Listen to these some of these comments! It's a us against "them" attitude no matter what. It's always been this way throughout history wherever religion is involved.

And you all wonder why the monkey in the middle "atheists, agnostics, freethinkers" stick our noses in other people's beliefs. It's because some believers will destroy the world just to prove their invisible sky god is the one true Being.

Of course, all He has to do is SHOW UP and tell everyone what's what. No muss, no fuss. (That is, in real life... not in a 2000 year old tale, but right now.)

Simple.

So why doesn't he? (Hint, hint.)

Perhaps in 30 years, so many people will have spoken up about this that we won't have to ...

Listen to these some of these comments! It's a us against "them" attitude no matter what. It's always been this way throughout history wherever religion is involved.

And you all wonder why the monkey in the middle "atheists, agnostics, freethinkers" stick our noses in other people's beliefs. It's because some believers will destroy the world just to prove their invisible sky god is the one true Being.

Of course, all He has to do is SHOW UP and tell everyone what's what. No muss, no fuss. (That is, in real life... not in a 2000 year old tale, but right now.)

Simple.

So why doesn't he? (Hint, hint.)

Perhaps in 30 years, so many people will have spoken up about this that we won't have to worry about the human race being destroyed over some other person's invisible god.

Religion has done an awful lot of harm to the world and individuals. It's a crouch for people that feel empty

Ridiculous statement. Go to a third world country and see how vital is the work of religious people and organisations If the religious people pulled out of Africa, the continent would collapse. Most of you atheists are so ignorant, it's beyond irritating. You atheists sit on your couches flinging barbs at the religious of the world. I have yet to see an atheist orphanage open in Africa. I have yet to see an atheist feeding scheme for the poor. I have yet to see atheist clinics treating the sick and the injured. The atheists I have seen for the most part on Clip...

Religion has done an awful lot of harm to the world and individuals. It's a crouch for people that feel empty

Ridiculous statement. Go to a third world country and see how vital is the work of religious people and organisations If the religious people pulled out of Africa, the continent would collapse. Most of you atheists are so ignorant, it's beyond irritating. You atheists sit on your couches flinging barbs at the religious of the world. I have yet to see an atheist orphanage open in Africa. I have yet to see an atheist feeding scheme for the poor. I have yet to see atheist clinics treating the sick and the injured. The atheists I have seen for the most part on Clipmarks are arrogant, hypocritical and laughably, woefully ignorant.

It's only been recent that Atheists organizations have been ALLOWED to operate in the open without being severely attacked by... you know who!

An atheist can't even run for public office in America, a supposedly secular government, because most voters being religious wouldn't give her the time of day.

I give monthly, automatically, to a Christian organization (Feed the Children) because they have an international outreach and the amount that goes to management is very acceptable.

I also give to a Christian organization because if I for one moment gave the same funds to a non-Christian organization I might be arrested for contributing to (thanks to Bush and the Christian right) a terrorist...

It's only been recent that Atheists organizations have been ALLOWED to operate in the open without being severely attacked by... you know who!

An atheist can't even run for public office in America, a supposedly secular government, because most voters being religious wouldn't give her the time of day.

I give monthly, automatically, to a Christian organization (Feed the Children) because they have an international outreach and the amount that goes to management is very acceptable.

I also give to a Christian organization because if I for one moment gave the same funds to a non-Christian organization I might be arrested for contributing to (thanks to Bush and the Christian right) a terrorist organization.

In other words, it's the only way we (atheists, agnostics, freethinkers) CAN give freely to help others without being attacked by... you know who.

And that's the point.

So to assume that religious organizations that help others, is somehow evidence that non-religious people don't help others is simply not valid.

(I could actually show you study after study that show religious people are actually LESS helpful and LESS honest than the non-religious. But that would be beside this point.)

No one needs religion to do good. And no one needs religion to do harm. But to do harm in the name of a god or religion... some of us are just getting sick of it.

So we speak up. The centuries of Christian terrorism, the suicide bombings, the treatment of women, gays, science... it's all harm in the name of religion.

"God doesn't do charity work, people do."

Yes, religion HAS done a lot of harm in the word and has killed and tortured countless non-believers, even while we speak!

Killing while being charitable... wouldn't you call that arrogant, hypocritical and laughably, woefully ignorant?

