Today is the shortest day and tonight is the shortest night of the year. Tomorrow we will see (but probably not notice) a slight increase in daylight, which will continue to increase until after the summer solstice.

Christmas Reenactments/Solstice Presentations

Last week I was watching my youngest in his kindergarten winter/holiday performance. It was unusual. There was a big Christmas tree with presents on the side of the stage. But the performance was a compilation of nursery rhymes. The only Christmas-related idea in it was the starring role of the Gingerbread Man and his place as the thread of the story. The narration between each song linked the various nursery rhymes into a telling of the Gingerbread Man’s journey and his eventual learning to trust others and make friends. Yes, it had a happy ending and nobody ate him. =)

It’s my understanding that nursery rhymes are more educational for young children than Christmas songs. Just their repetition alone helps children understand language. Thinking of all this–the choice of the kindergarten teachers to do such a non-traditional winter performance–got me thinking about the educational value of performances and reenactments in general. And that got me thinking about the reenactment of the Christian Christmas story that is a tradition for many families. My family usually did it when I was a child. And my own children have usually participated in a reading of the Christmas story at my in-law’s Christmas Eve celebration (until last year, when thankfully, someone most have woken up to the fact that 3 out of 6 siblings in that family is either atheist or agnostic–we now invite the grandkids to do a talent show, instead).

The result of all this train-of-thought thinking while the cute little Gingerbread Man ran around the stage and my son-playing-a-spider made cute faces at me was an idea to write a simple presentation of the Winter Solstice as a symbol of light and hope and the source for all the light-celebrating holidays, including our own Christmas. It would include a mention (and maybe visuals?) of all the sun gods (including Jesus) over the course of human history. It would also explain the reasons for our current traditions that have pagan beginnings.

Does anyone want to contribute facts/resources, especially online links? Ideas? Please share by leaving a comment. Maybe I will be able to put something together before next year’s season returns–unless you know of something like this that already exists…?

In the interview, Schaeffer describes how he and his minister father, a friend of the Reagan’s and the Bush’s, helped organize the Christian right by means of the Pro-Life movement, how it evolved to take over Republican Politics, and the hypocrisy that finally drove him away from it.

There is so much that is fascinating in this interview. If you haven’t already heard it, you can listen by following this link.

Dear Red States:

We’ve decided we’re leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we’re taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren’t aware, that includes California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole’ Miss. We get 85 percent of America’s venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition’s, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms. Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we’re going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they’re apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don’t care if you don’t show pictures of their children’s caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq , and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we’re not willing to spend our resources in Bush’s Quagmire.

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country’s fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation’s fresh fruit, 95 percent of America’s quality wines, 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. With the
Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all
Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we’re discussing the war, the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

Finally, we’re taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.

Peace Out,
The Blue States

I can’t ignore the fact that loyal readers like Ed and Jason reach out at random times, wondering if the blog is dead. I’d say it definitely died, but perhaps resurrection is real after all? It’s so good to hear from you guys.

Here I am, almost exactly one year after promising to pop in once in a while, which I’ve never done. How about I catch you up on what I’m doing and if any of you are hanging around you can catch me up on where your lives have headed?

My Second Full-Time Job

I have two competing full-time jobs now. I’m still a SAHM, but I also host an internet scrapbooking tutorial show. I have professional weekly videos, a weekly live show, and regular blog articles at Paperclipping.com.

This is where my AgnosticMom blogging time has gone and why I haven’t felt like I had any minutes left to write here. I still miss you guys, though. Maybe now that my blogging skills have improved I can stop in once in a while with some short posts. No promises this time, though.

I’m Now A Vegan

This was one of the best streets I’ve ever turned down. I love having an animal-friendly, cholesterol-free, whole-foods plant-based diet. Feels good.

The Great Gatsby

We rescued this sweetheart from the animal shelter. Gizmo was horrified at first but now they’re best friends. I love being a mommy to two dogs and find myself wanting to go back for a third, even though my allergist says I should never have gotten the first one.

The kids…

…are growing and we’re enjoying the wonderful little people that they are. Blake is teaching himself to animate, chose the school at which he wants to learn film and computer graphics, and has named his own production company for movies.

Trinity has become such a graceful ballerina and blows us away with her ability to beat anyone at any time in the game, Memory. She’s definitely visual.

Aiden is strengthening his natural inclination for music and will be starting full-day kindergarten next month.

All three are amazing kids.

What about you, my long-lost friends? Where has this amazing life taken you over the last year?

Hello Noell,

I have been reading your blog for a few months, and there are a few questions I feel compelled to ask. This is meant to be a genuine inquiry, and not a personal attack. One of the questions that reading Agnostic Mom has raised for me is: What does it truly mean to live a life as an atheist? Sure the easy answer is to live a life without religious faith or belief, but what about without -religious behavior-? Your behavior and lifestyle as
an atheist seems nearly indifferent to me from a person of faith. So that raises the question: Why do you feel it is so important to distinguish yourself from someone who is of a religious background? And, are there really substantial differences between the lifestyle of an atheist from that of a person of faith that merits being distinguished?

When you step back and look at it, Agnostic Mom, and your involvement with the HNN all revolve around religion. It is the true driving force behind your participation. It seems to me that by trying to denounce religion, and assert that you have done so, you have actually immersed your daily life in it. It also seems that some atheists are so caught up in professing their lack of religion, that they have inadvertently become reliant on it to identify who they are.

So, is it really worth the effort?

To be fair, I should state that I am agnostic to some degree. However, I feel more comfortable with not being labeled when it comes to my own position on religion. Also, I suppose it would be fair to state that I am a 22 year old college student. So even though I am not a mom myself, I really enjoy your blog and the discussions you have here.

Note:

Martin almost touches on these questions above. However when he asks, “What part of free from religion did you not understand?” my question is, are you really free?

Let me start with this observation and question:

Your behavior and lifestyle as an atheist seems nearly indifferent to me from a person of faith. Are there really substantial differences between the lifestyle of an atheist from that of a person of faith that merits being distinguished?

The first thing I want to say is that if you do not see a significant difference between religious people and avowed atheist/agnostics, then doesn’t this just show religion to be unnecessary? Isn’t that the point? Do we really need religion to be decent people? Is logic and reason not enough? If LaShawn’s observation is true for most of us, then it seems to me that religious people are just throwing enormous amounts of time and money to something completely unnecessary.

It is not my intention, though, to eliminate religion from the world. I am also not trying “distinguish myself from someone of a religious background.” I actually blend in quite well with the people in my environment, religious or not. What I am trying to do is share my ideas and gain from others who want to raise their families with humanist values. For those of us who have left religion behind, it can be scary.

For me, leaving religion allowed me to look in better places for understanding about the world and how humans got to where we are. That is a subject I have always wanted to learn more. Leaving religion also gave me freedom to direct more of my money to the places that made sense to me. And the best part is that leaving religion gave me more than an entire day, every week of my life, to focus my time on the things that are important to me, rather than on the things that my religion told me were important.

But to get to the specifics of your question, regarding day-to-day behavior and morals, I think this really varies from person to person, depending on what religion we leave behind and what we choose to value from our new worldview. I can only answer for myself. My religion was very strict. Having left Mormonism, I maintained the values that made logical sense to me. I refrain from shoplifting because I don’t like the idea of hurting or cheating someone. Plain and simple. Secondary to that, I prefer to live in a world where people choose not to steal others’ property and I know that will work out better if I do my part. Does it take religion to think that way? No.

So you are right. My life may not much different than a that of some people of faith when it comes to morals and ethics. It is more different in terms of what I devote time, money, and attention to. And specifically as a former Mormon, the details of my life are actually extremely different.

For the record, I do not push for the idea that everyone leave their religions. I am not an evangelical nontheist trying to convert the religious to become atheists. I don’t claim to know if the world would be better or not, although I am curious.

When you step back and look at it AgnosticMom, and your involvement with the HNN all revolve around religion. It is the true driving force behind your participation. It seems to me that by trying to denounce religion, and assert that you have done so, you have actually immersed your daily life in it.

Let’s get a little perspective here. I know that all of your contact with me is immersed in subjects often revolving around religion, but you have to remember that my blog and artlcles are not all there is to me. I do have a life beyond what you read here. If there is anything I immerse myself in it is art, photography and scrapbooking. That is not something I really talk about here. I probably spend less than an hour a week on average with AgnosticMom stuff. That isn’t exactly immersing my daily life in it. On the other hand, I work on my paper art between one and three hours daily. In addition to that is my 65-75 minutes of daily exercise, my household chores and errands, my volunteering at the kids’ school, and my family time.

