In response to Emil…
My point was not to propose a specific doctrinal analogy between the belief in religion and the belief in Santa. My point was to elicit empathy as to how annoying it is to have those wishing to “battle” about religion by relating a hypothetical experience you might find annoying in an equivalent way.
For those who missed it, this is Emil’s post:
In general, those who let us believe in Santa, eventually recanted their story. There would be no point in going back to that story that nearly everyone (other than the children) agrees is basically a myth. Then again, we do have historical knowledge (St. Nicholas, etc.) about true events that apparently developed into the Santa Claus story.
But those who’ve told us about God, in general, have not recanted their claim. If Santa Claus is based partly on some truth, how much more likely is it that the claims of God’s existence are true?
(An important note: I am talking mainly of the existence and reality of God here. I’m not so focused on “religion” or “Mormonism” necessarily. It seems when I talk of God, several people here take that to somehow imply I’m talking of the LDS church. Yes, my view of God is colored by my belief and upbringing in the LDS church. But my knowledge of God’s existence comes from my own experiences and also from accounts repeated by others of various faiths. That fact–that God lives–is the thing I most strongly believe in regarding spiritual things.)
EDIT by matthew: Linked for clarity.