Let the truth be told.

@michellezm

Re: Atheism and Charity. Here are plenty examples and why you would never hear of them. Including Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, among the two largest charitable organizations and donors in American history (much of their work is in Africa).

The Red Cross was founded by freethinker/deist/universalist Clara Barton. Lance Armstrong for his anti-cancer charity.

Benjamin Franklin a freethinker (& is said to have been a deist) co-founded Pennsylvania Hospital (the first hospital in the US, according to that link) with a Quaker.

Freedom from Religion Foundation has received a 4-star rating from
Charity Navigato...

@michellezm

Re: Atheism and Charity. Here are plenty examples and why you would never hear of them. Including Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, among the two largest charitable organizations and donors in American history (much of their work is in Africa).

The Red Cross was founded by freethinker/deist/universalist Clara Barton. Lance Armstrong for his anti-cancer charity.

Benjamin Franklin a freethinker (& is said to have been a deist) co-founded Pennsylvania Hospital (the first hospital in the US, according to that link) with a Quaker.

Freedom from Religion Foundation has received a 4-star rating from
Charity Navigator, America's largest independent evaluator of charities. (4 out of 4 stars)

Here is also a list, including America's Second Harvest, which is purportedly the nation's largest charitable hunger-relief organization.
And not to mention the Council for Secular Humanism, which is small compared to the major charity organizations but also has a 4 out of 4 rating with Charity Navigator, whose purpose is to rank and give information about charities.

You mainly do not hear of them because they do not list themselves as Atheist just to do good work. But with a religious organization.... that's all you hear. And mostly, it's why they do it.

Non-religious organizations do it because it needs to be done. And yes, there are plenty. They just don't need to advertise they are religion-free.

I'm not sure I understand. I used to give to Meals on Wheels because they gave where it mattered to me, most. Then I upgraded to do the same on a broader level.

I identify with this need because at one time I was not only homeless but hungry. The Christian organization I tried to go to for food turned me away, not because of at the time, there were so many others that needed help, they simply couldn't. They didn't have enough to give.

I never once in my mind faulted them on any level. But the need for food when one is hungry can cause desperation, and I can identify with that circumstance.

The organization I give to has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. It's that they fill a need th...

I'm not sure I understand. I used to give to Meals on Wheels because they gave where it mattered to me, most. Then I upgraded to do the same on a broader level.

I identify with this need because at one time I was not only homeless but hungry. The Christian organization I tried to go to for food turned me away, not because of at the time, there were so many others that needed help, they simply couldn't. They didn't have enough to give.

I never once in my mind faulted them on any level. But the need for food when one is hungry can cause desperation, and I can identify with that circumstance.

The organization I give to has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. It's that they fill a need that needs to answered right NOW.

Other than that, any relationship with god is completely irrelevant.

Surely you're not suggesting that I need a god to have empathy for others. One has nothing to do with the other.

@michellezm that is bull, you don't need to be with a religion to help people out. There are plenty of charities that do this that are not religious. Are you saying the Oxfam is a religious organization? There is a reason that there are all this in the third world countries, it's because religion is all they have.

I'm not a Atheist, I'm just smart enough to know that religion is gay. Atheisium to me is almost like having a religion for some people. These idiots need to get over it and shut up.

2035 is a long time away, you don't know they will outnumber christians. You have no idea, they both may get bored and find something better to do. Maybe people will start worshipping alice and wond...

@michellezm that is bull, you don't need to be with a religion to help people out. There are plenty of charities that do this that are not religious. Are you saying the Oxfam is a religious organization? There is a reason that there are all this in the third world countries, it's because religion is all they have.

I'm not a Atheist, I'm just smart enough to know that religion is gay. Atheisium to me is almost like having a religion for some people. These idiots need to get over it and shut up.

2035 is a long time away, you don't know they will outnumber christians. You have no idea, they both may get bored and find something better to do. Maybe people will start worshipping alice and wonderland.

Once Muslims realize that there are a million other ways to be completely nuts then they will abandon the religion. Most of these Islamic countries are full of wacko's, they just need some strangle religion in order for them to experience there wackiness. They should all start wearing glow in the dark turbins!

