Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lobstertrap · 08-17-2002, 11:56 AM

After reading the <a href="http://www.americanhumanist.org/about/manifesto2.html" target="_blank">Humanist Manifesto II</a> shortly after becoming Agnostic, I was highly interested in their beliefs and idea and since, I've referred to myself as a Humanist. When I post on religious boards about Humanism, people make fun of us, namely, Christians, but even agnostics and other atheists. Humanists have been called "intellectual baby-rapers."

How do you feel about Humanists?

I mean, some of the greatest literary and scientific minds were Humanists...Kurt Vonnegut, Issav Asimov, and Albert Einstein...

Anyways, what do you guys think?

Bible Humper · 08-17-2002, 12:02 PM

"Intellectual baby rapists"? I've heard them bleat that type of misconception about nihilism, but regarding humanism they usually moo that it is an absurd worship of humanity.

Eudaimonist · 08-17-2002, 01:48 PM

I only agree with roughly half of the Humanist Manifesto II. The authors are too leftist for me (despite their half-hearted attempts to be inclusive of libertarians), and their desire for world government scares me. Also, their ethical views sometimes seem too much like a watered down Christian ethics with the unPC bits filtered out.

THAT SAID, I'm happy they exist. I might disagree with them in some matters, but at least they are trying to provide an ethical direction and social support for non-theists. I think they are probably doing a lot of good.

Also, while I'm not a secular humanist of the sort who would agree with 90-100% of the Humanist Manifesto II, my own ethics holds the flourishing of the human individual as the highest value, and so I could be reasonably described as ethically humanistic, even if I don't call myself a humanist.

Who is calling secular humanists "intellectual baby-rapers"? What does that even mean?

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonist ]</p>

Sephiroth · 08-17-2002, 02:08 PM

I pretty much agree with them on the issues but I think they're too optimistic about humans hence I don't consider myself one.

Stephen T-B · 08-19-2002, 06:58 AM

The Humanist tradition is admirable because it is - well, humanist, and many atheists, I suspect, are in fact humanist - but with a small �h.�
I am.
The reason I�m not a Humanist is because of its political agenda and my aversion to joining things.

Many, I think, who go from a position of belief to one of non-belief are strongly individualistic. They don�t need a Church to tell them how to behave - they�ve worked it out for themselves - they don�t need a congregation of the like-minded to make them feel comfortable, and they are not coerced into conformity by friends, family or community.
I wonder if Humanists have perhaps settled on something which is as close to being a religion without being a religion as rthey can find?

Eudaimonist · 08-19-2002, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephen T-B:
<strong>Many, I think, who go from a position of belief to one of non-belief are strongly individualistic. They don�t need a Church to tell them how to behave - they�ve worked it out for themselves - they don�t need a congregation of the like-minded to make them feel comfortable, and they are not coerced into conformity by friends, family or community.
I wonder if Humanists have perhaps settled on something which is as close to being a religion without being a religion as they can find?</strong>

Are you suggesting that Humanists pressure their membership into conformity?

MadMordigan · 08-19-2002, 08:02 AM

I agree with many of the posters above. I am humanistic, but am far too much of a cynic to consider myself a Humanist. So many of people's problems come from their own stupidity, and I simply can't feign sympathy for nimrods.

ohwilleke · 08-19-2002, 08:26 AM

I'm a card carrying member of the American Humanist Association (I actually do carry the card right next to my health insurance card so no one worries that I'm a Jehovah's Witness or something if I have go into the hospital), which is the largest of the main humanist organizations. The AHA is even a backup donor in my Will. The idea of such an organization and ideals are fine with me. I think that, in practice, the organization is too political and needs to have a bigger tent, and that the membership tends to be too geriatric, too undynamic, and too closely linked to UU.

[ August 19, 2002: Message edited by: ohwilleke ]</p>

ForeverSeeking · 08-19-2002, 08:32 AM

I am humanistic in nature, but agree with others here and do not consider myself to be an actual Humanist. I have noticed that some people, no matter their affiliation, can be hateful. I have met just as many atheists/agnostics who were downright evil as I have fundies. It is really a shame.

I still do not understand that baby raper reference. Where does that come from?

