“Flying”, hmm, … it’s not spaghetti, it’s linguini …
Perhaps the doctrine is due for review, we need to know whose noodly appendage
It is possible that while his child will never need religion, he or his wife do.
I grew up pretty heavily Catholic, strayed a bit in college, came back as an adult but with less of the seriousness of youth, got mad at the Catholic church over women’s roles and the child abuse scandals, left again, married an atheist and had kids.
And became a UU. I said originally “for the kids” but it isn’t for the kids - my son has barely been to RE at all. I don’t force him, he doesn’t go. My husband goes a few times a year - usually for me (although when his brother was dying, he turned to our minister, and found the experience helpful - and the community offered much help - which he chose not to use, but which he appreciated being there). My daughter is pretty active in youth group - having discovered that UU teen girls are much more likely to be kindred spirits to her than most middle school girls. But I go for me. I’m the one that wants a “spiritual” community. I’m the one that wants ritual and a place to go for reflection. I need my “soul” nourished in this fashion. To me, going to church - even a UU church - is comfort food for the spirit.
I teach Sunday school and therefore work with a lot of young kids whose parents found the church because “our kids need church” - and as I watch the parents and the kids grow up - church is for the parents as much as the kids. They are the ones who are there for the bookclubs and the special concerts, not the kids.
That’s their choice. It’s not food or air, it’s a decision.
Hey, I’m not saying the decision is always easy.
Yep, but these debates often fall on the child needing or not needing. My husband did fine without being raised in a faith. But when we give that advice, we are often ignoring the needs of the adult(s). For someone who has found the faith community an important part of his life, as Nested Thorn obviously has, the vaccuum of no community may be something that needs filling.
My mother in law was raised Methodist and gave up her faith community when she married my husband’s father. She is still bitter about it - but he isn’t one to compromise (and yet, she didn’t choose to fill that void when he left thirty plus years ago - sometimes its easier to be mad at someone else about breaking something than to take steps to fix it)
I can relate a little bit to your troubles Nested Thorn. I can’t really explain well without sounding like some kind of nutcase, but I’d suggest that you pray about it. If you do believe that there is a God, then talk to Him. Oh, but I talk to God the same that I talk to my cats, dogs & chickens though, so maybe I’m not the best one to give advice.
Having kids does strange things to your mind, many of which wear off after a while. One of those strange things is the notion that you are 100% responsible for the kind of person your kid turns out to be. While I in no way wish to advocate laxity in parenting, it is simply not possible to go on bearing a burden like that if you want to maintain any kind of sanity. In fact, if you internalize that belief, you’re probably going to end up doing more harm than good. You just have to accept that you are the primary, but by no means only, influence on your kids.
I just want to pop in to say this is not a virtue.
Wow, that’s a lot of good advice. Thanks folks!
For those who’ve recommended the UU church, I’m looking into it.
For those who’ve recommended no religion or church, thanks, but I’m not certain how viable that will be given my circumstances. It’s my faith in the Biblical God that has died; I don’t know if I can commit to full-blown atheism yet, nor do I think it’s really necessary.
I also recognize that, ultimately, he will make his own decision. The agonizing part is making sure I set him up as best I can to help him make a rational, healthy decision. The area we live in is highly religious, with a smattering of cult-like churches here and there (not dangerous cults per se, but they live highly restrictive lifestyles that would take quite a lot of the joy out of life for him), and I don’t want to leave him vulnerable to their mind games. Somehow I doubt “everything is perfectly fine as long as you’re nice” will protect him much from the wiles of the loons, and he will have peers who will be loons wherever he goes. Conversely, I want my son to respect individuals of any faith or lack thereof as long as they live according to the standard universally accepted morals (or simply the golden rule, as Musicat mentioned).
I can accept that I’m not going to be his primary influence for most of his life. I honestly want him to have a wide array of influences; any decent parent would. But I don’t see how anyone could think that a child’s faith (or lack thereof) isn’t most heavily influenced by his/her parents. I want to respect that–in a world bursting with religions–it is our job as parents to guide him as best we can to be accepted by and accepting of the faithful and non-faithful alike. I just can’t approach this flippantly.
