The Spiritual Humanist Blog

Humanists held to a higher standard

2009-09-08T13:53:00.002-06:00

Recently I was contacted by a graduate student at an ivy-league school back east for an interview about Humanism and Parenting. I agreed and we began the interview (more like a conversation). Within a few minutes, my cell phone lost coverage, not an unusual occurrence at my home. I didn't have the student's phone number, so I hung around waiting for him to call back. He never did; instead, I receive a nasty email haranguing me for my rudeness, implying that I had hung up on him on purpose and accusing me of not meeting the high standards of other Humanists.

It was interesting to me that this student would just assume I had hung up when we were having a pleasant conversation up to that point. However, even more interesting was his assumption that Humanists adhere to a higher standard. I’ve thought this myself before, but it was made abundantly clear with his attitude in the email. It would have been alright, even acceptable, for a Christian (substitute your favorite religion) to hang up on someone if they had called to ask questions about their belief system, but it was completely unacceptable for a Humanist to do such a thing.

This is more evidence and reason why Humanists tend to be even more moral, on average, than the population of religious people, regardless of the religion.

Needing a God to Parent

2008-10-22T12:27:00.002-06:00

A couple of weeks ago, I was having dinner with some friends before a concert and we got to talking about growing up religious and about not being religious today. It was a long conversation about all the reasons why none of us were religious (one of my favorite topics, but it is better if some present are still kind-of religious).

Anyway, at the end of it we got to talking about parent and one guy said that if he became a parent, he would have to raise his kids religious.

Our mouths dropped open; all of us wondering just how he had come to that conclusion. Finally I spoke up and asked. He said that he couldn't imagine keeping his kids in line without the threat of a God.

This represents one more fallacy in parenting without religion. What people have to understand is that children (young children) think of their parents as Gods. They don't need some other God to threaten them and in fact don't really understand that. Many psychologists think that our tendency to believe in higher beings comes from this period in our life when we see our parents as Gods - we want that continue; we want someone to be looking out for us, protecting us, and loving us.

Kids want so badly to please their parents, that you don't need any threats from some higher being to keep them in line - you are that higher being.

Radio: Is religion important when raising our children?

2008-09-11T08:36:00.003-06:00

KNRY, a talk radio station in Monterey, CA hosts a show called Fathers are Forever and they are going to air a show tomorrow (Friday) night centered around whether or not religion is important when raising children.

This particular shows ill air from 7:00PM to 9:00PM Pacific time. You can listen to the show live here.

Dale Brown (author of Parenting Beyond Belief) and I (author of Humanism for Parents - Parenting without Religion) will represent the secular side of the discussion.

It should be a lively and interesting discussion.

Greg Epstein on Interfaith Politics

2008-08-28T09:19:00.002-06:00

Greg Epstein, the Humanist Chaplin at Harvard, published some advice to Obama (and McCain, though he admits the Republicans wouldn't bother to listen). I like Greg and his down-to-earth, practical stance on things. He doesn't jump immediately into slamming religion, but looks at America as a melting pot, with respect to religion as well as race; and purports that humanists and atheists need to be part of that melting pot.

The article is worth a read, check it out here.

Is Obama as bad as Bush?

2008-07-29T20:22:00.003-06:00

I was looking forward to getting the republicans out of office and to getting a democrat in who might tone down the faith-based programs and get back to basing our government and its decisions on reason and science.

Instead, the democrats must think they need to bend and become more religious to win the election. After everything Bush has done during the last two terms of service, you would think that the democrats would have a fairly easy win (at least now that Hilary isn't in the running).

Check out this article on Yahoo News about Obama and his faith program. Most disturbing of all was his emphasis on doing God's work in office:

Obama showed he was comfortable using the kind of language that is familiar in evangelical churches and Bible studies by calling his faith "a personal commitment to Christ." He said that his time as a community organizer in decimated Chicago neighborhoods, supported in part by a Catholic group, brought him to a deeper faith and also convinced him that faith is useless without works.

"While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work," he declared.

I sure hope he is just using this to gain voters and that he will tone down the desire to bring religion into the government once he is elected.

Off topic - great book:The Story of Edgar Sawtelle

2008-06-12T16:40:00.003-06:00

A friend of mine and fellow computer scientist has written one of the great American novels of 2008! It is an incredible book and one well worth checking out. Look at this quote from Stephen Kind on the book (you can find this on amazon):

Praise from Stephen King

"I flat-out loved The Story of Edgar Sawtelle, and spent twelve happy evenings immersed in the world David Wroblewski has created. As I neared the end, I kept finding excuses to put the book aside for a little, not because I didn't like it, but because I liked it too much; I didn't want it to end. Dog-lovers in particular will find themselves riveted by this story, because the canine world has never been explored with such imagination and emotional resonance. Yet in the end, this isn't a novel about dogs or heartland America--although it is a deeply American work of literature. It's a novel about the human heart, and the mysteries that live there, understood but impossible to articulate. Yet in the person of Edgar Sawtelle, a mute boy who takes three of his dogs on a brave and dangerous odyssey, Wroblewski does articulate them, and splendidly. I closed the book with that regret readers feel only after experiencing the best stories: It's over, you think, and I won't read another one this good for a long, long time.

