BS: secular humanism

Subject: RE: BS: secular humanism
From: Purple Foxx
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 02:54 PM

There is a Humanist Party in the U.K.(www.Humanistparty.org.uk)
Though I sometimes wonder if we won't end up with a situation where every person in Britain who is of the "Left"( in the broadest possible sense of the term) might end up with a party each.
Every year the number of such parties seems to increase but the membership doesn't.
As far as our own Schools go that would be divisive.
Also we have a State Religion & an unsympathetic Government.
WYSIWYG.the alternatives,possibilities & choices include Christianity.
It is for the individual to evaluate what is right for them.
I am not down on Christianity per se (I am very happily married to a practicing Christian)
However I don't think many Christians could give an impartial or objective inroad into Humanist thought.
The original message in this thread is a reminder of that.
The term "Proselytising" has developed negative connotations now.
"Believe exactly as I do or burn in hell." is not a great pair of options.

Subject: RE: BS: secular humanism
From: PoppaGator
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 03:18 PM

The fundamentalist-right kooks VOTE, in large numbers, and often vote on a single-issue basis, while most of the rest of us don't.

The cynical neocon ruling class takes full advantage. All they have to do is declare their "moral" position (which usually involves stomping on other people's rights, or at least demonizing some unpopular minority as a scapegoat), and they are given carte blanche to start wars based on lies, to appoint their frat brothers to critical positions of authority, to grant huge no-bid contracts at the first sign of a massive human tragedy, etc.

Not all of these right-wing bigwigs are hypocrites ~ I'm sure a fair number of them actually are believers, pretty much as they present themselves to the public ~ but I have no doubt that many of them are the most cynical and dishonest type of opportunists. I'm sure that there is more than one bigmouthed antiabortionist who has paid off an ex-girlfriend or two or three to "get rid of a problem" by terminating a pregnancy. I know of one such case personally: in this case, the father who has never met nor acknowledged his son, born in defiance of his wish to arrange for an abortion, is not a politician, but he is a prominently sanctimonious citizen and highly visible "pillar of the church." This asshole may indeed sincerely believe that abortion is wrong, but he has chosen to keep his nasty secret rather than effectively atone for his sin by contributing to the support of his own flesh and blood.

What a shame that so many good salt-of-the-earth people are so easily and cynically manipulated to vote in direct opposition to their own interests, economic and otherwise.

As for myself, I'm a believer (albeit an unconventional one), definitely not an atheist (How can they be so sure that there is no spiritual realm? Isn't it faith, of sorts?). However, I certainly do consider myself a secular humanist. And I am reasonably certain that I share this orientation with the US "Founding Fathers," most of whom were Deists who may or may not have attended church occasionally.

Subject: RE: BS: secular humanism
From: Purple Foxx
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 03:44 PM

PoppaGator like myself Leo Strauss (Intellectual father of the U.S. Neocons)was an Atheist but he advocated a pretence of religion amongst his students because this had political advantage.
This was not a new idea it goes back at least as far as Machievelli but I believe it shows you are right to speak of the "Cynical & dishonest type of opportunists." in their midst.
BTW You might like to read a post by Paul Burke on a recent thread about belief in god for a view of spirituality which might impress you.