Replies are closed for this discussion.
There's a secular humanist meeting across the street from me on Sundays. I'm intrigued, because most of them are atheist, but I believe I suffer from what others do on here: lack of a good definition.
I will say that I am not one to donate or volunteer just to say I donated or volunteered. I have certain causes that speak to me for a good reason. THOSE are the causes I help. If that makes me less of a person, sobeit.
I'm glad to see this being tackled, and no I did not vote, and will not vote. Discussion is more meaningful.
reality is still reality.. you can't pick and choose things because there's not a quantifying number. it's the same debate at the tree falling in the woods. displacement of fluid air cause vibration, which in turn causes audible sound.
i will contend that with out discussion, there can be little to no resolution. if the ideas are not exchanged, then how will the thoughts spread? through an excel chart or almanac? there is no statistic for the understanding of a philosophy or what that philosophy actually means. i'm willing to bet that after these exchanges, at least a few people will decide to research the idea of humanism.
Resolution.... spreading of thoughts..... great discussion topics
Go ahead and start them :)
Personally, any discussion on the topic of "percentage of humanists among atheists" has different implications whether the numbers lean on either side or 50:50. And until I get an idea of these numbers, I reserve my opinion.
But I am curious to get an estimate. ;)
I'm a humanist and I believe in tough love.
My anthem is:
>t's looking like 83% ThinkAtheist users are Humanists, which I find utterly surprising
Maybe not so surprising. But it is certainly appalling.
Okay, granted, and admittedly I myself would have probably subscribed to those ideals - - - at a time before I saw the way real, organized, secular humanists operate with my own eyes. Before a time when I sat in an audience and watched the National Executive Director of the Secular Humanist Society, Roy Speckhardt, state flatly that undesirables like myself were not permitted to join the lofty ranks of the Humanists. Could a Fundamentalist Church have done any worse? Could a Neo-Nazi organization?
Not that I in the slightest lament the fact of being denied membership in any group that would permit a douchebag like Speckhardt to be their National Executive Director . . .
I consider myself a freethinker, not a humanist. (The terms apparently appear to be currently mutually exclusive). It has also become quite clear to me over the past couple of years that the organized secular humanist movement is most probably the greatest current enemy to the atheist movement, an enemy far more dangerous than any fundamentalist or church organization,