In truth, there's never been a book quite like The Story of Edgar Sawtelle. I thought of Hamlet when I was reading it, and Watership Down, and The Night of the Hunter, and The Life of Pi--but halfway through, I put all comparisons aside and let it just be itself.

I'm pretty sure this book is going to be a bestseller, but unlike some, it deserves to be. It's also going to be the subject of a great many reading groups, and when the members take up Edgar, I think they will be apt to stick to the book and forget the neighborhood gossip.

Wonderful, mysterious, long and satisfying: readers who pick up this novel are going to enter a richer world. I envy them the trip. I don't re-read many books, because life is too short. I will be re-reading this one."

Colorado ground zero for abortionists in November

2008-05-28T17:06:00.002-06:00

The Denver Posts published this article:

Colo. fertilized egg measure backers submit signatures

a couple of weeks ago. This is a trick by the religious right to try to ban abortion (and along with it some forms of contraception, stem cell research, and in-vitro fertilization) in Colorado by masking it as a new definition of when Human Life starts.

Now, I've had a long history of siding with some aspects of the anti-abortionists (pro-lifers) because I can't stand late-term abortions (still legal here in Colorado). Unfortunately, people are not looking at this scientifically and are instead treating it as a religious argument only.

From a scientific standpoint, there is a fairly clear definition of when life ends (when there is no longer a recognizable brain wave pattern). The start of life should be measured the same way. This happens around the 20-21 week point or about when there is "quickening" (when the mother can feel the baby moving). And, more importantly, it is something that can be measured.

If they really want a fight they might be able to win, they should start there and see if that will pass the voters. What they have here will never fly (thankfully).

Research Volunteers Needed

2008-05-05T12:52:00.001-06:00

From Sam Harris:

We are preparing to run another fMRI study of belief and disbelief, and we need volunteers to help us refine our experimental stimuli. This promises to be the first study of religious faith at the level of the brain. By responding to the four surveys I have posted online, you can make an enormous contribution to this work.

You'll find links to these surveys on my home page.

Please answer as many of the surveys as you can. If you only have time to answer one, please choose at random (otherwise, we will have many more responses to the first than to the others).

Feel free to post this message to your blog or to forward the relevant links to your friends. I especially need Christians to respond, as one of the goals of these surveys is to design stimuli that a majority of Christians will find doctrinally sound.

I will, of course, pass along the results of this work the moment I have something to report.

Many thanks for your help.

All the best,

Sam

www.samharris.org

The Humanist Reviews: Humanism for Parents

2008-04-30T12:24:00.003-06:00

The Humanist magazine (see May/June 08) has a review this month of my book Humanism for Parents - Parenting without Religion by Jennifer Hancock (see Sumo Girl).

It is a good review and very thorough.

if you don't get The Humanist, you should and if you do, then check out the review.

A Humanist-Life-Stories Publication?

2008-04-21T16:13:00.002-06:00

The Humanists of Silicon Valley are sponsoring the development of a "Humanist Life Stories" book. This is akin to the Humanist Heritage effort the Humanist Society did a while back. I consider it a great idea and I hope they can pull it off. For my part, I'll be sure to submit one or two stories. If any of you are interested, let me know and I'll get you in touch with them.

We, Arthur Jackson (president) and Armineh Noravian (vice president) of the Humanist Community in Silicon Valley, California, wish to share an exciting idea with you. Our constant search for ideas to promote Humanism has led us to the realization that one important area is the manner in which Humanists deal with difficult or unusual life circumstances. We believe that sharing such experiences will provide important models of how Humanists live with life’s challenges without divine guidance.

This idea has defined one of our projects, which is to compile a series of life stories by Humanists all across the world. With this goal in mind, we would like to request your help by asking that you send us a life story that might ultimately be printed in a book, which we would like to title “Humanist Life Stories- Sharing our experiences with difficult problems”. We know that projects like this have been discussed before, but are not aware of any collections that are currently available. If you know of any, please tell us.

We believe that the outcome of such an exciting project will have a number of positive consequences, both for Humanism and all those participating in the project.

Wannabe Scholars -or- What counts as evidence?

2008-04-03T12:54:00.006-06:00

This last week I received a book
Evidence and Paul's Journeys by Jefferson White.

Jefferson is claiming to be a scholar who has spent many years investigating how "evidence" is used by scholars, especially as it relates to Paul's Journeys. He goes through a long diatribe as an introduction extolling the failures of scholars to look at real evidence and says that instead they look at theory and ideas and then try to present it as evidence.