It's all good though, 99.99% of Muslims are harmless and very very funny! We need to keep them, just so we can laugh at them. But society needs to get rid of it's hang ups, it's okay for me to make fun of someone for being an 'Emo' but not for being a 'Muslim'? Why?

These idiots need to get over it and shut up.

That would be wonderful. Pray tell...

How do you propose these idiots "shut up" when they keep getting bashed over the head because they don't believe in someone's particular invisible man?

For centuries they've been getting killed for not believing in someone's god, even as we speak.

How do you propose they shut up?

Don't you get it?

I for one FEAR the Muslims taking over almost as much as Christianity. Why? Because they, like Christianity, have a long and joyous history of KILLING PEOPLE that don't believe what they do.

A Muslim will say, the Koran doesn't condone that. Bull! A Christian will say, the Bible doesn't ...

These idiots need to get over it and shut up.

That would be wonderful. Pray tell...

How do you propose these idiots "shut up" when they keep getting bashed over the head because they don't believe in someone's particular invisible man?

For centuries they've been getting killed for not believing in someone's god, even as we speak.

How do you propose they shut up?

Don't you get it?

I for one FEAR the Muslims taking over almost as much as Christianity. Why? Because they, like Christianity, have a long and joyous history of KILLING PEOPLE that don't believe what they do.

A Muslim will say, the Koran doesn't condone that. Bull! A Christian will say, the Bible doesn't condone that. Bull!

In America (or the West in general), our secular laws PREVENT IT. Islam, however, is BASED on their holy book. There is no secular law that supersedes their holy book. It's a theocracy.

There is NO prevailing law to prevent it. In fact, they believe they get rewarded by heaven if they DO kill non believers. That's why suicide bombing is so popular (haven't you heard?).

Can you imagine them with nukes?

Please... take a moment to do so.

Now,... Why is it that only those "idiots" can see this?

@RecordSage

to compare Christians and Muslims as far as killing for the cause goes.

You are right, and I apologize for this. I wasn't clear. I was speaking in an historical sense. Our secular laws have prevented this for probably a couple hundred years, probably ending with burning witches at the stake.

The thing that frightens me, is that most of those religious people (on either side) actually believe these things.

I doesn't make me feel much safer when even though my neighbor is peaceful (pretend he's a Muslim), he still "actually believes" that IF he killed me, he would by virtue of his action, go to heaven.

Or that if (pretend I'm gay) my neighbor is a fundy ...

@RecordSage

to compare Christians and Muslims as far as killing for the cause goes.

You are right, and I apologize for this. I wasn't clear. I was speaking in an historical sense. Our secular laws have prevented this for probably a couple hundred years, probably ending with burning witches at the stake.

The thing that frightens me, is that most of those religious people (on either side) actually believe these things.

I doesn't make me feel much safer when even though my neighbor is peaceful (pretend he's a Muslim), he still "actually believes" that IF he killed me, he would by virtue of his action, go to heaven.

Or that if (pretend I'm gay) my neighbor is a fundy Christian, that even though I've never harmed a soul in my life, that he hates me and actually believes I'm going to roast in hell for eternity and deserves it! But if someone bashed my head in with a brick, he'd think it was a good thing and I deserved it.

It's sickening.

@RecordSage

I think you're crossing a line here. I think a Christian might believe
that you will be going to hell, but I don't believe he'll want your
head bashed in as if you deserved it. I just don't see that kind of
attitude.

Here: Jimmy Swaggart telling his flock he'd kill a homosexual and lie about it to god. No one in his congregation says anything about it, but gives praise instead.

Take a quick perusal of the site GodHatesFags.com .

From [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/12/gaybashing-state-rep-exa_n_91269.html]Huffington P...

@RecordSage

I think you're crossing a line here. I think a Christian might believe
that you will be going to hell, but I don't believe he'll want your
head bashed in as if you deserved it. I just don't see that kind of
attitude.

Here: Jimmy Swaggart telling his flock he'd kill a homosexual and lie about it to god. No one in his congregation says anything about it, but gives praise instead.

Take a quick perusal of the site GodHatesFags.com .

From Huffington Post: "The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation is sorting through nearly
7,000 e-mails that were sent to a state lawmaker after she said
homosexuality is a bigger threat to the United States than terrorism."