I will grant you that despite this reality check of how much time I actually spend on AgnosticMom items, I do immerse myself in it quite a bit, especially in the past. But that deserves some perspective, too. I like writing. I think way too much and so it helps me to write my thoughts down. It gives me clarity. When I started my little blog I had no idea it would take off so quickly and get me public recognition. The writing opportunities have all come to me. I have not sought after a single one. Since the atheist/agnostic topics happen to be my niche from the blog, since I happen to have an audience, it would make sense that this is the subject I discuss.

And there is a reason many of my topics revolve around religion. Because my past religion was so all-consuming I was lost and scared during those first years after leaving, especially when it comes to raising children. This blog is mostly (but not totally) for others like me who have left religion behind but are not sure how to go about filling in the holes when it comes to childrearing. So, of course, religion plays a factor in most of my posts and articles. I basically write how-to’s about raising a family without religion.

There is one more reason that I dwell on this subject. There two types of people (among the gazillion types of us!). Those that have a natural propensity to ponder life and the world and over-analyze everything about it. And those who just want to live their life. You mostly hear from those of us who like to analyze it and talk about it. That is how I am. I was like that as a religious person (so no, I do not dabble in religion near as much as I did when I believed in it) and I am still that way. It’s my nature. There are plenty of atheists who do not feel compelled to analyze and talk about it. That is why you don’t hear as much from them. I actually have a handful of friends who are agnostic or atheist, who I see regularly, but we have only discussed our nontheism a couple of times.

Your last question:

Martin almost touches on these questions above. However when he asks, “What part of free from religion did you not understand?” my question is, are you really free?

No, I don’t think I am really free. As long as I still feel I need to prove to my parents that they do not need to get me back to church, I will probably not feel totally free. As long as I feel I need to keep my ideas and perspectives to myself so as not to offend my religious friends who have no problems sharing their perspectives with me, I will not be totally free. As long as I have to worry about how adequate my children’s science education is because there are topics that those in charge do not want taught, I will not feel completely free. That’s just the way it is.

Thanks, LaShawn, for your honesty and asking such interesting questions. I’d love to hear thoughts from anybody else.

Hmmm…

I WANT MORE is all I can say. I learned some new names at the conference and want to know more about these people and their ideas. The next conference will take place November 1-3, 2007.

For those of you who are lucky to have the Internet connection and want to learn about other incredible things in science and technology (and get entertained, too!), I also suggest this conference: http://www.ted.com/tedtalks/ From my experience, it’s best to download each video and then watch it in QuickTime. Julia Sweeney, Hans Rosling, David Deutsch, Jeff Han are just a few people I want to mention that made such an impression on me.

We’re in Kansas City visiting my parents and siblings! We’re having so much fun! Yesterday we went away to some farm areas where my parents have some gorgeous hilly property away from civilization. We took turns riding quads, Grandpa pulled the little ones in a trailor with his miniature tractor, and we sang Karaoke.

If only you could have heard (and seen) my brother-in-law’s versions of Lady Marmalade and The Final Countdown. Or maybe you would have enjoyed my husband and I singing Zombie by the Cranberries, with the funky vocal flips and all! What a blast.

I just wanted you all to know that I am still here, still thinking of all the posts and topics I have been wanting to blog. I hope you all had a wonderful Christmas or Solstice, or whatever it is you did this past week! Hopefully I will post again before the New Year, but if not, I wish you a very happy start to 2007!

What is the drawback? Blake’s imagination exceeds my abilities. Now that Thanksgiving is over (and my 34th birthday!), I am trying to plan his Harry Potter themed birthday party. But nothing I do matches the picture in his mind.

For example, he wants to play a game of Quittage (spelling?). He knows that he and his friends cannot possibly fly, no matter how great the broomsticks. He agrees to that. But he will not accept any other modification in the game. I have showed him revised versions of the game offered online; versions suitable for actual children. Not good enough. He wants to play it exactly as it is played in the movie. It is impossible. But he won’t accept that.

So, anyway, I am busy trying to squeeze a birthday party in between now and Christmas, while also preparing something for Trinity’s birthday. On New Year’s Eve.

If you never saw my article in HNN for last week, you can go here to read it.

I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving!

I was wondering what was going on the past few weeks! I like the new design, though, I think I will miss the photo of the pretty flowers at the top…

Just think, though, you are now important enough to be attacked and not just ignored by the right-wing! Congrat’s! Next thing you know, James Dobson will be denouncing your bog on national television, and soon you’ll have hundreds of hits instead of just a few dozen…

Ahh, the price of fame and simply being right….

Good luck with the whole hacker thing–from what I’m reading here, a few other sites I visit are being–shall we say persecuted?

As for my design, it is not by choice. If there is a hacker, he/she is doing it. If it’s not a hacker, my blog is either possessed or it has some weird default mode. It does not look like this by my own choice. I keep switching it to the old template and but it jumps back to this one. If I were more computer literate I’d be more proactive about getting to the root of this. Alas, I am dependent on my super-busy husband to fix these problems.

BTW, Jason, my blog has been getting at least a hundred hits per day for quite a while now! It hardly deserves it with the decline in posts over the last couple months.

Moving on: we have a busy day today. I carved two pumpkins this year instead of just one! When the kids get home (well, Blake is already home sick) we’ll grab an early dinner, get the costumes on, take tons of pictures (I am determined to get some good ones this year, so I’m giving myself plenty of time) and then we’ll head over to the grandparents’ neighborhood (much better for trick-or-treating than my own) to get an early start. With Blake sick, I don’t want to be out late.

I hope to have some time tomorrow to get a more normal entry posted!

Dear Mr. Potential Hacker,

If you are the reason for my blog troubles, I can only assume it is because of religious motivations. And since that seems to trump freedom of speech for you, let me appeal to the Ten Commandments. I pay for my website, therefore, when you shut it down, not only are you stealing my right to free expression, you are also stealing my money. Where are your principles?

I do have a story I’ve been wanting to share and I’d love to hear anyone’s thoughts on the situation. I hope to be able to sit down and blog it in a couple of days. Until then, Olga provided a link to this Freethought Media website. Go take a look around. I am still getting familiar with it but there are audio files on Richard Dawkins, James Randi, Michael Shermer, Daniel Dennet, Steven Pinker and a couple others I am less familiar with (but looking forward to getting to know). So far I have listened to one interview with Richard Dawkins.

But before you go over there, I want to initiate a little discussion on science writing. In previous debates on my blog, as well as in other articles I have read, there seems to be an issue with some popular science writing, particularly with Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker, but also some others. One issue, as far as I can tell, has to do with an unclear line between general scientific understanding and the writers’ own philosophies and worldviews. The other issue stems from language. Good writing involves tools that may sometimes obscure scientific accuracy.

Let me explain what I mean. In my earlier discussions about some of Pinker’s writing I began to sense that he intermingles his own philosophy with scientific data in a way that is sometimes hard to tell apart. He also doesn’t always say how strong the support is for a particular theory he is basing his premises on. At some point we have to make decisions about what we believe, even when there is little evidence. So I see no issue in Pinker’s forming philosophies around new and emerging theories. The problem comes when he doesn’t always clarify the strength of the various theories.

At the same time, I understand why he doesn’t. What a monotonous book it would be to make notes for every single statement in order to clarify. As a blogger I understand this. In every post I have to decide what information to include and what not to or you would never finish reading. Pinker also has to make his writing interesting if he wants to reach a greater audience. And in my opinion, reaching a greater audience is importance for the future of science. But so is integrity.

Dawkins seems to have some issues as well, although I am less familiar with his writing. I have read three different critiques of his work, and I wish I could remember with more clarity what the exact criticisms were. In addition to these two writers, I have read a critique of science writers in general about the personification of genes, Natural Selection and such (what I mean is, talking about Nature as if it were a thinking being, even though it is not). Many of us writiers do it. It is good writing. But it does give the false impression to some that genes, or Natural Selection, or even Nature itself, have a will and a purpose. I like writing that way and I see others do it all the time. It makes for a good story. It is what pulls me in to the study of Biology. And yet, I can see how it can be misleading.

So here is the dilemma, as I see it. We have good science writers reaching the public and educating them on important issues in science. It is generating an interest unlike before. But it may be generating a lot of misunderstanding as well. It it worth it? What are the ethics in this situation? Should a science writer sacrifice wonderful writing for more scientific accuracy? Or should one keep it interesting and hope that the overall effect is more scientific understanding, not less?

Please feel free to weigh in on my question, or just provide more information and specific examples if you have them. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this.

