Blind faith

Many times I see Christians think that a believing evolution requires blind faith. I've read and heard over and over that evolution is just a theory or less and Pascal's wager weighed heavily on me throughout my transition beyond faith.
I need to constantly reevaluate what I know because I have been wrong in the past. I cant settle for the knowledge I have because I may be wrong, I have been before.
So, is my faith now in science? Or the scientists?
First, it's important to note that faith is a belief not based on proof or evidence. I can say with certainty I do not have faith in science. I analyze the evidence presented by it and make the best judgment from there.
One thing I know is that mankind is a prideful species and every scientist lives for a big discovery. If one scientist can prove another wrong they will gladly do so. Would it be easy to prove evolution false? No. There is mountains of evidence supporting it. The theory is so solid at this point it would take a lot to disprove it. One giant leap in the right direction to put some doubt in the theory and give the flood story a little more credence is if any fossil ever were found out of order in the geological layers.
I believed as a young earth creationist that the flood was fact and that it was the primary cause of the layers we see in the earth today. The flood story offers a lot of explanations to what we see around us when limiting earth to a 6,000 year time scale (aside from the god of the gaps idea.)
There's one huge glaring problem though. In a flood the water moves everything chaotically. If the flood was truth, we would still find tons of fossils, but they would be mixed up, as if there was no order to how life evolved. We would find mammals  prior to the Triassic period and some dinosaurs in the most recent of rock deposits. We don't find that in reality. If we could separate the geological layers like sheets of paper we could watch evolution occur like a flip book.
Even for animals as unique as the platypus we can view its evolutionary progress.
By the flood account, this is not possible unless God purposely made it that way, in which case it is a lie fabricated by God to lead people away from the Bible, which is contrary to everything I believed about God.
When I was studying through all this information,  I wanted to believe the creation story. I tried my best to reconcile what I believed with reality, but it just didn't match up.
Another big thing I learned during the process of learning about the origins of life as we know it is that evolution is a theory, but not as Christian leaders taught it. Evolution is a theory the same as gravity, planetary movement, or the expanding universe are theories. Gravity exists, you feel it's forces constantly, and not believing in it doesn't make it untrue.
I remember once in high school I was talking to another student about God and she said to me that her faith was that whatever you believed was true to you. I asked if she believed the chair she was sitting on was there, and she replied in the affirmative. I then asked, if I didn't believe in the chair would it cease to exist. She replied in the negative of course. I said it's the same with God and she said just because I believed, doesn't mean he exists.
Pascal's wager basically boils down to the idea that belief in God is better than non-belief because there is a lot more to gain in faith.
I love the idea that I could live forever. It is a wonderful thought that I could have eternity, but I cannot believe in God because I like the idea, and it doesn't make it true just because people believe.
I was in prayer constantly over everything in my life and it was easy to find a correlation with real world events. I didn't understand that I was creating an enormous probability that would be true. It all seemed real until I heard about an experiment with pigeons who developed their own "prayers" to get food.
I was doing the same thing as these pigeons. It just seems like God is there because I'm connecting the dots I created in the first place.
Over a long enough time scale you a correlation can be found between lots of entirely unrelated events, but it doesn't prove they're related.
So how can I be sure that evolution isn't just that, a correlation of unrelated events over time? The evidence. Evolution is reinforced constantly through DNA, dating methods, and fossil evidence.
My views on evolution are based on anything but faith. It's all based on evidence.
The fallacy here is in not knowing that all faith is blind. By definition it does not need proof. But believing, unfortunately, does not make it so.

What about my kids?