Muslims?: Here's a 3 year old being indoctrinated to hate the infidels. Here's what happens when they go to heaven for murdering an infidel. (This is a woman talking about what happens when she succeeds in a suicide mission.)

You tell me, which are the apples and which are the oranges?

I agree to the point that there are individual nuts and anyone can spout anything, but regardless of what Jimmy has to say - you don't see his people running around and blowing up tons of other people, or carefully adjusting their kids belts and checking for malfunctions... prior to knowingly sending them to die.

There IS a difference. Of course I realize there are people like mcveigh and few losers that blew up abortion clinics, but there's no comparison in numbers, tactics etc.

As for Huffington Post - sorry, those are also bunch of losers in my view, so I don't waste time there.

All I'm saying it's one thing to 'say' something, or even listen to someone 'say' something and another t...

I agree to the point that there are individual nuts and anyone can spout anything, but regardless of what Jimmy has to say - you don't see his people running around and blowing up tons of other people, or carefully adjusting their kids belts and checking for malfunctions... prior to knowingly sending them to die.

There IS a difference. Of course I realize there are people like mcveigh and few losers that blew up abortion clinics, but there's no comparison in numbers, tactics etc.

As for Huffington Post - sorry, those are also bunch of losers in my view, so I don't waste time there.

All I'm saying it's one thing to 'say' something, or even listen to someone 'say' something and another to actually act on it in a seriously negative manner.

If you look at the two - there's the difference. Also there's a difference between the folks that do NOT do such terrible acts. For example most Christians I meet (and those are much higher numbers of course) - are completely and vocally oppose such acts, openly so. Muslims tend to keep quiet on these issues. I have a friend, who's a devout muslim, and I know he's definitely anti-terrorism, yet he chooses not to openly condemn it, who knows why. I know there are those who say they do, we just don't see it in mainstream etc., which is BS... when they do - it's very visible. This is why I said apples & oranges.

There IS a difference. Of course I realize there are people like mcveigh and few losers that blew up abortion clinics, but there's no comparison in numbers, tactics etc.

Right, and I agree. Our secular laws supersede religious dictates that condone such things.

As for Huffington Post - sorry, those are also bunch of losers in my view, so I don't waste time there.

Would you prefer Fox News? Here's a few of her quotes from Fox:

"I honestly think it's the biggest threat that our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam, which I think is a big threat," she said.

"Studies show no society that h...

There IS a difference. Of course I realize there are people like mcveigh and few losers that blew up abortion clinics, but there's no comparison in numbers, tactics etc.

Right, and I agree. Our secular laws supersede religious dictates that condone such things.

As for Huffington Post - sorry, those are also bunch of losers in my view, so I don't waste time there.

Would you prefer Fox News? Here's a few of her quotes from Fox:

"I honestly think it's the biggest threat that our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam, which I think is a big threat," she said.

"Studies show no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted, you know, more than a few decades. So it's the death knell in this country."

Better?

All I'm saying it's one thing to 'say' something, or even listen to
someone 'say' something and another to actually act on it in a
seriously negative manner.

Right, and I agree. Surely it gives you a nice cozy warm feeling knowing that your neighbor supports hating you, as long as they don't act on it.

Fortunately our secular laws PREVENT them from acting on it, but the HATE is being condoned, taught and supported, by their RELIGION. To minimize this fact doesn't add to the well being of the world, it attempts to ignore it. But it's hard to do when the subject of hate happens to be you, and you've done no harm to anyone.

For example most Christians I meet (and those are much higher numbers
of course) - are completely and vocally oppose such acts, openly so.

Yes, I find this also. Thank god some are willing to look past the literal interpretations of their holy books!

Muslims tend to keep quiet on these issues.

Yes, out of fear. To go against the teaching of their holy book (even as a practicing Muslim) makes them apostate (dead).

Now you're getting too philosophical. In terms of Fox news - I haven't heard such comments, not to say they didn't happen, but I haven't. Regardless, when huffington kept crap they have about Tony Snow, as one example - that was way over the line for me. If you don't like 'hate' in general - huffington would be the place to stay away from.

In terms of my neighbor disliking me (or 'hating' if you use your example) - I don't really care. I don't have to associate with him/her... I can't 'make' someone like me, nor do I go out of my way TO or NOT TO do so. People think what they will, for their own reasons. And yes, if they choose to 'hate' me - I couldn't care less. If they want to thr...

