d'naturalist

In the "Is Child Pornography Really Bad?" thread, it was suggested that some secular humanist groups advocate child sexploitation. As some mentioned in that same thread, it's easy for any group to claim that they are 'secular humanist' or 'christian' or whatever. While the Humanist Manifestoes aren't dogma or law, they are viewed as being generally accurate portrayals of humanistic ideals.

On that note, I offer this paragraph from Humanist Manifesto II (emphasis mine):

While sex education for minors and adults is viewed as necessary to promote responsibility, the freedom to legally engage in sexual activity is granted solely to consenting adults. Sexual activity with and between minors is (as it should be) restricted by both law and social sanction. All forms of exploitation and abuse are disapproved of.

Unlike atheism or agnosticism (which are fairly broad categories of thought), secular humanism is a defined philosophy. It has it's variations, but for the most part, there is an overall standard. Any group or individual claiming "secular humanism" should at least have some resemblance to the established norm. Abusing and exploiting people -- physically, sexually, or emotionally -- runs counter to humanistic ideals.