One thing I have contemplated a lot since my religious transition is how I will raise my children.
I had always imagined that my children would be raised as members of the Christian community and a big part of that would be my immediate family and their influence.
Before I had kids I would imagine us being late for church because it took my wife too long to get ready, and as soon as it was time for Sunday school you'd see how fast they could really run. I based these ideas off of my upbringing.
Church was such a necessity that even on vacation, it was part of the planning process to figure out where we would go to church.
Especially when I first realized the Biblical story was untrue I wondered how would I teach my kids morality. I considered continuing to bring them to church because I didn't understand morality without God. I didn't think there could be a standard of morality without God. And I was partially right.
Even within the Bible the standard fluctuates from person to person based on their knowledge and faith. For non-believers the standard ranges even more wildly, though.
How am I supposed to teach my children solid morality?
I still think the golden rule applies to everyone and is quite useful. Treat others as you would have them treat you, but this does not apply to every situation. To begin with, you must have a sense of responsibility in order to be treated fairly. If a thief comes to your home, do they deserve to be treated as you would treat yourself? The answer is simple, no. They have forfeit their sense of responsibility for their own sense of entitlement. They think they are entitled to what you have for whatever reason they have come up with to justify their actions.
I feel like most situations can be viewed this way outside of the Bible's version of morality.
I think it boils down to the simple concept of responsibility toward humanity vs. a sense of entitlement from it.
The biblical version of morality covers everything with a little bit of faith, but definitely defies what I see as right because it views God as entitled to all of humanity so whatever is written in his name goes. God even has guidelines for what you can think.
There are a lot of things the Bible says not to do that no one fights, so let me bring up an example that Christians fight hard on that falls outside my standard: homosexuality.
This has been the biggest fight for equal rights since Martin Luther King Jr. was around and there were a lot of Christians on the wrong side of that moral battle. Now most Christians would say everyone is God's creation whether they're black, yellow, red or white. (No offense, it comes from a Christian children's song.)
I wonder what Christians will say 50 years down the road now. I suspect that they will say homosexuality is fine. It's what happened with slavery and segregation.
These are all pretty good examples where entitlements outweighed responsibilities.
The Bible does not approve of homosexuality to clear that up for anyone who does not know, but does it present a truly moral obligation against it? I assume the obligation comes from the fact that same-sex relationships at the time didn't allow for children in a society where having a legacy to leave behind was pretty important.
The fight in the U.S. now is Christians want homosexuals to know they don't approve of their lifestyle by denying them a piece of paper and some tax benefits.  The truth is it doesn't change the way people will live, it only makes them feel like lesser people in the eyes of others. Sometimes people perceive others to think of them as less when it's not true, but in this case, it is exactly that which is happening.
I don't want my children to view others as less because of personal choices which have no effect on their lives.
Should anyone who's favorite color is green be ostracized? Perhaps if you're favorite flavor is strawberry you should be extradited immediately. Even more gravely, a farmer who uses crop rotation, anyone who wears clothes of more than one fabric, if you cut the sides of your hair, if you like your steak any way except well done, and if you don't stand in the presence of old people, you are in danger of the fires of hell. That's not all either. If you don't like immigration,  hell. Homeschooling mom with male children, hell. Seriously, this goes on and on and on, and Christians chalk up these rules to cultural relevance.
These personal preferences have no effect on another person's happiness unless they take they choices as an affront to themselves personally and who's fault is that? I have to admit, I don't like making other people feel bad and I do feel guilt over it at times, but its my problem for feeling guilty when I shouldn't.
Homosexuals aren't gay because you do or don't want them to be, its a part of who they are. Is it fair for anyone to force them to be disallowed their own responsibility for who they are?
The Bible does not allow for this view of morality.
I want my children to be leaders in a society that looks at humanity for the dignity and liberty it could have and moves toward more freedoms through responsibility.
My children are entitled to my love. It is my responsibility to give it to them and through that simple idea, I hope I can give them everything they need to succeed morally in life on their own terms.
But what if they believe in religion despite everything I know and pass on to them?
My children are their own people. Even though they are small now and I can make nearly every decision for them, it wont always be that way.
I can absolutely accept they may believe in religion down the road. I believed it once and had faith. I know that faith is a very small leap when you have truth, or at the very least good ideals, mixed with unverifiable statements, or even lies. Most importantly I would still love them, but I would also hope they didn't lose their sense of humanity, empathy and responsibility.