Now you're getting too philosophical. In terms of Fox news - I haven't heard such comments, not to say they didn't happen, but I haven't. Regardless, when huffington kept crap they have about Tony Snow, as one example - that was way over the line for me. If you don't like 'hate' in general - huffington would be the place to stay away from.

In terms of my neighbor disliking me (or 'hating' if you use your example) - I don't really care. I don't have to associate with him/her... I can't 'make' someone like me, nor do I go out of my way TO or NOT TO do so. People think what they will, for their own reasons. And yes, if they choose to 'hate' me - I couldn't care less. If they want to throw a bomb for that reason - that's a different story. I'm assuming it's unnecessary to describe the difference to you.

There will always be bigots and racists etc. Based on my past in the USSR - (most) Americans of today have no clue what that means, although they think they do, but they really don't. The government can't teach children (although they obviously try and fail), neither can churches (although they try and succeed in some instances), it's up to the parents and that's something no one can (or ever will be) able to control. Thus the problem will exist as it has been. The question is to what extent.

And as for (most) Christians not following the Bible literally - kudos to them, certainly using their brains there. And Muslims - I'm sure fear is an element, but I disagree that they're helpless and couldn't do anything else... or an example of not using their brains, unfortunately.

@RecordSage

And Muslims - I'm sure fear is an element, but I disagree that they're helpless and couldn't do anything else... or an example of not using their brains, unfortunately.

Perhaps you can help Sayed Parwez Kambakhsh, a journalism student. He's been convicted of insulting Islam. He's only 24 years old, but his penalty for his alleged crime (I believe he downloaded some blasphemous material off the Internet), is of course... death.

But there is good news! They are now allowing him to have an attorney AFTER his conviction. So perhaps you're right, these people aren't really "helpless". They have freedom ...

@RecordSage

And Muslims - I'm sure fear is an element, but I disagree that they're helpless and couldn't do anything else... or an example of not using their brains, unfortunately.

Perhaps you can help Sayed Parwez Kambakhsh, a journalism student. He's been convicted of insulting Islam. He's only 24 years old, but his penalty for his alleged crime (I believe he downloaded some blasphemous material off the Internet), is of course... death.

But there is good news! They are now allowing him to have an attorney AFTER his conviction. So perhaps you're right, these people aren't really "helpless". They have freedom of speech, and can speak-out any time they want.

RecordSage, these are real people, in real life. The hatred is real, the bombs are real, and the theocratic systems are real.

And I can appreciate that it's your opinion when you say you "couldn't care less". But some of us do, and would really like to leave the world a better place for our next generation.

And it's just a small thing, but to me, it matters.

Ok, so let's entertain the concept of you caring about the fact that someone may dislike you or worse. What exactly is your proposition?

When I said I couldn't care less, it certainly wasn't in regards to accepting the hatred within some as it is. I'm simply saying I won't let it bother me to the point of creating a major disruption in my life. I want the world to be better for the same reasons you do, since I also have the next generation growing up. However, I don't see how you can make an iota of difference in, for example, palestinians teaching their kids to hate the Jews. I like your hopeful statements, but there's absolutely NOTHING that you can do to change the fact. The soluti...

Ok, so let's entertain the concept of you caring about the fact that someone may dislike you or worse. What exactly is your proposition?

When I said I couldn't care less, it certainly wasn't in regards to accepting the hatred within some as it is. I'm simply saying I won't let it bother me to the point of creating a major disruption in my life. I want the world to be better for the same reasons you do, since I also have the next generation growing up. However, I don't see how you can make an iota of difference in, for example, palestinians teaching their kids to hate the Jews. I like your hopeful statements, but there's absolutely NOTHING that you can do to change the fact. The solution of course isn't to accept it, but certainly to confront and fight it with as much vigor as necessary, especially when things get to the point of violence... but as you well know there is an old saying 'people don't change', whether it's learning to use computers to write letters or anything else. Some do, some embrace change, but others completely refuse it. Being a computer consultant I can't tell you how many times I've heard "I've always done it this way"... people (for the most part) are creatures of habit, and we all know that brainwashing does wonders... so when you're 3 years old, you get on TV and reporter asks you whether you don't like Jews and you enthusiastically respond with a smile and big 'yes' - of course there's very little chance that you'll grow up anything but that. There are many reasons why people don't change... the only point I'm trying to make here is that they do NOT, and with that stated - your sentiments might be noble and heart in the right place, but realistically speaking - it ain't happening any time soon. So, you can chew your gut out fighting it without success (or with extremely limited success on a grand scale) or you can live your life concentrating your thoughts and efforts on other things, more important things, like your next generat

What exactly is your proposition?

