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.

Here are a few of the reasons why I am raising my children without God.

God is a bad parent and role model.
If God is our father, then he is not a good parent. Good parents don’t allow their children to inflict harm on others. Good people don’t stand by and watch horrible acts committed against innocent men, women and children. They don’t condone violence and abuse. “He has given us free will,” you say? Our children have free will, but we still step in and guide them.

God is not logical.
How many times have you heard, “Why did God allow this to happen?” And this: “It’s not for us to understand.” Translate: We don’t understand, so we will not think about it or deal with the issue. Take for example the senseless tragedy in Newtown. Rather than address the problem of guns in America, we defer responsibility to God. He had a reason. He wanted more angels. Only he knows why. We write poems saying that we told God to leave our schools. Now he’s making us pay the price. If there is a good, all-knowing, all-powerful God who loves his children, does it make sense that he would allow murders, child abuse, wars, brutal beatings, torture and millions of heinous acts to be committed throughout the history of mankind? Doesn’t this go against everything Christ taught us in the New Testament?

The question we should be asking is this: “Why did we allow this to happen?” How can we fix this? No imaginary person is going to give us the answers or tell us why. Only we have the ability to be logical and to problem solve, and we should not abdicate these responsibilities to “God” just because a topic is tough or uncomfortable to address.

God is not fair.
If God is fair, then why does he answer the silly prayers of some while allowing other, serious requests, to go unanswered? I have known people who pray that they can find money to buy new furniture. (Answered.) I have known people who pray to God to help them win a soccer match. (Answered.) Why are the prayers of parents with dying children not answered?

If God is fair, then why are some babies born with heart defects, autism, missing limbs or conjoined to another baby? Clearly, all men are not created equally. Why is a good man beaten senseless on the street while an evil man finds great wealth taking advantage of others? This is not fair. A game maker who allows luck to rule mankind’s existence has not created a fair game.

God does not protect the innocent.
He does not keep our children safe. As a society, we stand up and speak for those who cannot. We protect our little ones as much as possible. When a child is kidnapped, we work together to find the child. We do not tolerate abuse and neglect. Why can’t God, with all his powers of omnipotence, protect the innocent?

God is not present.
He is not here. Telling our children to love a person they cannot see, smell, touch or hear does not make sense. It means that we teach children to love an image, an image that lives only in their imaginations. What we teach them, in effect, is to love an idea that we have created, one that is based in our fears and our hopes.

God Does Not Teach Children to Be Good
A child should make moral choices for the right reasons. Telling him that he must behave because God is watching means that his morality will be externally focused rather than internally structured. It’s like telling a child to behave or Santa won’t bring presents. When we take God out of the picture, we place responsibility of doing the right thing onto the shoulders of our children. No, they won’t go to heaven or rule their own planets when they die, but they can sleep better at night. They will make their family proud. They will feel better about who they are. They will be decent people.

God Teaches Narcissism
“God has a plan for you.” Telling kids there is a big guy in the sky who has a special path for them makes children narcissistic; it makes them think the world is at their disposal and that, no matter what happens, it doesn’t really matter because God is in control. That gives kids a sense of false security and creates selfishness. “No matter what I do, God loves me and forgives me. He knows my purpose. I am special.” The irony is that, while we tell this story to our kids, other children are abused and murdered, starved and neglected. All part of God’s plan, right?

When we raise kids without God, we tell them the truth—we are no more special than the next creature. We are just a very, very small part of a big, big machine–whether that machine is nature or society–the influence we have is minuscule. The realization of our insignificance gives us a true sense of humbleness.

I understand why people need God. I understand why people need heaven. It is terrifying to think that we are all alone in this universe, that one day we—along with the children we love so much—will cease to exist. The idea of God and an afterlife gives many of us structure, community and hope.

I do not want religion to go away. I only want religion to be kept at home or in church where it belongs. It’s a personal effect, like a toothbrush or a pair of shoes. It’s not something to be used or worn by strangers. I want my children to be free not to believe and to know that our schools and our government will make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair—not on what they believe an imaginary God wants.

iamswizz: *Yawns*






Boring Tale.
Even the bible knows that some will not still believe in God, no wonder it calls them fools!

Uyi Iredia: With great potential for good comes a like propensity for evil. As it is with God so it applies to man. I think it inane one dismisses God for evil despite good and upholds science for good forsaking its evil.

plaetton:

The difference is that religion arrogates to itself and sets out to set the standard, to model and to control human behaviour towards some ultimate goal. Science does not do that.

The point is that no single good ever comes out of religion.
Religion actually encourages evil because it promotes that idea of forgiveness of sins.

iamswizz: *Yawns*






Boring Tale.

Uyi Iredia: ^^^I first came accross 'We Are Africans' slogan on RDFRS. Funny though, most African inhabitants don't bother about or believe in evolution. Neither do I.