The best part was taking some banana bread over to a friend whose husband is a police officer. I know the possible sacrifice she and her husband say yes to every day that he walks out their door.

Tonight at dinner we will light candles for the thousands of our citizens that died on 9-11, for the thousands that have died in the wars, and for our memory of a day that opened our eyes.

See you on Sunday!

Although I was sure after my hours-long quest in the temple that it was false, I had not actually been expecting that conclusion. It came as a surprise I wasn’t ready for.

So the grand finale of that six-month search became the beginning of another six months of continued church involvement, a smidgen of hope for the slightest reason to think I was wrong, along with the question of where the truth was, if not in the Mormon Church.

I wondered which Christian religion was closest to truth. Would I find one I could be comfortable in?

And then the new year came around and the adult Sunday School class began studying the Old Testament.

Our discussion and reading of the great and wacky O.T. was probably what planted the idea that it was all wrong: the Mormon Church, Christianity, the entire Bible, and God in general (that changing god who evolved from one personality to the next depending on the culture and popular understanding).

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

But let me back up a bit. If you’ve ever studied the Old Testament with Mormons then you know that the introduction of every O.T. class is not actually on that particular book of scripture, but on one of the Mormon scriptures, The Pearl Of Great Price.

Part of The Pearl Of Great Price is, according to Joseph Smith, a “complete” version of certain scripture that supposedly went missing from the first five books of the O.T.

Another part of The Pearl (excuse my shortcut-nickname) is the writing of Abraham, himself. It was this part of our gospel study class that got interesting. Actually, it is where I began to get angry.

We started our study of the writings of Abraham with a review lesson on how Joseph received it. The teacher reminded us that some guy came traipsing about Mormom-Town in Illinois selling ancient rolls of papyrus and mummies from Egypt.

Joseph Smith took a look at them, and God told him the rolls were the writings of Abraham himself! So he bought them and “translated” them.

Now I realize God may have maneuvered this transaction. But it all sounded so very opportunistic to me. It was the kind of line I would have pulled out as a kid when I used to tell my friends I wasn’t really Noell, but her twin Dutch sister.

I went home feeling angry that I hadn’t seen through this story before.

It was no more than a couple days later when my son, Blake, brought me a kids magazine he was reading and he asked me to explain a page to him. I looked at it, and my jaw dropped open. It was a picture of papyrus with drawings of ancient Egyptian burial rites. It was almost exactly the same picture as this one in The Pearl.

While Joseph Smith explained that the drawing was that of Abraham almost to be sacrificed as a child by his father who was a priest, the authentic one in the magazine explained very well what these drawings really were.

What made this experience all the more enlightening was that I had seen pictures of these before, probably in high school. And I never made the connection between them and the drawing in the Pearl.

Many ex-Mormons know all about this doctrinal dilemma. I am leaving out all the many details of how wrong Joseph’s make-believe translation is, now that Egyptologists have a greater knowledge of those ancient artifacts. And many Mormon apologists have given bizarre justifications for it. But this was all new to me. It was almost like divine intervention. An answer from on high that all of it was. . .stupid.

By this time, though, I was done with thoughts of a Being from on high. Over the previous months, since that last temple visit, I watched my relationship with what I thought was Heavenly Father slip away. I had grown far distant from that god who had seemed always at my side.

I didn’t see this as tragic or lonely. It was empowering! All the strength that I had derived from this imaginary god-partner growing up had really come from within myself!

For example, I have always been a happy person. It takes a lot to get me down. And I bounce right back. When I was younger people often asked me how I was so happy. This is embarassing now, but I actually used to tell them it was because I was a Mormon. And because I had such a close relationship with God.

I felt a little guilty saying this because I knew plenty of devoted Mormons who were miserable. But I continued with that story nonetheless. It was my missionary tool.

When God disappeared from my side, I realized I was still the same me in every way. I was still a happy person. And all the sides of me that I thought were God supporting me, or God’s gifts to me, were actually me.

I had now come to know myself and appreciate myself more than ever before in my life.

It was good.

This affected my interpretation of things people would say at church. I remember when a member of the bishopric, who apparently didn’t know about my waning spiritual state, expressed to me how I had inspired him with something I said and that I “had such a strong testimony.”

I smiled and thanked him but knew inside that it was just my happy nature that he was misinterpreting as my testimony shining through. There was no testimony.

My new paradigm of self also contrasted with the guilt and self-criticism I witnessed in many of the women at church. They never felt they were good enough. They could never meet the demands and expectations of religion.

It got to the point where I left every church meeting angry about something someone taught. I had resigned to continued church attendance, not out of belief, but out of a desire for spiritual sustenance. Instead, church was becoming a spiritual vacuum.

At one point, our congregation split and a small handful of us, including only one of my real friends, got reassigned to a different one. I knew almost no one in church now, which made it easier for me to become more anonymous and less involved. My one remaining good friend, who I really admired (because she and her husband were extremely intelligent and the only Mormons I knew who went to prestigious universities) inspired new hope in me. She told me she wanted to go to the temple with me, and asked me to get my recommend.

This friend was normally so busy, I was thrilled to have an opportunity to spend time with her. This really motivated me. At the same time I had a sister whose temple wedding was coming up the following month, so it really was vital for me to get a glimpse of a testimony back so I could get a temple recommend.

My new motivation drove me to a two-week, two hour-a-day scripture study and prayer obsession. That’s right. I read and prayed for two hours. Every day. In the process I lost any remaining hope that it might be true. I couldn’t believe it when later my mom suggested I didn’t show enough faith to get an answer from God. Two hours a day for two weeks isn’t enough? How about a year of desperate searching?

Around this two week period I flew up to Utah for a weekend to meet with my parents and family. We took a trip to the center of the Mormon organization in Salt Lake City, Temple Square. We ooh’d and ahh’d at the new Conference Center. It was an amazing and magnificent building. The woodwork was unmatched. And while my family interpreted the building’s beauty as another testament to the truthfulness of the Mormon Church, all I could think about was the money it took to build the thing.

I remembered when my husband and I were struggling with a baby, sometimes unable to buy groceries. Yet there was the obligation to give an entire ten percent of our income to the Lord. So that he could erect this building. Nevermind the many poorer families who don’t have money for food or medicine. They need to help provide for the Church’s desire to build more buildings.

We left the gorgeous wooden money pit and went outside where my parents showed me that the Church convinced the Mormon-dominated legislature to give them the city’s main road so that they could build over it. The main road through temple square is no longer a road. Commuters now have to circle around Temple Square and then veer back to the road, as I understand it.

“Were a lot of the non-members around here furious when they did this?” I asked.

“Oh, they just need something to be angry at the Church for. It’s really nothing,” was the response of one of my family members.

Seemed like quite a lot to be upset about to me.

This trip to the new and improved Temple Square both impressed and disgusted me.

Between that experience and my two-week devotion to get an answer once-and-for-all, I was now ready to accept the facts: it was all bogus. I was ready to add the “ex” to Mormon.

It was exhilarating. Life was exhilarating. So much to learn! So much to explore! New paradigms to view my world through. New questions to ask.

I walked into the most exciting time of my life.

And everything about it became better. My husband and I are stronger friends, closer than we’ve ever been.

I appreciate the fragile lives of my children more.

I can accept people for who they are.

I can be honest about who I am without pretending to live up to another person’s ideal. Because of this I am finally able to make real friends. I hadn’t had real friends since high school. You can’t be a real friend when you have a picture you have to portray.

I was a happy Mormon. I am a happier agnostic.

Fortunately, this week’s installment of HNN released today and you can read my artlcle, The Line. Come back and share your thoughts. I know you have many!

So here I am at an internet cafe on a computer in Mexico where all the symbols are in different locations from what the keyboard says. Have you noticed my lack of contractions? I cannot find the apostrophe. Nor the exclamation point.

Anyway, I just wanted to let you know I am alive. I will be back on Monday with much to say and a lot of comments to respond to.

Until then, I will be eating fish tacos, drinking Piña Coladas and thinking of you.

Hasta Luego.

Some of you were following along on the morality discussion in the comments section of Breaking It Down. A couple of days went by before I was able to get back to Ron and Hifi’s comments. I have since taken a more organized approach at responding point-by-point. If you were following along but didn’t realized we resumed the conversation, you can start here and read through the latest comments.

I promised Lilly I would write up a post about my leaving religion. I will start working on that and hopefully I will have it up soon.

Have you heard of ClubMom.com? It’s a mainstream mother’s website, an affiliate of momcentral.com, which has a new spot on the Today Show called, Parent Central. ClubMom has three million subscribers.