1. There is nothing about secular humanism that denies or disparages any religion. There is no reason, therefore, we can't teach it in all schools K-12 and above.

It can stand as an example to all others our commitment to freedom and fairness without discrimination, holding no person as less valuable than any other. (Our Bill of Rights was supposed to do that before it got hijacked by a competing ideology.)

2. Make secular humanism clear at an international level through the U.N. and world councils. (The goal of Human Rights was supposed to do that before it got hijacked by a competing ideology.)

3. At least for America, allow no immigrant...

What exactly is your proposition?

1. There is nothing about secular humanism that denies or disparages any religion. There is no reason, therefore, we can't teach it in all schools K-12 and above.

It can stand as an example to all others our commitment to freedom and fairness without discrimination, holding no person as less valuable than any other. (Our Bill of Rights was supposed to do that before it got hijacked by a competing ideology.)

2. Make secular humanism clear at an international level through the U.N. and world councils. (The goal of Human Rights was supposed to do that before it got hijacked by a competing ideology.)

3. At least for America, allow no immigrant to this country that will not swear to put our secular laws above all others, religious and otherwise, while here. (That ought to keep out some of the riff-raff.)


But that's where I'd start. At home in the schools, and then to larger arenas. Secular humanism respects the person and their freedoms. It's like a world Bill of Rights that asserts equality and freedom as a human right for all.

I strongly believe people will embrace this idea. I also strongly believe governments will not. Most governments believe they exist to control the people, not the other way around.

Our American government was founded "for the people, by the people", so we have a good start.

I don't mean to insult you, but I do think you're being excessively naive.

I think religion, just as many other things, is a tool that can be used and can (is) abused. People who abide by the 'don't steal, don't kill' are showing positive traits. You're advocating 'secular humanism' is essentially the same end result, just packaged differently.

Can humans be decent without religion? Absolutely. Does religion help guiding people into the 'decent' area? Many times it does.

The problem is with human nature being 'me, me, me'. That's where we run into problems. Especially when you mix it with 1st Amendment. You have, understandably so, major differences of opinion, to the point of vi...

I don't mean to insult you, but I do think you're being excessively naive.

I think religion, just as many other things, is a tool that can be used and can (is) abused. People who abide by the 'don't steal, don't kill' are showing positive traits. You're advocating 'secular humanism' is essentially the same end result, just packaged differently.

Can humans be decent without religion? Absolutely. Does religion help guiding people into the 'decent' area? Many times it does.

The problem is with human nature being 'me, me, me'. That's where we run into problems. Especially when you mix it with 1st Amendment. You have, understandably so, major differences of opinion, to the point of violence & beyond. Some folks do unimaginable stuff... has nothing to do with 'religion', but they do. Some (like bin laden) act for the sake of their religion, in which case it's easy to point out that religion sucks - perfect example of why. But then you have people like hitler, who wasn't religious. There are plenty of others.

The bottom line - it's 'human nature', there's nothing we can do about it. We don't really understand why someone like manson was born or how he looks at things, or someone like dahmer. There are plenty of people who want to change what is 'normal' to some and vehemently so. There are all kinds of factors involved, all kinds of people and in the end - it's always the people who are to blame for the actions.

Our American government was founded "for the people, by the people"... when they got totally pissed at the Brits for wanting to tax them a bit more. Come to think about it - our upcoming leaders seem to want to do the same, have been doing the same for many years... kind of makes you wonder about those good old days.

Governments (some of course) are founded to control people, but those would be the ones that stay in power for long times. Term limits (as in our case) don't really work well in that endeavor... and the Founding Fathers certainl

@RecordSage

I don't mean to insult you, but I do think you're being excessively naive.

You're advocating 'secular humanism' is essentially the same end result, just packaged differently.

