God? Experiencing god is a particular description of a spiritual and poignant mental state. Which is a question of internal feelings and subjective ways we can choose to experience the world which don't have to require a belief in what something really is at all.

So the whole topic of God is one of truth claims, definition and enjoyment of meaningful subjective experiences. I don't actually see where belief comes into it for atheists, because as we are not religious, what is that point of bringing children up to think that believing in the definite existence of things that are outside of human knowledge claims and always will be is a future option they might want to consider?

Just a quickie - how's this for scary?
www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jun/06/evidence-creation-museum#

I don't believe that appreciating the beauty of the built environment or a cultivated natural environment (like a graveyard) is in any way connected to religion. And vicars generally are nice. I met ours last christmas and he was fearfully drunk and we had a lovely chat.

We're secularists - you can believe whatever you like, we don't mind, but we will make our own minds up. I answer my children's questions with 'well what do you think' and they do have their own opinions. Of the nativity play, DD (5) said 'well it's a nice story but I don't think it's real'.

Similarly life after death was interpreted as 'unlikely'.

Funny comments on that page, Octavia

"For the story of Lot offering his daughters up to the men, I would teach children that this is not ok, and that Lot, most likely, knew it was not ok."

How come Bible calls him a righteous man, then? He offers his virgin daughters (he says) to a mob of men knocking at his door, ffs.

"I would tell them that it's possible that God inspired Lot to say make the offer because God knew that the men wouldn't accept"

And the point of that exercise in humiliation would be? To make daughters hate father? To make father hate himself?

I much prefer the story of Lot's daughters plying their father with liquor to have incestous sex with him, anyway

Cote: "And the point of that exercise in humiliation would be? To make daughters hate father? To make father hate himself?"

The Lord Moves in Mysterious Ways, His Wonders to Perform:-)

" If it saved the whole family from being attacked, it would make sense"

Maybe to you.

To many of us, offering our virgin daughters to a mob for gang rape would not make sense even if it saved the entire village.

In fact, if you asked that whole village "If these two virgin girls are gang raped for a really long time by this mob, you will be saved. Do you accept this deal?" I would dare hope that most of those people would refuse.

That is how repulsive the idea is.