It was a long, slow process for me to finally let go of my belief in God and even after over 30 years I still haven’t “come out” to most people. It is a scary leap to let go of that ever watchful, and extremely vengeful, being that everyone talks about in church. So I understand how the OP may be reluctant to jump straight out of the church. Take you time. Let the idea seep in that, just maybe, there isn’t anyone watching your every move and judging you.
We reared my son without the benefit of religion of any kind. He hasn’t turned into an axe murderer or anything, so far (knock on wood.) In fact, he has a strong moral compass that he is unwilling to go against, even when the alternative would be the easy path. He is, and I like to think I am too, living proof that morals neither come from religion nor does religion necessarily spring from a moral code.
A belief in God is a burden no parent should put on a young child IMO. It’s easy to pick up the church habit later in life if one wants that sort of thing. It’s difficult to shake that monkey off your back when its been there your whole life.
I’ve been lurking on this thread because I’m well aware that my own views are radical, unforgiving, unpopular, rude, and misguided. In other words, I’m a converted anti-theist of an extreme variety.
So take this stuff for what it’s worth:
The standard monotheistic (Hebrew, Christian, Muslim) paradigm posits Evil and Good as two sides of a coin with agents and dominions designated for both sides. As one of my favorite authors noted through one of his most popular characters, “There’s no such thing as a one-sided coin.” In fact, while there are some belief systems which posit multifaceted paradigms or nebulous/non faceted paradigms, the most common and popular tropes for Western mythologies are essentially bi-polar oppositional frameworks: A belief in an entity of good requires belief in an entity of evil as well.
You could also explore Eastern traditions which tend to lack the dichotomies or explore modern inventions like neo-paganism, and science. These formats may be a bit more distant from your familiar religious foundation than you’ll be comfortable adopting.
True, but it is humanly possible. There are those who call themselves atheist whose rationale for their position is either a hatred of “God” and/or a hatred of the current/past beliefs, practices, behaviors, abuses, etcetera (real or merely perceived) by the people or organizations purporting to be doing the work of God. Specifically, many who call themselves atheists were ‘recovered’ or ‘converted away from’ Christianity after being appalled by the Crusades, the Holocaust, Manifest Destiny, particular scandals, personal tragedies, etcetera. Technically, they should be called “Anti-Christians” but such a term is interpreted much more precisely within Christian communities while Atheist has become an accepted alternative term.
Nicely defined for ‘true’ atheism but…see above…
Actually, this perspective shows its roots in the dichotomous/bi-polar paradigms. In contrast, consider that it’s possible enough for a deity to allow or cause one person to suffer (for whatever reason) without anyone else enjoying or suffering in relationship to that person’s experience.
Hmmm…really? I would think that would mean our planet’s population would be globally static (though perhaps I’m simply not familiar enough with the concept of a zero-sum game). While I do recall a sci-fi short story that suggested human populations are growing while equivalent numbers among the rest of the world’s fauna were declining, I tend to suspect the reality is that human populations are steadily growing with no particular correlation to the shrinkage of other animal populations. In other words, I don’t think we can suggest (outside of that Sci-Fi story) that animal souls are simply transferring into human bodies from other animal incarnations.
Trust this guy to suggest there’s only one correct option. 
I plan to reject any and all invitations to his slumber parties!
Anthropologists and sociologists* recognize that one of the things religions do is provide the faithful with a way to feel good about themselves via methods of distinguishing believers from non-believers. One of the ways believers demonstrate their adherence is via compliance with restrictions – diet, behavior, speech, etc. Thus, it’s quite possible that OP or his son could participate in a ‘highly restrictive lifestyle’ and actually get more ‘joy out of life’ by doing so because each time they avoid BehaviorZ they reaffirm their compliance to the restriction(s) and their worthiness of the privileges that Believers gain from adherence to the faith. In fact, one of the criticisms of atheism by faith adherents is that, having no restrictions due to religion, the unfaithful (infidels/faithless/out-group members) are on the slippery slope to engaging in all sorts of heinous immoral transgressions.
–G?
Could you ever steal a prayer
to deny your God?
…Elliott & Collen (Def Leppard)
…Where Does Love Go When It Dies?
…Slang
*Sorry, I don’t have a cite; it’s one of those things I remember from the chapter with the overview of Religion in my old Sociology 101 textbook.