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?

It's ok to believe in a higher power, obviously. And it's ok to say that there are things which are unexplained. But it is wrong to say that anything is unexplainable.

I think that other people and their faith, or lack of faith, is unexplainable.

"Many of us have good reason to believe in a higher power - things that can't be explained by body chemistry and seem unlikely to be able to be explained by physics"

Like what?

I have no problem with interpreting the Bible as a historical document, full of interesting, weird and sometimes quite repellant quirks, but that's not it's role in Christianity, even the more liberal leaning branches. I can cope with thinking about allegory and myth too. However I don't really think that you can get away from the fact that as a foundation for faith there is a lot in it that is deeply iffy and that over time many many people (almost all men) chose which parts to keep and which parts to excise. As an ex-Catholic I was taught that these people were divinely guided. So either they were wrong and lying about being guided. Or they misinterpreted the guidance. Or god wanted the nasty stuff in. None of which makes me personally feel terribly good about either Christianity or the bible, because the nasty stuff has been repeatedly endorsed.

Yup, the problem I have with all this silly bullshit is the social harm it does and has done over the centuries. Believe in whatever nonsense you like, have as many imaginary friends as your mind can encompass. But don't expect other people to take any of it seriously or give it any 'respect'.

"I think that other people and their faith, or lack of faith, is unexplainable."

Not sure what you mean? I'm an atheist, but I don't think it's very hard to understand what people 'get' out of being believers. There are all sorts of benefits, if you are that way inclined.

Lack of faith is pretty easy to explain, too.

It's because you people have NO PROOF and we can't suspend our disbelief long enough to swallow the whole fantastical story without any proof.

It is unexplainable because you don't know why the person should have a faith or why someone needs proof. My friend is an atheist, so is her DD but her DS is Christian and bases his whole life around the church - why? They had the same upbringing. If you take scientists as a group some have a faith some don't. There is no explanation. Why does one person need proof and one person not? Unexplainable. You can't look at a person and tell who has a faith and who hasn't. You can't look at a baby and predict.

ohh you can a little bit look at a baby and predict....faith/belief without proof has a genetic component...

So the thing I read said she was 6 when she got married and 9 when she lived with him and the marriage was consummated, and yes it was all legal at the time coz it was after her first period.

I am aware that laws change...but when the law has changed to protect the vulnerable...I just can't help wondering why it wasn't gods idea in the first place? Why did humans need to come up with the idea that a nine year old isn't fair game for a 50 year old man of the world? Or maybe we are wrong....maybe a nine year old IS fair game and future generations will laugh at us for thinking this way....

well it says Aisha was 9 when her "marriage was consummated" (not the words I would use) on wikipedia....so it must be true!

We have a lot of genes in the pool - you can't just look at the parents. I know many DCs of Christians who are atheist and vice versa. You may have to wait until the are 40 or older to find out. People' s beliefs are also not set in stone- what you believe in 10 yrs time may be completely different from now.

"Why does one person need proof and one person not? Unexplainable."

Possibly a combination of:
(1) whether or not one has been indoctrinated as a child, before he could question it
And
(2) whether one has an analytical brain/personality or an emotional one.

Even now, you start with the premise that things are unexplainable, whereas to me, nothing is. If we can't explain it now, surely one day we will.

I rest my case

firstly I said you can predict a little...not you can get it 100% right. secondly this is not about your specific beliefs it is about your capacity to believe without proof.

You might be catholic one day and spiritualist the next...but you are someone who finds it easy to believe in something bigger than yourself without evidence.

I used to be a not believing C of E churchgoer and have toyed with not really getting buddhism too....now I have settled down with the idea that I have a genetic predisposition to require proof before I put much 'faith' into anything....

In that case Cote, all siblings would think the same - and they don't. Scientists have to be analytical and some have a faith and some don't. One thing is for sure - I have never come across an adult who says 'I think X because my mother does'.
It is down to personality a lot - if SGB was my mother I would rebel and try church - others would just accept her word.

entropy - Morals change with time. Obviously, if he was doing something immoral in such a conservative society, so many people wouldn't follow him.

identical twins have twice the correlation of faith/spiritualism that fraternal twins have....because they share twice as much genetic information.

cote yes I know...my point is why did GOD think it was moral? Are humans now better than god?

Exotic - Are you saying all siblings have the same personality and way of thinking?

I read somewhere recently that the brains of believers are wired differently to the brains of non, which is what makes them both believe and be so certain of it. As usual I only remember the interesing bit and not the source etc.

exotic by your logic hair colour is also not genetic because some siblings have different colours....or eye colour...or height....are you getting the picture of how wrong you are about genetics yet?

Of course it is genetic but your DD has as much chance as being like your MIL than you- in looks or personality.

My black haired, brown eyed friend has 3 blue eyed blond DCs.

erm no she doesnt....she share half my DNA and a quarter of my MIL's...

is there any more misinformed crap you would like to spout?

right so....exotic appears to think that looks are genetically controlled but it is okay for kids not to look like their parents because its complicated

but religion can't be genetically controlled because kids have different beliefs from their parents?

Do you get the logically inconsistency there?