Thanks to my editor, Duncan Crary of the Humanist News Network, ClubMom has asked me to become an “Expert Writer” for the website. According to our agreement, I will be providing them with 25 prewritten articles (the “non-attacking” stuff you read here and in my HNN column) over the next month or so.

They said they love the unusual niche (and my writing) regarding parents who want to raise their families without religion. They said they see a need for this!

The “Expert Writers” are pre-published book authors, professional writers who ClubMom compensates with publicity. They made an exception for AgnosticMom, a non-professional, non-book author, because they like the topic! I think we’re making a little headway here.

The species anamensis is not new, but its location is what helps explain the shift from one early phase of human-like development to the next, scientists say. All eight species were within an easy day’s walk of each other.

Why is the location significant?

Modern man belongs to the genus Homo, which is a subgroup in the family of hominids. What evolved into Homo was likely the genus Australopithecus (once called “man-ape”), which includes the famed 3.2 million-year-old “Lucy” fossil found three decades ago. A key candidate for the genus that evolved into Australopithecus is called Ardipithecus. And Thursday’s finding is important in bridging — but not completely — the gap between Australopithecus and Ardipithecus.

The location gives stronger indication that we evolved from one species to the next. It fills in a part of the possible map of how we got from there to here. It is further indication that we did, in fact, evolve.

Psst, Note to TXAtheist: I started writing up a post based on your question. As of right now it is completely incoherent and I am short on blogging time today. It’ll be up soon, I promise!

Do you not get the weekly HNN ezine? Subscribe here to see my monthly column, and to read about the most current humanist news and issues every week.

Mr. Anonymous: So do you think I’m a Humanist?

AgnosticMom: I don’t know. Are you?

Mr. Anonymous: I don’t know.

AgnosticMom: Do you even call yourself Agnostic or Atheist?

Mr. Anonymous: Not really. Just . . . Nothing.

AgnosticMom: If somebody asked you if you believe in God, what would you say?

Mr. Anonymous: I’d say, “I don’t care.” I’m apathetic. That’s it! I’m an Apathist.

Let’s see, we’ve got Agnostics, Atheists, Freethinkers, Brights, Humanists, and probably a dozen more names. What’s another one to add to the scene to give distinction to our minute differences?

You are doing a wonderful job for the devil. Now stop being so self-absorbed and stop patting yourself on the back. Poor you , mommy won’t tell me I’m good. Do you think God is happy with your attitude.

Thanks for the laughs, Awzy.

In case this little bit of attention fuels Awzy’s fire and he decides to leave additional bits of un-christian love, I will be deleting any future comments he leaves. Unless he actually has something constructive to say.

AgnosticMom reader, and most especially, my good friend, Larry Keim, inspired my article’s topic when we ate at Buca di Beppo’s a couple weeks ago. Next to our table was a dinner party for a bride and groom. They were giving speeches, and Larry sat at our table, basking in his love for his used-to-be-teen-bride, now wife of almost twenty-five years. Larry, the passionate person that he is, got up and gave a speech to the party about beating the odds!

Anyway, if you feel so inclined, head on over. I must add a disclaimer first, though. When I got on the site to check out my name, my picture, and my post, I almost died of embaressment because I saw two major grammatical errors!!! I thought for sure the Mommybloggers must have gone in and added them! Those sly foxes. Of course, Ockham’s Razor suggests that the most likely scenario, the one in which AgnosticMom made the errors, is the theory to bet on. I checked the original draft. Yes, it was me. Ok, Mommybloggers, you’re off the hook.

So, when you see the comma following the question mark, and the extra “O” in the word “to,” just laugh and know that AgnosticMom still makes mistakes.

Oh, you already knew that?

“Hey, Noell! We saw your biography over there.”

“Huh?”

“You know . . . ‘Queen of the Damned.’”

Israel is Pro-Gaming. I am Pro-Gaming-In-Moderation-Only. He is liberal with the types of games he allows Blake to play. I’d rather limit Blake to childrens’ games.

I insisted on, and Israel went along with, a rule that mandated “no shooting people, or killing.” So when Israel introduced the adult game, Splinter Cell, to Blake, he instructed Blake to only use a stun gun, not a regular one. No matter that it all looks the same, whether the guy falls dead, or falls stunned.

I complained, but went along with that. Blake is a peaceful boy, the son of a man who once loved writing violent, gory suspense thrillers, but can’t go fishing, because the fish’s death is too traumatic for him. I doubt sneaking around as a CIA official, with a stun-gun, would turn Blake into a voilent predator.

As leniency tends to increase with time, the rules evolved slightly; it somehow became okay for Blake to shoot aliens dead. Aliens are bad. Guns, in this situation are good, according to Israel.

About a month ago, Israel bought Blake a new game. I walked in to find him playing the role of an alien, and shooting humans, specifically police officers.

Israel’s justification? “From the viewpoint of the alien, the humans and the police are the bad guys.”

I wasn’t giving in this time. I told them, “I hope you can get your money back on that, because if it is still here tomorrow, I’ll be putting it in the trash.”

They didn’t get all their money back. But they got some.

Returning to the subject of my “tail-whooping”, Israel thinks I am Anti-Video Games. He convinced me long ago, that they have value: They refine the child’s hand-eye coordination (a skill I lack,). They teach the child quick-thinking skills. They also taught Blake to read. Like an adult.

So, great! There are some benefits! My argument has been that excessive gaming deprives the child of time to develop other vital skills, learned only in the formative years. Those skills come with physical activity and role-playing. While Israel’s article convinced me that gaming may have more benefits than I thought (such as social benefits), and also made me feel better about the lack of substantial evidence regarding violence, it did not address the issue of excessive time and the imbalance that must result from it.

As for the violence issue, and whether Blake should be allowed to shoot police officers, I’m still not going for it.

If you don’t mind my changing the subject , you ought to check out my husband’s video podcast. It’s had enormous success and has received the notice of prominent bloggers and podcasters. Israel is a talented videographer, and he shares his skills in small five-minute bites. If you like to video your kids, or anything, for that matter, you will love Izzy Video.

He contacted me tonight through email. He wants to join in on the discussion. He is not agnostic. He has opposing viewpoints to the majority of us, regulars.

Jerry, you are absolutely welcome here! Comment all you like. You would add color to my blog.

My only stipulation, is that your comments be shorter in length than my own posts! I will remain queen of my castle!

A warning to my readers: Jerry is a true salesman. He is persuasive. I can’t wait to see how he does here.

The next morning, Aiden woke up, and, being only two years old, he had forgotten about the tree.

Sensing his excitement, I said, “Aiden, watch this.” In the early morning darkness, I flipped on the switch. All those lights produced a satisfying, “Ooooh” from Aiden.

After a brief pause, Aiden said, “Needs batteries, Christmas tree. Not turning.”

Israel was just entering the room at that moment, so I translated for him what I was pretty sure I just heard Aiden say, “Aiden says the Christmas tree needs batteries because it’s not turning.”

Aiden confirmed my understanding, “YEP!”

I wonder, at what age did you start talking with your kids about religion? When did they start asking? Without the basics, how do you start to explain to a child?

When your family participates in a religion, there is no initial introduction. It is just already there, as much a part of your child’s life as bathing. For those of who have opted out of religion, there needs to be a starting point; an introduction.

The timing of it depends on the family situation. Christy’s daughter is only two. From what I know of Christy, she is not around any close family or friends who are religious. Her daughter has probably had zero exposure to religion.

My children, on the other hand, are around religious extended family all the time. At every meal we have with relatives, they pray before eating. Three times a year when Israel and I travel, the kids stay with the grandparents and attend church with them. One of their cousins just got baptized and the children attended the ceremony with us.

If you are in no hurry to introduce the matter of religion, I think it can wait until the children become more socially aware of other families’ cultures and traditions. At some point, in the early elementary years, friends start talking about the Bible, and praying. I would suggest educating your children about religion by the kindergarten age if they have no exposure to religious practices by then. Otherwise, at or before the time of exposure.

Here are some possible different ways:
1. Religious books! Books are such a great educational tool. They don’t even have to be children’s books. Adult books have wonderful pictures. You can show the children the pictures, and educate yourself at the same time.

The key here is to give a brief explanation of the history and evolution of religion. There was a time when people didn’t have science and the understanding of the world that we have now. It was very scary for them to have thunderstorms. They didn’t know what they were or where they came from. They didn’t know why people got sick. So they invented answers and imagined all kinds of different gods that they thought might be causing it. (This is where a basic understanding of science is also vital).

Then show pictures of different gods from different religions. Tell a brief story. Show pictures of hindu gods. Show the Buddha.