Gnothi Seauton
<a href="http://www.foreverseeking.com" target="_blank">Forever Seeking Truth</a>

Mad Kally · 08-19-2002, 08:41 AM

Quote:

posted by ForeverSeeking:
I have met just as many atheists/agnostics who were downright evil as I have fundies. It is really a shame.

In real life or on internet discussion boards?

08-17-2002, 11:56 AM	#1
lobstertrap Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 21	What do you think of Humanists? After reading the <a href="http://www.americanhumanist.org/about/manifesto2.html" target="_blank">Humanist Manifesto II</a> shortly after becoming Agnostic, I was highly interested in their beliefs and idea and since, I've referred to myself as a Humanist. When I post on religious boards about Humanism, people make fun of us, namely, Christians, but even agnostics and other atheists. Humanists have been called "intellectual baby-rapers." How do you feel about Humanists? I mean, some of the greatest literary and scientific minds were Humanists...Kurt Vonnegut, Issav Asimov, and Albert Einstein... Anyways, what do you guys think?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-17-2002, 12:02 PM	#2
Bible Humper Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,125	"Intellectual baby rapists"? I've heard them bleat that type of misconception about nihilism, but regarding humanism they usually moo that it is an absurd worship of humanity.

08-17-2002, 01:48 PM	#3
Eudaimonist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sundsvall, Sweden Posts: 3,159	I only agree with roughly half of the Humanist Manifesto II. The authors are too leftist for me (despite their half-hearted attempts to be inclusive of libertarians), and their desire for world government scares me. Also, their ethical views sometimes seem too much like a watered down Christian ethics with the unPC bits filtered out. THAT SAID, I'm happy they exist. I might disagree with them in some matters, but at least they are trying to provide an ethical direction and social support for non-theists. I think they are probably doing a lot of good. Also, while I'm not a secular humanist of the sort who would agree with 90-100% of the Humanist Manifesto II, my own ethics holds the flourishing of the human individual as the highest value, and so I could be reasonably described as ethically humanistic, even if I don't call myself a humanist. Who is calling secular humanists "intellectual baby-rapers"? What does that even mean? [ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonist ]</p>

08-17-2002, 02:08 PM	#4
Sephiroth Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 625	I pretty much agree with them on the issues but I think they're too optimistic about humans hence I don't consider myself one.

08-19-2002, 06:58 AM	#5
Stephen T-B Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 5,878	The Humanist tradition is admirable because it is - well, humanist, and many atheists, I suspect, are in fact humanist - but with a small �h.� I am. The reason I�m not a Humanist is because of its political agenda and my aversion to joining things. Many, I think, who go from a position of belief to one of non-belief are strongly individualistic. They don�t need a Church to tell them how to behave - they�ve worked it out for themselves - they don�t need a congregation of the like-minded to make them feel comfortable, and they are not coerced into conformity by friends, family or community. I wonder if Humanists have perhaps settled on something which is as close to being a religion without being a religion as rthey can find?

08-19-2002, 08:02 AM	#7
MadMordigan Beloved Deceased Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 2,704	I agree with many of the posters above. I am humanistic, but am far too much of a cynic to consider myself a Humanist. So many of people's problems come from their own stupidity, and I simply can't feign sympathy for nimrods.

08-19-2002, 08:26 AM	#8
ohwilleke Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Denver, Colorado, USA Posts: 4,834	I'm a card carrying member of the American Humanist Association (I actually do carry the card right next to my health insurance card so no one worries that I'm a Jehovah's Witness or something if I have go into the hospital), which is the largest of the main humanist organizations. The AHA is even a backup donor in my Will. The idea of such an organization and ideals are fine with me. I think that, in practice, the organization is too political and needs to have a bigger tent, and that the membership tends to be too geriatric, too undynamic, and too closely linked to UU. [ August 19, 2002: Message edited by: ohwilleke ]</p>

08-19-2002, 08:32 AM	#9
ForeverSeeking Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: State of disbelief Posts: 32	I am humanistic in nature, but agree with others here and do not consider myself to be an actual Humanist. I have noticed that some people, no matter their affiliation, can be hateful. I have met just as many atheists/agnostics who were downright evil as I have fundies. It is really a shame. I still do not understand that baby raper reference. Where does that come from? Gnothi Seauton <a href="http://www.foreverseeking.com" target="_blank">Forever Seeking Truth</a>

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.