Two very different and important differences between Secular Humanism and Religion:

1. The AUTHORITY to justice can be appealed to on a HUMAN level based on equality and fairness. Who arbitrates when a god sanctions evil?

2. The FOUNDATION of justice is "for and by" the human, not a belief, a religion, or a god.

Such a humanistic foundation can thereby evolve with society and advance accordingly. We no longer stone to death our wives or children for disobedie...

@RecordSage

I don't mean to insult you, but I do think you're being excessively naive.

You're advocating 'secular humanism' is essentially the same end result, just packaged differently.

Two very different and important differences between Secular Humanism and Religion:

1. The AUTHORITY to justice can be appealed to on a HUMAN level based on equality and fairness. Who arbitrates when a god sanctions evil?

2. The FOUNDATION of justice is "for and by" the human, not a belief, a religion, or a god.

Such a humanistic foundation can thereby evolve with society and advance accordingly. We no longer stone to death our wives or children for disobedience. The development of our secular society no longer permits such barbarism.

(Not true for some others! Notice those others are entrenched in cultural [traditional, religious] entrapments that won't allow them to evolve their cultural standards. I.e., the Muslim who challenges the laws, traditions, or cultures of Islam becomes apostate and is often killed with the sanction of their laws, which are interpreted according to their holy book. This acts as a preventative means to developing or evolving culture.)

Secular humanism allows a culture to supersede restrictive social and cultural limitations, thereby allowing them to break restrictive attitudes by setting common secular human rights as inalienable by virtue of birth.

A person may therefore practice any traditional norms as they wish (a religion, for instance). But another person within that same culture, has just as much right to not practice that religion or norm, as granted by the freedom of their birth.

A woman in Islamic culture, for instance, would have just as much right not to wear hijab or even not to practice the traditional religion should she decide not to.

Her human right would supersede the tradition.

True - we no longer stone our wives, but some of us beat our wives or kill them using other means than stones. You read sensational stories such as woman walking into a room, seeing her husband sound asleep, picking up a gun and shooting him dead, shooting her children dead and then herself. Where's your evolution? Mother taking her children in the back of a car and then driving them into a lake and drowning them. Where's your evolution? Men, having sex with children, married to many wives - where is your evolution?

I agree that we've made some advancements... when people were being stoned to death - nobody blogged about it, but on the level you and I are discussing - there's practicall...

True - we no longer stone our wives, but some of us beat our wives or kill them using other means than stones. You read sensational stories such as woman walking into a room, seeing her husband sound asleep, picking up a gun and shooting him dead, shooting her children dead and then herself. Where's your evolution? Mother taking her children in the back of a car and then driving them into a lake and drowning them. Where's your evolution? Men, having sex with children, married to many wives - where is your evolution?

I agree that we've made some advancements... when people were being stoned to death - nobody blogged about it, but on the level you and I are discussing - there's practically no evolution, just evil done using other tools.

You're talking about a utopian society, something communism was trying to achieve, being more than secular at the same time. That was suppose to be 'secular humanism', turned out to be the biggest joke of the last century, in terms of progress, in terms of lives lost, in just about every term possible. And that's not some 3rd world country, with naked people running with spears - we're talking a huge population, huge amount of land, vast natural resources and some of the most educated nations on the planet and that whole experiment failed miserably. So, obviously 'secular humanism' in that sense didn't work. I lived under that kind of 'humanism' and I want nothing to do with it - ever again!

The 'me, me, me' concept is human nature. If applied correctly - it's a good thing for the person and people around them. Capitalism, which certainly has 'me, me, me' at its center, has been about as good a society concept (at least in the USA) as anyone ever devised.

You say 'a person may practice any traditional forms' - what exactly is that? Perhaps marriage? I don't think your gay friends would agree with you on that one, as we've just recently seen in California. Are they right or wrong?

Did you say that because there is still crime, ... therefore there is no social / cultural evolution? (Take a look at religious law, and then secular law. BIG difference.)

Did you say communism didn't work, and then called it secular humanism??? (One has nothing to do with the other.)

For the record: "Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production."

Secular humanism is, in brief, a system of ethics that respects the human.


Did you say that Capitalism is a "society" concept? (Uh, no.) But just for the record:

"Capitalism is an economic system in which all pro...

