Taxonomically, my family is Freethinker including atheists, skeptics, agnostics ; my genus is Humanist including the religion-based , and my species is Secular. Perhaps everyone who believes in the principles of free inquiry, ethics based upon reason, and a commitment to science, democracy, and freedom.
Perhaps even you. Secular humanism is comprehensive , touching every aspect of life including issues of values, meaning, and identity. Thus it is broader than atheism, which concerns only the nonexistence of god or the supernatural. Secular humanism is nonreligious , espousing no belief in a realm or beings imagined to transcend ordinary experience.
Whoever would defy God must be wickedness personified. That seems to be a given of traditional religion. To them, Zeus, for all his power, could still be mistaken. After all, God is entitled to his own opinions! Only a humanist is inclined to speak this way. Only a humanist can suggest that, even if there be a god, it is OK to disagree with him, her, or it. Socrates asks if something is good because God ordains it, or if God ordains it because it is already good.
It is humanists who claim this tradition. After all, much of human progress has been in defiance of religion or of the apparent natural order.
Politically, the defiance of religious and secular authority has led to democracy, human rights, and the protection of the environment. Humanists make no apologies for this. Humanists twist no biblical doctrine to justify such actions. They recognize the Promethean defiance of their response and take pride in it. For this is part of the tradition. Another aspect of the Secular Humanist tradition is skepticism. Why Socrates? Because after all this time he still stands alone among all the famous saints and sages from antiquity to the present.
Every religion has its sage. Every one of these individuals claimed to know the absolute truth. It is Socrates, alone among famous sages, who claimed to know nothing. Each devised a set of rules or laws, save Socrates. Instead, Socrates gave us a method—a method of questioning the rules of others, of cross-examination.
For these reasons Socrates is the quintessential skeptical humanist. He stands as a symbol, both of Greek rationalism and the humanist tradition that grew out of it. And no equally recognized saint or sage has joined his company since his death.
That is, Secular Humanists identify more closely with the rational heritage symbolized by ancient Athens than with the faith heritage epitomized by ancient Jerusalem. The positive side is liberation, best expressed in these words of American agnostic Robert G. When I became convinced that the universe is natural, that all the ghosts and gods are myths, there entered into my brain, into my soul, into every drop of my blood the sense, the feeling, the joy of freedom.
The walls of my prison crumbled and fell. The dungeon was flooded with light and all the bolts and bars and manacles became dust. I was no longer a servant, a serf, or a slave. There was for me no master in all the wide world, not even in infinite space. I was free! I stood erect and fearlessly, joyously faced all worlds. The fact that humanism can at once be both religious and secular presents a paradox of course, but not the only such paradox.
Another is that both Religious and Secular Humanism place reason above faith, usually to the point of eschewing faith altogether.
The dichotomy between reason and faith is often given emphasis in humanism, with humanists taking their stand on the side of reason. Because of this, Religious Humanism should not be seen as an alternative faith, but rather as an alternative way of being religious. These paradoxical features not only require a unique treatment of Religious Humanism in the study of world religions but also help explain the continuing disagreement, both inside and outside the humanist movement, over whether humanism is a religion at all.
Because both Religious and Secular Humanism are identified so closely with Cultural Humanism, they readily embrace modern science, democratic principles, human rights, and free inquiry. The most obvious point to clarify in this context is that some religions hold to doctrines that place their adherents at odds with certain features of the modern world. Other religions do not. Therefore, they see the teaching of evolution in a science course as an affront to their religious sensibilities.
It is indeed true that Religious Humanists, in embracing modern science, embrace evolution in the bargain. But individuals within mainline Protestantism, Catholicism, and Judaism also embrace modern science—and hence evolution.
Evolution happens to be the state of the art in science today and is appropriately taught in science courses. That evolution has come to be identified with Religious Humanism but not with mainline Christianity or Judaism is a curious quirk of politics in North America.
But this is a typical feature of the whole controversy over humanism in the schools. Other courses of study have come to be identified with humanism as well, including sex education, values education, global education, and even creative writing. One of our key aims is that the UK should be a secular state guaranteeing human rights, with no privilege or discrimination on grounds of religion or belief.
This is not only because it is the fairest approach, but also because it reflects the diversity of Britain today. Survey after survey shows that the UK is a diverse country that is becoming more so all the time, with most measures suggesting a majority of the population is now non-religious.
And yet many of the barriers to secularism involve legal privilege for Christian groups in particular, using historical justifications for continued advantage over others. We also work internationally on these issues through our representation at the UN Human Rights Council, and in partnership with Humanists International and European Humanist Federation through, for example, the End Blasphemy Laws campaign.
We use it to mean separation of church and state and equal treatment for all, regardless of religion or belief — much as set out above. We have long been the most vocal voice calling for disestablishment of the Church of England and for a removal of bishops in the House of Lords. The Government received more correspondence objecting to the place of bishops in the Lords than on any other aspect of the proposals.
In we published Quality and Equality: Human Rights, Public Services and Religious Organisations , setting out our concerns around service provision and our proposals for secular and inclusive services free from discrimination.
More recently we have been working with the Equality and Human Rights Commission as part of its research into religion and belief and discrimination in the workplace and in service delivery. This process is ongoing. This is in spite of the fact that non-religious personnel number eight times all the non-Christian religions combined, and that membership of Defence Humanists alone is larger than the number of Sikh and Jewish members of the forces — but both Sikhs and Jews do have official representation.
You can find more information about our campaigns work on other secularist issues — such as marriage laws , religion and education , public broadcasting and pastoral support — elsewhere on our website. Our Take Action Toolkit has advice on how to go about this. Sign up as a supporter and we'll keep you up to date by email about all of our work for a fair and equal society.
Click here to see our Privacy Policy.
0コメント