This is actually the way Christy had her own epiphone about religion. She was in a world religion class learning about Buddha. She recognized similarities between his life and Jesus’s life. After Buddha died, his followers immortalized him as a god, even though he taught that he, himself, was only a man. (Not all buddhists believe he is a god, by the way).

It occurred to Christy that this is also what happened with Jesus. Millions of people on one side of the world worship a brilliant man who was a good teacher, named Buddha. On this side of the world, most people worship another great teacher, Jesus.

#2 Once you have established the existence of many relgions and many ideas about gods, I think it is important to teach the children Bible stories. If you can find children’s books from other major religions, I would do that, too. I have been meaning to do some research to see if I can find some, but I haven’t gotten around to that yet. Those stories have great value. Biblical stories, especially, are so integrated into our lives, our literature, our culture, our art, that our children would have huge gaps in their knowledge and understanding. They would miss out on so much richness.

I like to emphasize my use of the word, “story” when I share them. For example, I will say, “There is this great story in the Bible, about one of Jesus’ followers, named Peter. The story goes like this . . .”

I don’t spend time trying to tell them that it’s not true. If they ask me, I say that I don’t believe the magical parts of it are true. Probably most of the people existed, and many of the things they did and said were real. But Jesus and Peter probably never walked on water. It’s just a great story about staying focused on your goal and not letting your fears distract you from them.

3. Use the religious holidays as an opportunity to teach them. If you have not learned the history of Christmas, you are missing out. It is fascinating.

4. Balance the folklore with science. Teach your children about evolution as soon as they are asking questions about life and animals. They should know the earth is billions of years old. If they do, then the Bible’s literal version of a seven day creation and a six or seven thousand year age will be fairy tale-ish.

Ok, I hope to come back to this subject later, either to edit and improve this particular post, or to make an entirely new one later. I wanted to do a lot more research and add links to other sites and books, but it is way past my bedtime. I had to come through on my promise, though!

Go take a look at his article. My response will require more work than a definition search on the internet. Give me a week. In the meantime, feel free to tell me any of your own thoughts from his post. I doubt you will be able to keep them to yourself. Larry is provocative.

Come back tonight for the post I promised at Christy’s request.

Two hours ago, I finished cleaning up the aftermath of my 8-year-old’s birthday party. December is the busiest month of the year for those of us who celebrate Christmas. For my family, December also includes two birthdays (one on New Year’s Eve), and this year, a family wedding. Trinity will be a flower girl next weekend.

Normally I begin a little holiday planning in July (yes, I am that type, although there haven’t been exterior Xmas lights on my house since we moved here three years ago). October 1st is my serious holiday preparation launch-date, when I go full-throttle into holiday cheer.

Remember that luncheon I sacrificed my life to? It outdid me and thwarted my holiday planning.

Today was the birthday party, and the last few days have been Star Wars-themed and full of last minute party preparations. Now it’s finally done.

So, what do my faithful readers have to look forward to, here, at AgnosticMom? I am expecting a rebuttal from Larry, who told me he was brainstorming. He has his work cut out for him. Maybe he’ll surrender.

I also promised Christy a post about introducing religion to the children. She requested it in a comment to an earlier entry. I will have this up by Monday at the latest.

Relating to the topic of exposing our children to religion, my sister-in-law gave me food for thought. I’ll let you chew on it until my next post: She is hosting the Hyman Family Christmas Eve this year. Today she told me that she was planning an interactive nativity for the kids. While telling the Christmas story of Jesus’ birth, the kids will each get a piece of the nativity to assemble (IE. Mary or Joseph). At the appropriate times, the children will place their nativity piece in the pretend manger.

My sister-in-law asked me if I would like to include my children, or have them sit it out. I told her they would probably participate, but I’d let her know if we decide against it. I don’t want them to feel left out. Children should learn about various religions, but Israel and I would need to give adequate disclaimers ahead of time. Im not sure if I care to think about that right now. What would you do?

Recently, my good friend, Larry Keim, posted an entry on his blog. (Hi, Larry!). He titled the entry, “I’m A Spiritual Person, . . .Really.” He gave more criticism of the secular use of the word. He wrote it right after I left a comment on his previous post, “Finding God On The Way To Work.” Since Larry moved his site, my comment is no longer present, but it contained the arguably appropriate word, “spiritual.” I now realize his post may have been a reaction to a bonehead he met at a party, who made the very statement, but I am taking it as a challenge, anyway.

Larry says that secularists should not use this word because, according to Dictionary.com, the definition of “spiritual” is:

“Adj.
1 Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material.
2 Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.
3 Of, from, or relating to God; deific.
4 Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.
5 Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural.”

I would agree, that according to the first, and last three definitions, the word “spiritual” is meaningless from a secular viewpoint. On the other hand, the word may be of great value in regard to the second definition, “Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.”

It would depend on the word “soul.” Using Larry’s same source, I went to Dictionary.com and found that three of the possible definitions of “soul” are:

1. The animating and vital principle in humans, credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotion and often conceived as an immaterial entity.
2. The central or integral part; the vital core: “It saddens me that this network… may lose its soul, which is after all the quest for news” (Marvin Kalb).
3. A person’s emotional or moral nature: “An actor is… often a soul which wishes to reveal itself to the world but dare not” (Alec Guinness).

I need to qualify definition number one: It says the soul is “often conceived as an immaterial entity.” This implies that it is also NOT always conceived as such.

As the Agnostic Mom, I declare that the word “spiritual” is an appropriate word. I define it as:

“Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul, which is the animated and vital principle in humans, credited with the faculties of thought, action, and emotions; also a person’s vital core, or moral nature.”

As the Agnostic Mom, I also declare that secularists should have as much interest in their spirituality as a religious person, as I believe it is vital to our well-being and happiness, God or no God.

So, in the “Keim ‘N’ Hyman” tradition of playful banter, I challenge you, Larry, to a “spiritual” debate! I welcome arguments from anyone else who thinks they have a strong case.

I just found your website this morning.
I left the Mormon church five years ago and became a humanist too.
I would love to reconnect, if you wanted.

The writer is Laura, a friend from church, during my highschool days, 15 years ago. Meeting someone with your same worldview, when you are in a minority, is gratifying. Reacquainting yourself with an old friend, to find you’ve chosen the same unusual road, is an unexpected present on your doorstep.

Laura and I began emailing each other, swapping religious war stories about leaving, sharing enlightening books, and describing our favorite coffee and tea.

What I found fascinating were the parallels between Laura’s journey toward secularism, and my own. I’m sure many other agnostics and athiests will recognize the story.

First, the creeping doubts become so overwhelming they drive us into a mad search for answers. I think Laura told me she read about 80 different books regarding subjects like religion and science. In an email she said:

I studied myths, and other religions. I read about brainwashing and cults. I read anthropological, historical and scientific books. The end of 2001 I discovered websites that would be called anti-mormon sites in some circles. Suddenly my world exploded.

As we begin to accept the reality that everything we understood about the world is false, there is a short period of initial mourning.

THIS was the hardest thing I had ever gone through. I started going back through all the questions I had put on that shelf. I remembered events and people who had given me a small smoldering spark of doubt. I went from being a closet doubter to certain agnostic. I only gave other churches a moment of consideration before I shut the door on those options. With sadness, I gave up hope of a god I could trust, a father figure who would love me as my father hadn’t and a mother figure who would love me as my mother hadn’t and hope of ever seeing those who had passed before me.

Then, the adventure begins. We get to explore a plethora of ideas once forbidden. We discover what makes true sense to us, regarding the nature of the world. With time we are able to let go of hopes that once provided false security and easy answers. The real leap of faith is learning not to worry about whether our existence stops at death. This is when we find more meaning in what we already have, especially our families.

I will say that that I enjoyed and still enjoy discovering what I believe. I find great joy in NOT knowing what happens after we die.

It really is an adventure. Having others to share it with makes it that much better.

Here is what you get when you ask your husband, who loves shock value, to help your daughter with her kindergarten assignment:

Her name is Ana.
She is a cannibal.
She has syrup for blood.

Trinity turned this in to school today.

Kareena and I bonded when we met outside my family’s pop-up trailor. We would become long-term pen pals. After we sealed our friendship the day we met, Kareena decided to introduce me to her family. We approached her trailor, parked behind mine, and she invited me in.

The first words her mother spoke to me came as an interrogation, “Are you a Christian?”

Even though I was, in fact, a Christian, and would remain one for more than twenty years, I often thought back to that day and the question that disturbed me. I had become aware that a common religion is a pre-requisite in some social circles.