Logicboy03:


Follow the masses like a sheep.

Uyi Iredia:

As I see your name I suspected you replied my post. You sure say u no dey troll me ?

Uyi Iredia:

Science came out of religion: it is most clear that from the medieval era the enlingthment era proceeded and more importantly the icons of that era had no qualms with religion.

turnstoner:

The above is a perfect example of crooked logic/reasoning:

If the enlightenment era emerged from the medieval era does that equate the two eras?

The icons of that era didn't have qualms with religion therefore people of modern era should be like them?

Are you so ignorant that you haven't noticed the shifts in paradigms since then

Uyi Iredia:

This is a good example of the strawman fallacy. Where did I equate the 2 eras ? I said one gave rise to the other. The shift in paradigms (from mostly theistic to mostly materialistic) since then does not bother me: what is 'bothersome' is your inanity crudely displayed.

Uyi Iredia:

The shift in paradigms (from mostly theistic to mostly materialistic) since then does not bother me: what is 'bothersome' is your inanity crudely displayed.

turnstoner:

If the shifts in paradigms and the subsequent accumulation of facts and certainties does not make any difference to you then you must be one prehistoric crocodile.

By saying that the icons of that era didn't have qualms with religion you are suggesting that we shouldn't have, too. In other words, nothing has changed i.e., you are equating the two eras.

turnstoner:

If the shifts in paradigms and the subsequent accumulation of facts and certainties does not make any difference to you then you must be one prehistoric crocodile.

By saying that the icons of that era didn't have qualms with religion you are suggesting that we shouldn't have, too. In other words, nothing has changed i.e., you are equating the two eras.

mantraa: It seems clear that science came out of the curiosity to investigate the world without including god in the equation. This method was always very risky with the threat of being branded a heretic and tortured and killed by the religious authority.
However, the scientific method has proved much more successful in understanding the world and universe that we live in.

Scientists have looked at the air we breathe and discovered it is made of different gasses like hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen etc.
They have investigated light and discovered the electromagnetic spectrum, the colours of the rainbow and the real reason why it forms.
They have discovered electricity and the real reason why lightning forms,
the reason why the sun burns thought nuclear fusion,
the reason why the wind blows,
plate tectonics and earthquakes,
DNA, natural selection and evolution etc. the list goes on and on.

And in all cases no supernatural gods have been found to be involved even though for centuries people thought that these were acts of god.
Religions have held back progress by imposing harsh punishments on those who dared to question. Now that the influence of religious believers is dropping, human understanding of the universe has increased immensely.
If there really are gods out there somewhere, the evidence should lead us there. So far all the evidence is indicating there are no gods.
Allah, Yahweh, Krishna, Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Sango, Oduduwa, Zeus, Thor, etc, are all man made gods and prophets of gods.

This is where the evidence is taking us, and millions are finally waking up to the fact that you can be good, ethical and moral without believing in ancient supernatural fairytales. (And you won't be burned at the stake as a heretic by man, or condemned to everlasting torture in hell by a god for the 'crime' of thinking rationally).

Uyi Iredia:

Nonsense.[size=18pt]There is a reason why metaphysics was said by a certain famed man of old to be the first and last science. I assert that science rests on the metaphysical (or supernatural if you will). [/size]Science starts from consciousness (or intelligence if you will). It is a conscious thing which notes an event, [deems it a problem[/u][/b] and arrives at the solution when satisfied with an understanding of preceding causal events. The mystery and solution thereof start and end with consciousness which all science rests on. As surely as you, the plaetton's and the Murray Gellmann's of this world say there is nothing more, and that Nature and its laws are proceed the result of chance and exist by virtue of themselves: I, the Planck's and Newton's of this world will state that the fundamental aspect of reality is a non-contingent conscious being, understood in religions, to be God who defined this physical world and made men with sufficient consciousness requisite to apprehend this reality. This consciousness being 'something more'
pre-requisite to science. 2 Tim 3:5 comes to my mind when people allude to mind resulting from matter without God.

"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness."
- Max Planck

mantraa:

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-910282

I pray that Allah wul cure you from this destructive sickness

Logicboy03:



You write as if you are dropping some real intellectual gems. Unfortunately, what you wrote in bold is the biggest unscientific, pseudoscientific nonsense I have ever read in my life.


Metaphysics is philosophy and not natural science.

Uyi Iredia:

The scientific method, logic and causality are METAPHYSICAL concepts undergirding science. Those concepts aren't empirically verified but they are the means by which we carry out any empirical analysis. My point was on how a basis thing necessary to science (consciousness and pre-requisite intellect) is itself in fact metaphysical.

Logicboy03:


The easiest way to debunk your nonsense is to ask for proof. Give an example of metaphysical concepts guidingn science