Did you say that because there is still crime, ... therefore there is no social / cultural evolution? (Take a look at religious law, and then secular law. BIG difference.)

Did you say communism didn't work, and then called it secular humanism??? (One has nothing to do with the other.)

For the record: "Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production."

Secular humanism is, in brief, a system of ethics that respects the human.


Did you say that Capitalism is a "society" concept? (Uh, no.) But just for the record:

"Capitalism is an economic system in which all property is owned by either private individuals or a corporation."

It is a system of economics.


You said: "You say 'a person may practice any traditional forms' - what exactly is that? Perhaps marriage? I don't think your gay friends would agree with you on that one, as we've just recently seen in California. Are they right or wrong?"

I think if I had communicated properly, you never would have asked the question. Short answer: they have the "freedom" to traditional marriage... or not. THEY get to chose. Not you, me, the state, tradition, or anyone else.

Like I said, it's a complicated world, and 'secular humanism' is a concept, like communism, that's good on paper and doesn't work in our society.

In a sense, you've already admitted that it does. The American society is already among the closest to it! It's embodied in our Bill of Rights, and our U.S. Constitution (esp., the 1st and 14th Amendments which guarantees freedom of expression and due process under the [secular] law).

And as you admit, it's "about as good a concept as anyone ever devised", but you've got your terms mixed up. Secular democracy and capitalism are different things.

I was trying to relay the concepts as examples, not play dictionary. What you're talking about everyone being free to do what they want is anarchy, and that definitely doesn't work. And having everyone be able to do marriage traditional style or gay style, just let everyone be as is also doesn't work... simple example of such - bin laden. You may believe in certain things, he doesn't give a damn. As far as he's concerned - you're wrong. Period, no debates, discussions or evolution - pure and unabashed hatred.

For things like communism or your concept to work - all people must be decent human beings and that's just not the reality at hand.

Like I said, moving in that direction is certa...

I was trying to relay the concepts as examples, not play dictionary. What you're talking about everyone being free to do what they want is anarchy, and that definitely doesn't work. And having everyone be able to do marriage traditional style or gay style, just let everyone be as is also doesn't work... simple example of such - bin laden. You may believe in certain things, he doesn't give a damn. As far as he's concerned - you're wrong. Period, no debates, discussions or evolution - pure and unabashed hatred.

For things like communism or your concept to work - all people must be decent human beings and that's just not the reality at hand.

Like I said, moving in that direction is certainly a noble goal... Achieving total success in 100% of population, based on the prior examples of total lack of evolution in some - it certainly won't be happening in your and my lifetime... probably never.

What you're talking about everyone being free to do what they want is anarchy, and that definitely doesn't work.

You're right, anarchy doesn't work. In anarchy there are no laws; it's a free-for-all. It's also NOT what I'm talking about. In fact, there can be no secular humanism in a system of anarchy!

But it's clear we have some communication barriers with regard to the meaning of certain terms and labels.

You've equated Communism with secular humanism, when one has nothing to do with the other.

You've equated society as capitalism, when one has nothing to do with the other.

And now you're equating secular humanism as a form of anarchy! (???)

Clearly our terms are no...

What you're talking about everyone being free to do what they want is anarchy, and that definitely doesn't work.

You're right, anarchy doesn't work. In anarchy there are no laws; it's a free-for-all. It's also NOT what I'm talking about. In fact, there can be no secular humanism in a system of anarchy!

But it's clear we have some communication barriers with regard to the meaning of certain terms and labels.

You've equated Communism with secular humanism, when one has nothing to do with the other.

You've equated society as capitalism, when one has nothing to do with the other.

And now you're equating secular humanism as a form of anarchy! (???)

Clearly our terms are not in agreement. And this makes communication difficult.


So I guess I'll part with this:

1. Our society, and our freedoms within it, are given and supported by our secular laws.

2. Our economic system is based on Capitalism, the concept of free trade. (Which had nothing to do with the discussion, but it [secular humanism] in no way restricts capitalism in any way. It does, however, invite it.)

3. Forming society's laws based on humanistic principles of inalienable rights to fairness and equality of justice, allows laws and society to evolve without the restriction of tradition.

Sorry. It is not anarchy, communism, or a financial system. It is a principle of laws based on human ethics allowing for the maximum happiness, freedom, and responsibility for the individual.