This fact became more concerning when my first child, now part of our agnostic family, started school and began to make friends. I had just joined The MOMS Club and was making new friends of my own. I worried about the inevitable moment when I would have to confess to another mother, that we were not Christians.

Eventually the time came, as conversations became more personal. To my surprise, it hasn’t yet been a problem. Perhaps the integrity I have already displayed is enough to take the stigma away? Or maybe I am just with the right kind of people. The more tolerant type.

My confidence flourished as I got to know two Christian moms a year ago. One of these moms claimed to be a true, believing Christian, but excused herself from being an example of righteous living. She was “weak in the flesh”.

I remember my shock the day these two friends told me about an evening a year earlier. They were drunk, and decided to get revenge on a friend who upset them. They drove to her house (yes, I believe they drove drunk) and egged it.

These ladies are moms. In their 30’s and 40’s.

That day I decided I was not ashamed of my disbelief of religion. I stopped worrying about others judging my morality. Since then I have had the confidence to say, with a smile, that I am not a Christian. I am an agnostic humanist.

Last week I finished “The End of Faith” by Sam Harris. What a fascinating and very different book. Harris outlines the unique position the world is in currently. For thousands of years, people have tortured others in the name of religion. But never has there been a time when fanatic religious people had access to weapons of mass destruction.

Harris warns that this is an era when suicide bombers, who want to “destroy the infidels” off the face of the earth, could actually accomplish their mission. He claims that tolerance of moderate religious faith gives credence to fundamentalists, who will go to extreme measure to accomplish their goals. What if those goals are to annihilate all others of a different faith?

This book gave me more reasons to stand up for myself and my beliefs.

Am I a Christian? No I am not. I am an agnostic humanist.

He first woke me at 3:45 requesting, “Mama’s bed.” So I let him join Israel, the dog, and me. For 45 minutes I laid awake, with Aiden in my arm and Gizmo the Bichon puppy against him. At 4:30, Aiden decided he needed my entire half of the bed.

“Get away, Mom! Get away!”

So here I am, blogging in a dark, quiet house. At 4:30 I answered an email from a friend inviting me over for coffee. She wants to talk about our shared “world view.” She had previously heard me mention agnosticism, looked it up, and then emailed me to thank me for giving her a name for her beliefs. We’ve been friends about a year, but had no idea we shared a common philosophy.

At 4:32 I received an email from another friend. This time it was a church-going friend who wanted to thank me for something, and said she was “inspired by me.” What does it say about me that I feel a sense of vindication when I read that? That I still have something to prove?

Ok, I admit it. I have a lot to prove.

In response to “I Hate the Devil and I Hate Russians”, Rodolpho said:

“I gave up on the whole idea of having kids”

Debbie responded with:

“I’m also an agnostic mom, but I never really felt conflicted about how I would raise my son.”

I would like to understand the roots of both of these views.

I definitely felt conflicted, but not to the extent that I would decide against raising a family. On the other hand, I cannot imagine having the confidence that Debbie has. I appreciate both of you sharing thoughts on my blog. I invite you to elaborate on the comments I quoted.

I mentioned before a lack of mentors. I have another reason for my own trepidation. I attribute much of my wonderful life to my religious upbringing. I did not drink as a teenager or a college student. I have never done a drug. I chose abstinence until marriage, and married a man who did likewise.

My husband and I have a great relationship. Mainly, it is because of our personalities, and the choices we make now. But if I had made more risky choices when I was young, I may not have gotten the great guy that I got. I may have, instead, born the baby of some immature kid. Who knows?

When I talk with other moms, and they tell me about their younger years, and all the crazy things they did, it scares me! What if my kids do the same things? I wonder if they would be less likely get into trouble if we were religious.

But then, these same friends turned out great. Maybe I worry too much.

And then, of course, my thoughts go to the people who don’t turn out so hot.

I live on the hope that logical reasons will be enough to encourage my children to be responsible and live well.

Me: I heard you on the phone with Zach. It sounded like he thought you were Mormon?

Blake: Yeah, but I told him we’re nothing.

Me: I heard that. I noticed you said it a couple times. How come?

Blake: He said you can’t be nothing. I told him we really are.

Me: That’s funny . . . You know if you want, you can tell people we’re agnostic.

Blake: What’s agnostic?

Me: It’s when you believe nobody knows what it’s like after we die. Religions think they know all about it; what happens. Agnostics don’t think anyone does.

Blake: Agnostic?

Me: “Gnostic” means “knowledge”. The “A” means “without”. So “agnostic” means “without knowledge”.

Blake: Then really, EVERYBODY is agnostic!

For a year, these questions persisted with every call. One time I told him I intended to never go back. If anything changed, I would let him know. After that, the inquiries became more sporadic.

My parents were due for an update.

This time, I answered, “Sometimes we go for family baptisms and baby’s blessings. And honestly, we just don’t feel good about it.” That ended the subject.

It will resurface. Eventually.

Earlier in our conversation, I had dodged an indirect attempt to turn the subject to religion. After I told him about my daughter’s struggle to keep her room clean, he asked me, “Are you having Family Home Evening?”

In case you don’t know what that is, I’ll explain. The Mormon Church designated Monday evenings as a sacred time for families to spend together. It can be an evening in or out, and often centers on a religious topic. Church leaders command members to have Family Home Evening (FHE) every week, implying negative consequences for those who don’t. They promise parents that, if they have it, “no child will be lost.”

I was stunned when my dad’s follow-up question to a room-cleaning dilemna was whether or not we were having FHE. I felt I was being interviewed for worthiness.

When I left the church, my parents expressed dire concern for my kids. I told them I would continue to have FHE because it is a great idea. I didn’t want to now tell my dad that I had neglected it. An admonishment with warnings of drugs and teen pregnancy would surely result.

But then I realized the connection that led him from room cleaning to FHE. Periodically, as a kid, my family had room inspections for the activity. We spent the day preparing our bedrooms. That evening, my dad donned white inspection gloves. Acting a silly character, he marched through each room checking for dust and toys left out. It was a fun evening that ended in prizes and candy.

So, rather than answer my dad’s question of whether or not we’d been having FHE, I played his game and steered the conversation back to room cleanliness. “You mean you want to know if we have room inspections? No! That is a great idea!”

Of course, within minutes, Dad chose the direct route and asked me if we ever go to church.

For a week I thought about the guilt I felt for not having FHE with my kids. I wondered if I should try to start it. It really is a good idea.

But then it occurred to me: as an agnostic, my family doesn’t NEED a Family Home Evening like a Mormon family does. Mormons don’t have the sacred Sunday Family Day that my family has. For Mormons, Sunday is God’s Day. They have church for 3 hours. That doesn’t include travel and preparation. Most families also have at least one parent who has a minimum of one additional meeting to attend that day. Add to that the Visiting Teaching and Priesthood visits (estimate 2 hours) that often occur on Sundays.

My parents had a Family Night. I have an entire Family Day.

Robertson claimed that Dover residents effectively “voted God out of your city.”

Do you not think it scary that this man can say so many outrageous things, and continue to draw a huge following?

My favorite of Robertson’s godly admonishments is when he said, “I’d like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city.”

The prophet has spoken.

My first question is, where have they been keeping all this stuff? My second question is, WHY have they been keeping all this stuff? Is it really worth saving tons of unwanted junk for a garage sale, to spend the entire weekend on your driveway? For a few hundred dollars?

I had a garage sale years ago and found that for me, it was not worth it. Below are three soul-enriching reasons to ban garage sales from your home.

Items that you would otherwise sell could be donated to a charitable organization. What an easy way to make a contribution to society. I never feel I reserved enough money for the causes I support. It costs me nothing to donate items I no longer need, that would be useful to some child whose dad is long gone and whose mother is unable to parent him because of drugs.

Causes and organizations I support:

• American Cancer Society
• National Parkinson’s Foundation
• Esperanza Children’s Home in Sonora, Mexico (There is no official site for this, but I found a page from another organization that donates to this home.
• The International MOMS Club
• Clothes Helping Kids

The second reason not to hold garage sales has to do with time! Two days sitting on that driveway is two days NOT doing something enriching: running on my treadmill, taking the kids to the park, sorting thoughts while I blog, relaxing at the coffee shop, scrapbooking family memories, reading a good book, organizing my home, etc.

My minimalist philosophy inspires reason number three: A person should never hold onto enough unwanted junk that they could even have a worth-while garage sale! That much stuff is detrimental to the soul. Too much clutter makes a home disorganized and crowded. A cluttered environment poisons the mind with distractions and stress. If you don’t use it and you don’t LOVE it, get rid of it.

