There's no such thing as an atheist baby

[LostOne4Ever]

80. This article's main argument rests on two assumptions

1) That atheism is an active position
2) demand that babies only be ascribed identities that they themselves embrace

The first is both an objectionable and false claim. It is simply a lack of belief.

The second is an opinion the author made, and to which most countries in the world reject. If you only meet the conditions of being a Chinese citizen, then you are a Chinese citizen. Ascribe to yourself that you are Japanese all you want, unless you are able, willing, and actually do take the steps necessary to become a Japanese citizen....you will still only be a Chinese citizen.

There is another reason why babies can't be atheists or agnostics. Everything we know from science shows that supernaturalism comes naturally to children. It is not just that they believe much of what their parents and the surrounding societies tell them: they show a preference for remembering and transmitting stories that defy scientific rationality. So do we all, unless we train ourselves out of it.

Again, atheism is simply a lack of belief. One can believe in an afterlife, fairies, leprechauns, or whatever, and still be an atheist so long as they do not have a belief in god(s). He is thinking of a "skeptic."

I have other issues with his statements here, but without more background in child psychology I hesitant to comment. Let me just say I am "skeptical" of his claim that supernaturalism is natural to children. That would take an understanding of there being a natural order to things and entities that go beyond that. That is a very abstract concept which I doubt a very young could develop on their own. I think they definitely make irrational explanations to explain the world around them, but without outside input those explanations probably seem very natural to the child.