Freethought & Rationalism Archive

njhartsh · 04-24-2003, 03:57 PM

While surfing around today, I stumbled upon Humanist Manifesto III (alternate title: "Humanism and its Aspirations"), which apparently was published a few days ago (4/21/03) by the American Humanist Association. Original signatories to the document include Richard Dawkins, Antony Flew, Lester Mondale, Katha Politt, James Randi, Oliver Stone, Kurt Vonnegut and Edward O. Wilson. There's a press release and an explanatory speech, plus other stuff relating to the document, on the AHA website as well.

Anybody read the new Manifesto? What do you think?

- Nathan

KnightWhoSaysNi · 04-24-2003, 07:59 PM

It looks good to me.

I completely agree with it.

Albert Cipriani · 04-24-2003, 08:14 PM

The manifesto states:

Quote:

We are committed to treating each person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility.

So long as the signatories preserve the right to decide who is a person. Babies up to the 9th month of gestation need not apply.

I've never met a humanist who wasn't for a mother's right to choose abortion. Lot of "worth and dignity" in that. Shows "responsibility" too. Yeah, right. Hypocrites, Albert the Traditional Catholic

GeoTheo · 04-25-2003, 12:40 AM

I also wonder where "inherent worth and dignity" comes from.
Do bugs have it? Does the grass on my lawn have it? Why or why not.

Harpy · 04-25-2003, 01:43 AM

I think the Humanist Manifesto is a document that any decent, rational human being would be happy to sign upto. As far as living upto it, that may prove a little harder but none the less is a worthy goal.

Pensee · 04-25-2003, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Albert Cipriani
The manifesto states:

So long as the signatories preserve the right to decide who is a person. Babies up to the 9th month of gestation need not apply.

I've never met a humanist who wasn't for a mother's right to choose abortion. Lot of "worth and dignity" in that. Shows "responsibility" too. Yeah, right. Hypocrites, Albert the Traditional Catholic

Hi, nice to meet ya. I'm a Humanist against abortion after 8 weeks gestation.

lpetrich · 04-25-2003, 02:29 AM

I agree with that document -- it's a nice statement of ideals. Although I'm not going to advertise my personal conduct as support for these ideals -- I am far from being a superior achiever, for instance.

Here are its predecessors, Humanist Manifesto I and Humanist Manifesto II.

Shake · 04-25-2003, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Albert Cipriani
I've never met a humanist who wasn't for a mother's right to choose abortion. Lot of "worth and dignity" in that. Shows "responsibility" too. Yeah, right. Hypocrites, Albert the Traditional Catholic

Just like the "responsible" Catholics who don't use (or advocate) birth control, thereby contributing to overpopulation, starvation, the spread of STDs and other diseases, etc.

[/rant]

Anyway, I'm now a signer of the new Manifesto. You too, can be a signer.

Eudaimonist · 04-25-2003, 05:50 AM

I usually agree almost completely with these manifestos... until they start talking about politics, and which point all I can do is shake my head. I won't be signing this one either.

worldling · 04-25-2003, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Albert Cipriani

So long as the signatories preserve the right to decide who is a person. Babies up to the 9th month of gestation need not apply.

I've never met a humanist who wasn't for a mother's right to choose abortion. Lot of "worth and dignity" in that. Shows "responsibility" too. Yeah, right. Hypocrites, Albert the Traditional Catholic

If, as you say, they "preserve the right to decide who is a person" (as, apparently, do you), and by their definition a foetus is not a person, then you cannot accuse them of being hypocrites.

04-24-2003, 03:57 PM	#1
njhartsh Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota Posts: 138	Humanist Manifesto III While surfing around today, I stumbled upon Humanist Manifesto III (alternate title: "Humanism and its Aspirations"), which apparently was published a few days ago (4/21/03) by the American Humanist Association. Original signatories to the document include Richard Dawkins, Antony Flew, Lester Mondale, Katha Politt, James Randi, Oliver Stone, Kurt Vonnegut and Edward O. Wilson. There's a press release and an explanatory speech, plus other stuff relating to the document, on the AHA website as well. Anybody read the new Manifesto? What do you think? - Nathan

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

04-24-2003, 07:59 PM	#2
KnightWhoSaysNi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 2,767	It looks good to me. I completely agree with it.

04-25-2003, 12:40 AM	#4
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	I also wonder where "inherent worth and dignity" comes from. Do bugs have it? Does the grass on my lawn have it? Why or why not.

04-25-2003, 01:43 AM	#5
Harpy Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Chelmsford, South East England Posts: 144	I think the Humanist Manifesto is a document that any decent, rational human being would be happy to sign upto. As far as living upto it, that may prove a little harder but none the less is a worthy goal.

04-25-2003, 02:29 AM	#7
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	I agree with that document -- it's a nice statement of ideals. Although I'm not going to advertise my personal conduct as support for these ideals -- I am far from being a superior achiever, for instance. Here are its predecessors, Humanist Manifesto I and Humanist Manifesto II.

04-25-2003, 05:50 AM	#9
Eudaimonist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Sundsvall, Sweden Posts: 3,159	I usually agree almost completely with these manifestos... until they start talking about politics, and which point all I can do is shake my head. I won't be signing this one either.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.