Two different organizations make regular monthly stops through my neighborhood to pick items up from my sidewalk. I have a space in my closet where I can put unneeded items until pick-up day comes. This week I bought new bed-covers for the boys. Guess where the old ones are going?

For more info. and helpful tips regarding clutter, take a look at Flylady’s website.

He couldn’t have been more than four years old. It was the Cold War. It was common American knowledge, passed from adults to children, that all Russians were evil.

Although my husband would describe me as opinionated (and I guess that’s his opinion), I try to take a nuetral stance with my children on most matters. It’s more important to teach them to question things, look for facts and evidence, and use their reasoning skills, than it is to get them to think what I think.

My other goal is to send the message that it is okay if their opinions don’t agree with my own.

During last year’s presidential elections, Blake (age 7) decided he was pro-Bush, and Trinity (age 5) said she was pro-Kerry. They were both fully confident with their choices and had no problems disagreeing with each other, or with anyone else. When President Bush won, Blake felt victorious. Trinity stayed loyal to Kerry.

I had a fascinitating conversation with Blake yesterday. Somehow we started talking about “bad world leaders” who killed innocent people and children. We talked about Hitler and World War II, and Saddam Hussein. Based on those two examples Blake made a false conclusion. “Oh, so every time a country has a bad leader we start a war with them?”

“No, no, ” I told him, “there are many leaders, like the ones over Cuba and North Korea, who we haven’t gone to war with. Usually they have to do something that affects us before we will go to war with them.”

So, Blake wanted to know why we declared war on Iraq. I told him we thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

I may have some opinions about the war. The facts we know tend to be the ones that support our own opinion, but I do my best to give a little information from both sides. Then I ask my kids what they think about it.

I told Blake that although a few people didn’t think Iraq had the weapons, President Bush was sure they did, so we declared war on Iraq. We got Saddam Hussein and put him in prison, but then we realized they didn’t actually have weapons of mass destruction.

Blake immediately voiced his opinion, “Well, we need to stop the war then!”

Once again I tried to stay nuetral, “A lot of people agree with you, but there are others, including President Bush, who think we need to continue because the ones fighting now us will probably take over the country if we leave, and then they will have a bad leader again.”

Blake’s support of Bush doesn’t make him feel the need to always agree with him. Blake reasoned, “But the longer we stay, the more problems we’re going to have. It will just get worse.”

I supported Blake’s own opinion, but since he never asked me mine, I didn’t give it. If he had asked I would have told him. Then I would have followed it with the question, “What do you think?” This gives him the message that I respect his ability to form his own opinion, even if it doesn’t agree with my own.

We shouldn’t stay nuetral on everything. Kids need to know there are some boundaries of right and wrong, safety and danger, in order to feel secure. They also need to know about things that could hurt them.

When Trinity asked me what came first, “Do you have a baby and then get married”, I gave my opinion! “You get married and THEN you can have a baby.” This is an issue that will impact her life and her children’s lives.

What is not vital to their well-being is whether Bush or Kerry was the right choice, other whether or not we should pull out of Iraq. That is strictly opinion.

The same goes with religious matters for an agnostic family. I have not tried to persuade my kids that there is no god, or that Jesus is not a god. When they ask me, I tell them that Christians believe Jesus was God, but I think he was just a good man whose followers decided later that he was a god. Then I ask them what they think.

So far they’ve come back with the opinion that Jesus is God. That’s what I originally taught them. It’s what they hear from their friends and what they hear at church with Nana when Israel and I travel. In the past it has frustrated me. It still get nervous, but I think it’s okay for now.

If the tooth fairy and Santa exist for the kids’ pleasure, why not a god? It’s not important at this age. What is important is that they learn to ask, reason, and have confidence in their opinions.

Imagine the animosity that must have been seething that day in the bus as Rosa Parks stood her ground. Imagine the fear she must have felt, but the courage she maintained.

“Are you going to stand up?” the bus driver asked.

“No,” Parks responded.

“Well, by God, I’m going to have you arrested,” the driver said.

“You may do that,” was Parks’ response.

Children understand these stories. There are not many ideas they comprehend and relate to more than the idea of fairness.

What I love most about these types of stories is they show that we are not helpless in a struggling and difficult world. We should not wait in compliance for a more just afterlife. We don’t have to wait for a god to change things on his own time. These stories tell our children that there are things we can and should do now to make a positive change in our society.

Tonight my family will light a candle at dinner in honor of a brave woman who made a courageous choice and sacrifice that changed everything.

Boy, did I get in over my head this year. When I first joined the MOMS Club, I had decided I was done being an over-active, over-committed, at-home mom. I was now going to be the relaxed perfect mom I once was (LOL). I had previous leadership experience, but I was going to keep quiet about that and let people think I was clueless. I took two small positions. Ok, well, that lasted one year.

At election time last spring, I accepted the nomination for Administrative Vice President. I think that actually would have been just fine, but then something else came up. Our chapter had agreed to host the yearly statewide fall Luncheon, for 300 women. The mom who was going to chair it became our chapter president and resigned from the luncheon chair position. When no one else stepped up, I began to sense that the world would end if I didn’t take it on. Nevermind that my position is arguably more demanding than the president’s (at least it is if you do it my way; complicated, overly involved, and larger than life).

I told the club I would only become Luncheon chair if we would delay our fundraising until after the luncheon. Everybody agreed, raised their hands, and then the chaos began. The community Halloween Carnival was scheduled one week after the Luncheon, and we HAD to do it. We’ve done it every year. One week after that, for some reason I’m not aware of, we HAD to have our Open House. I wasn’t in charge of that one, but it would require man-power already being exhausted. And then, because I made the mistake of offering another good fundraising idea, which I intended to happen next year, the club almost unanimously insisted that we HAD to do it for the holidays, four days after the Open House.

I will hand it to the club that they did as I requested; they scheduled these events right AFTER the Luncheon. Nevermind that they all had to be in planning stages at the same time. Like I said before, just because something is a good idea, doesn’t mean you should do it.

So my poor family has been neglected over the past number of weeks. Two-year-old Aiden grew out of is only pair of shoes, and I didn’t have time to take him shopping. He grew to the point where he’d scream and scream the entire time I made him wear them. For two days he went everywhere (yes, somehow we’ve developed a life where we go EVERYWHERE) in slippers, because I could not find 30 minutes to go to the store.

About a week ago, I stepped down from my Administrative Vice President position. Thankfully, many in the club had been simultaneously learning Lesson #1, albeit not the the extent I had. My mom-friends were all very supportive, and agreed we had taken on too much, and I was bearing the weight of it.

Yesterday, at 3:34 p.m., I walked away from the Windemere Conference Center, got into my car, and called Israel. “It’s over! The Luncheon is done.” It was a huge success. I got a mariachi band there (it was a Mexican Fiesta theme). We added a number of other new features never done at a previous luncheon. We made thousands of dollars from the raffle. It was fun and I was so proud. But I definitely should not have done it.

At 4:00p.m., I came home to my neglected children. We played a modified “Red Light, Green Light” in the backyard. Then the kids had me name animals for them to act out. Next we advanced to Lego’s and built choo-choo trains. It was a calm and eery moment of slow no-obligation. My kids have their mom back.

I still love my MOMS Club. It was never intended as a full-time job with no pay. I will now be enjoying our fun activities as a contributing participant, not as a leader. And I hope we’re all ready too cool it on the big stuff. The club was meant to support moms, not drive us crazy!

Comments in “The Vent” and “Letters” against evolution reveal that most of these people don’t understand it. A past venter asked why apes still exist if humans evolved from them, implying a greater expertise than biologists. His and others’ comments are an embarrassing display of ignorance.

The current debate about Intelligent Design has revealed a deeper problem: scientific ignorance has surpassed evolutionary ignorance. Most ID proponents lack an understanding of science’s definition and goals.

This is not a debate about a Designer’s existence. To reject the teaching of ID in science classes is not to reject God. It is simply an effort to maintain scientific integrity where theories are based on research and duplicatable test results. If we cannot observe and measure a theory, we cannot create an explanation — no matter how reasonable it seems to us. If we had always applied this faulty method, the world would still be a flat disc in the center of a universe that revolves around us. The current “gaps” in our knowledge are an incentive for scientists to continue their search.

While it might be acceptable to include ID in a philosophy class, it has no place in a science class. This misallocation of the subject is largely because the scientific community has failed to educate the public. If educators could effectively reach the non-science-oriented majority, more people would understand ID’s improper fit in a biology class. Too few people understand the basic fundamentals of the Scientific Method, the basic definition of science, the process of validating and testing a hypothesis to see if its results are duplicatable, and the goals of scientific discovery.

