Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dustin on December 9, 2010 at 1:50pm

"What it does mean is that everyone in a society should be free to be religious or not (provided that it doesn't harm anyone else)"

I guess we need to ban all religion then ...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Herk on December 9, 2010 at 1:54pm

Perhaps it would be better to describe secular values as basic human values. We all know what the 'values voters' consider valuable: no marriage for gays and if they could just stay out of the limelight because we're a bit bothered looking at them; Christian teachings in schools; no abortion because we can't stand the thought of you sucking babies' brains out with straws; grovel before God or you'll really, really be sorry.

Without the influence of religion, human societies create more reasonable laws (sometimes) based in function rather than mythology.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Peters on December 9, 2010 at 2:07pm

That's a good thought. However, I like the term secular values because it highlights that Atheists can and DO have values and morals.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Peters on December 9, 2010 at 2:52pm

Indeed.

This past summer, a man from the Philippines (a largely Catholic country) moved into my apartment building. We became friends quickly. Somehow, the subject of my Atheism came up, and he was shocked. Apparently, I was the first person he had ever met who didn't believe in God. Luckily, he was intelligent, and realized that didn't make me an amoral nihilist; it didn't affect his opinion of me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Jensen on December 9, 2010 at 2:41pm

I think that rather than beginning with a listing, we would find more distinction and legitimacy if we attempt to lay out the foundations for our values. The question, I think, is not so much *what* values are shared by secularists, but rather, from where do secularists derive their values?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Peters on December 9, 2010 at 2:47pm

Well said, Dan! That's something I often wonder as well. Most of my values stem from an innate feeling-- an almost visceral reaction; but I realize that may not always be the best way to determine them...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Coulthurst on December 9, 2010 at 3:56pm

The basis, origin and merits of a particular value would probably be a massive thread all by itself knowing the people here :)

For me it is enough to realise that secular values spring from critical inquiry and human endeavour - NOT from authoritarian decree and faith/emotional thinking, or appeals to the supernatural (the ultimate appeal to authority).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Peters on December 9, 2010 at 2:36pm

When I talk about freedom, I'm concerned with social issues rather than economic ones-- these are secular values, not political values. :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Coulthurst on December 9, 2010 at 3:53pm

Adriana's post on the Declaration of Secular Humanism pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter. I'd probably leave out the section aimed specifically at evolution and instead focus on the success of the scientific method at large.

I'm also not sure whether I would have specifically addressed the mass-media entertainment values (see section on Education), even though I agree with it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Coulthurst on December 9, 2010 at 5:14pm

Oh I'm sure it was. Personally, though, I feel that by addressing the issue of evolution seperately to other fields of scientific inquiry feeds into the creationist agenda by elevating it's status - we'd call it tall poppy syndrome in my country.

Evolutionary biology, while a very important field of study, is subject to the same methodologies as other scientific fields and really should be addressed in the larger context of the scientific method. Just my opinion, of course.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gayle Gordon on December 9, 2010 at 7:30pm

I was going to chime in and advocate for including compassion and respect for others, but those seem to be incorporated in this list.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Peters on December 10, 2010 at 9:31am

I can't watch this right now, so I'm not sure what he says, but I still see disgust as a bad way to determine morals. Someone can be disgusted at the thought of homosexual sex, but that doesn't make it wrong. Same goes for foods that people eat. Ever seen "Bizarre Foods" on the Travel Channel?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page