LS, this is an entirely reasonable position. One can have this position and be consistent with Objectivism. Frankly, this is the position Ayn Rand should have taken. Instead, she took what I consider a logical shortcut to atheism, which cannot be proven and on this earth, probably not even tested.

Admittedly, I have about a 10% error rate in determining whether or not someone is being sarcastic or not in printed word. What makes sarcasm (or any form of humor) effective is that it has an element of truth.

Thank you jbrenner :)

I put in parentheses (dripping with sarcasm) so that I am perfectly clear.

How is that flawed?

"Everything that happens has a cause; when it appears to happen for no apparent reason it means you don't know the cause." I agree completely with that statement, so I am giving you a +1. However, this statement is why you and I have such vigorous disagreements about the origin of the universe. I don't know what the reason was, nor do I know what the cause was, but I do know that the universe did not just appear "out of thin air". Existence exists, while true, is insufficient to explain the cause for the universe's existence.

Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 4:10, "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." This pretty much defines a lack of logic and defines mysticism.

In a sense, I'm luckier than most who have experienced such tragedy. I'm not afraid of my emotions. If I feel like crying, I cry. I had him for 32 years and my memories are good. I could go on and on about it, but this isn't a shrink blog.

I am usually a pretty open and a friendly person and as a result, I've had at least twelve people and two standbys trying to save my soul. As a matter of fact, I have a good friend who is very religious and keeps reminding me how he prays for me every day. Fortunately he is a musician with a great sense of humor, and both things make him an excellent buddy. I was going to use the phrase "saving grace" but I thought that was too religious. I don't want to fall off the wagon.

Quite clearly, LS has been exposed to Christianity. She knows the creed. She isn't ignorant about that, Robbie. She simply rejects Christianity in one sentence, "What kind of parent saddles their kid with that?". That is a perfectly valid reason to back her philosophical world view.

But air DOES exist. Oxygen is not faith based.

The two usually go together.

Of course there is a happy ending. But that is not the point of the story. There are thousands of good medical outcomes daily, many after people were in danger of death. This story was written not because there was a "happy ending" but because that ending was supposedly caused by divine intervention. That's what makes it "news" to some. It was not written to explain an interesting medical phenomenon. Read the title to the story.

I think it's a "don't think" piece.

But why do you feel the need to "discuss other people's beliefs" ?
Why can't your desire for the right to believe what you choose and not be messed with, be extended to the rest of us?
Personally, I am not religious...but I'll accept (and expect) being damned, if I tried to make that the norm for everyone else.

All writings of any length are flawed in some way.
I'm not going to stop reading and learning because of it.

So he only answers the prayers of the most obefient?

Great thought. But I'm not that limited.

Meaning?

He doesn't listen.