Our science educators must learn how to teach the masses.

This letter was published in the East Valley Tribune, one of Phoenix’s two major newspapers, on Tuesday, Oct. 11, 2005.

*For a more humorous commentary on this debate, check out this website where you can read a letter sent to the Kansas School Board on an alternate theory of Intelligent Design.

I don’t know how food eventually achieved such high-ranking status in my book, when for years as a teenager I consumed very little of it for long periods of stressful times. I realized in college that the full-feeling stage of eating was almost foreign to me. I could only remember feeling full after Thanksgiving dinner. Living in the Philippines when I was 21 changed that. The food was INCREDIBLE! Well most of it. The Cow Cheek in Peanut Butter Sauce? Not so good. Pig brains and ears cooked in vinegar? Ummm, not good. The other pig brains with vegetables and a different type of sauce, perhaps Patis? Delicious. Mostly we ate normal foods, though, and I learned to eat. I learned to love food. I ate A LOT. And I have ever since.

But not only do I love food, I regard it as a major aspect of my spiritual life. Some people go to church to find upliftment. I prep my dinner vegetables after lunch for mine. Life slows down. I feel close to nature. I know I am blessing my family. It’s a beautiful part of life. I cook complete meals from whole foods for my family most every night. We sit down as a family to a set table regularly. I am sad that so many people don’t. And while I know most of my working-mom friends (understably) don’t make dinners very often, I am stunned periodically when I find an at-home mom like me who rarely brings a wholesome dinner to the table.

Call me naive. A group of us moms were scrapbooking, and one friend said she does her main grocery shopping once a month. “How do you plan a menu for an entire month?” I asked. Everyone in the group shot wide eyes at me and one blurted out, “You make a menu?!”

Proud Moment: Usually I steam fresh vegetables like green beans, asparagus and squash, but every once in a long while I buy a can of green beans to make this great Creole-style side recipe I love. The last time I made it (it had been a while), my 5-year-old Trinity gasped, “What is that?!!!” Canned green beans do look weird when you’ve always had fresh. For me, hearing my daughter ask that was like putting a trophy on my wall. Especially when one of my own childhood memories was seeing fresh green beans for the first time at Grandma’s house and asking, “What is that?”

Proud Moment Number Two: Last week I bought a can of Creamed Corn for an easy corn chowder I would make for dinner one night. I had to buy another can today because a few days ago, my kids requested Creamed Corn for their after school snack. They were ecstatic when I said yes. The three of them sat around the table with their little primary-colored plastic bowls, eating a very special treat. When my kids think Creamed Corn is a special treat, I know I’ve done my job!

Recommendation: If you’ve never done it before, and if you have time earlier in the day, prep your dinner early. Get the kitchen clean and clutter-free first. Empty the dishwasher. Create a peaceful environment. Then pull out your recipe for your evening meal and start chopping. If you have time, measure out the herbs and other ingredients, too. It can be a meaningful part of your non-religion. And then when dinner time comes and you’re tired, the kids are hungry, and everyone is on the edge, dinner is so easy to put together.

The other morning we were running slightly late for school, as usual. While rounding up the kids to get in the car, Blake panicked, “Mom, mom! We need to turn in the money and orders for our school pictures today.” No, we don’t. School pictures are tomorrow. You turn them in when you get your picture taken. But Blake was almost hysterical. “I heard them say it on ZNC (school daily news show), They said we HAVE to turn them in today.” I knew he was wrong, and I didn’t have time to put the money together, but I also knew Blake would be freaking out if I didn’t just write the check and give it to him to turn in early.

So I gave Blake his way, filled out the packets, wrote out the checks, and rushed the three kiddies into the car. I was making up time on Main Street and taking on the role of victim with thoughts like, “I can’t believe he’s making me turn in the money early and now we’re late!” I despise playing this role, but find that I take it on a lot since I became a mother!

Then, interrupting my self-absorbed thoughts, came the voice of my 7-year old Gimminy Cricket, “Mom, you’re going 60 in a 50 mile per hour speed zone”.

“Blake, Leave Me Alone!!!!!!!!!!!!”

But it’s worth it. I often wonder what I would do if my kids had the “rule-breaker” gene instead. I admit, I would be more inclined to stay involved in church, only for the added effect of having a god-belief as a motivating factor for choice-making. This morning, Blake came to me from playing an online video game, and told me he shut down the game because someone used the F-word on it. I thanked him for making such a responsible choice. He reminded me of a test he took on Disney.com where the site instructed the children to log off and tell a parent if anyone ever uses “bad words” online, or is mean or a bully. And here was my child, doing exactly that. While I don’t beleve any religion is true, or has any real clue about what happens after death, I am not opposed to people involving themselves in one if it meets their needs and wants. I wonder if it would be beneficial to people whose children who are don’t look for rules like mine do. I don’t however, think that Sunday School lessons are essential for teaching children your moral values. I have found that just by being around my children, and always being the moral person that I am, my children learn everything they need to know. I truly believe that one day spent with good parents, is worth more than a lifetime of Sunday School lessons.

Purposely giving up your religion, and your beliefs about life and the world, can lead to such an exciting, rejuvenating adventure with new paradigms and understanding. You have to decide what you believe and don’t believe about everything. As my views created new shape, I have gradually found names for my beliefs and values that others share with me: Humanism, Minimalism, etc. A big question many athiests feel a need to answer for themselves is the question of morality. Is it relative? Is there a source for it? Do goodness and evil exist in and of themselves, or is that defined by humankind? To me, goodness is anything that contributes to the overall happiness and well-being of the living as a whole, whereas evil is anything that deprives from the happiness and well-being of humankind. I cannot achieve my own happiness at your expense (ie. by stealing your property) and call that goodness, because it hurts “the whole” as a group.

In my reading of The Moral Animal, I found a name for this world view: It is called Utilitarianism. John Stewart Mill was the “premier publicist” (pg. 332) of this philosophy, and published papers with the very title, Utilitarianism. He and Darwin both embraced Utilitarianism as the answer to the question of morality in light of the harsh and brutal ways of Natural Selection. Mill saw a need for a moral code in order to “maximize the world’s total happiness’ (pg. 332). Jesus’ Golden Rule is the key to Utilitarianism. It goes hand in hand with Secular Humanism.

My next thought now is always, “what are some ways I can discuss these ideas with my children?” Before it was so easy: the Church had all kinds of materials and lesson plans for parents to use with their children. I am completely unaware of material on these subjects, designed specifically for parents to use with their children. Maybe the Universalist Unitarians have stuff. They are like a church for the not-necessarily religous. . . kind of. They embrace good parts of all faiths and their members are full of athiets, agnostics, liberal Christians, Jews, Pagans, Buddhists, etc. If I think of it later, I’ll do some research and see if they have library of books for children on this stuff. Otherwise, I guess these types of universal subjects can be pulled out of literature and discussed while reading to our children.

Tomorrow I’ll be enjoying coffee with my girlfriends while the kids participate in a story/singing time, which I arranged for my club through a coffee shop. Two years ago we moved to a new town 30 minutes away, and not having a church community to jump into, I made no friends for two years. I know things are different in the midwest and other places, but here, it’s very difficult to get to know your neighbors. And eventually when you do, you still can’t really call it a community because you’re just not that close. These days, if you don’t belong to a church, you have to go out and make a community in some other way. I was scared at the idea of raising my children without a supportive group like the one I grew up tied to. A year ago I discovered the MOMS Club, a non-profit organization with local chapters for at-home moms. We have activities scheduled one to three times a week and we can attend as many or as few as we want (at no cost: there’s just a yearly membership fee, my chapter is $20). I had no idea that these ladies would become some of my closest friends. We get together, our children play, we share our hobbies and insanities, and we have a blast! Some moms are religious by faith, some by heritage, and some, like me, not at all. It’s a totally secular group, and it was the missing piece I needed! I highly recommend it, if you’re like I was, and without a community, go find a chapter in your area. You can find it online at www.momsclub.org.

Ok, so finding a club was a triumph for me. I am also experiencing struggle. What do you do when your family life is infiltrated with the extended relatives’ religion? We just attended the baptism of my kids’ 8 year old cousin, Nana just took my kids to church while we were in Florida last weekend, and my son’s best friend has been telling him he won’t go to heaven if he doesn’t pray. He also read the Bible to my son. Suddenly Blake (7 yrs) announced to me that the Bible is true, he loves church (he didn’t like it before, so that made things easy), and he wants to get baptized when he’s 8. Maybe I’ll go into more detail next time (unless something new pops up!). Will this be a continuous battle? I think so. It’s all an adventure.