He goes on to give a definition of evidence that he will use for the book he has written about Paul's travels. Listen to this definition of evidence:

1. The biblical record is assumed to be true unless it can be shown to be false.

2. if a contradiction is alleged to exist between the bible record and other historical evidence, and there is a reasonable explanation to account for it, the contradiction is not proved.

in other words, the bible is assumed to be true, period. Have you ever heard such utter crap? If I were to present you (him?) with the FSM Bible and said that my evidence for it being real is its claim that it is correct and that constitutes evidence unless you can prove it false, you would call me (rightly) nuts. I've done a fair bit of research into this myself (though I wouldn't claim to be a scholar) and I know very well how much the Bible was rewritten as needed over the first three centuries and how little of it is truly original writings of the claimed author (though some of Paul's letters were). Still, to say you know about "real" evidence and then to present such a ridiculous definition is pathetic at best.

How can people be so stupid/ignorant as that? And, I'm ashamed to say, he claims to be in Computer Science; if someone in computers can't get basic logic right and thinks evidence is a completely invalid assumption, how will we ever get the general population to understand?

Back in it...

2008-04-02T17:23:00.002-06:00

A few months ago I decided to stop blogging for a while because this blog had taken a direction that I hadn't originally intended. Mostly this was to be about spirituality within Humanism. However, as I became more and more frustrated with the direction America is taking and with the Bush administration and how there are people trying to turn us into a Theocracy, I found myself blogging against things things of for things.

That wasn't my intent, but it was a natural outcome of the environment we are in. I wanted to take some time off to reevaluate my stance and my intentions for this blog.

In the end, many of the things I have been blogging about are as or more important than the original intent of this blog. Therefore, I've decided to get back to blogging about whatever comes up that feels important (regarding Humanism and freedom of belief of course) and not worry so much about the original intent (or name) of this blog.

So, you can look forward (or not) to my ranting on various applicable topics. In the next few days (and this is one of the things that convinced me to get back in the game), I'll post on the idiocy of some wannabe scholars when it comes to evaluating the bible.

Cheers, Sean

How up-front about not being religious should we be?

2008-01-09T12:59:00.001-07:00

I was recently at some friends house in Iowa (I live in Colorado) with my children. These friends happen to be extremely religious and my children and I aren't at all.
Through most of my life, I have tried to be very tolerant and respectful of other's beliefs and opinions. In this case, that meant at dinner, when they prayed, I would stay quiet, though not participate.

This year however, they went to hold hands prior to the prayer. I didn't think much of it and just held hands with the two people on either side of me. But, I noticed my oldest two children refused to do so and one of them gave me an odd look for the fact that I was doing it.

It made me ponder just how tolerant I should be. I've been getting less so because of the changing tide in this country, especially with the Bush Administration. But, with friends. I also noted on this trip that they were willing to give me a book on Christianity that I'm sure they hope will convert me, but I'd be uncomfortable giving them a book trying to break them of their faith.

This is certainly something each of us has to ask ourselves and for me, I've been making a concerted effort to be more upfront about me beliefs, but I also don't see a lot of gain in being argumentative just to argue or with people that aren't really open to it. I tend to be much more willing to let them know what I think without being pushy about it and while being willing to listen to them.

Ask Presidential Candidates

2008-01-08T14:32:00.000-07:00

Over the past seven years Humanists have watched as the president and congress have repeatedly breached Thomas Jefferson's wall of separation between church and state. But now you can act to prevent a continuation of this process.

At every opportunity you have, ask the candidates pointed questions on this issue. Or call on your local media to ask such questions. Write letters to the editor expressing church-state concerns. Request that your friends ask such questions. Let's make 2008 the year we begin to set things right as we publicly hold the feet of all presidential candidates to the proverbial fire.

Here are ten questions to draw from or to modify in your own words.

1. Leaders of the religious right often say that America is a "Christian Nation." Do you agree with this statement?

2. Do you think houses of worship should be allowed to endorse political candidates and retain their tax exempt status?

3. Do you think public schools should sponsor school prayer or, as a parent, should this choice be left to me?

4. Would you support a law that mandates teaching creationism in my child's public school science classes?

5. Do you think my pharmacist should be allowed to deny me doctor-prescribed medications based on his or her religious beliefs?

6. Will you respect the rights of those in our diverse communities of faith who deem same-gender marriage to be consistent with their religious creed?

7. Should "faith-based" charities that receive public funds be allowed to discriminate against employees or applicants based on religious beliefs?

8. Do you think one's right to disbelieve in God is protected by the same laws that protect someone else's right to believe?

9. Do you think everyone's religious freedom needs to be protected by what Thomas Jefferson called "a wall of separation" between church and state?

10. What should guide our policies on public health and medical research: science or religion?

These suggested questions were developed by First Freedom First, a joint project of Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Interfaith Alliance Foundation. First Freedom First is cosponsored by the American Humanist Association and its allies in the community of reason. So we urge you to use one or more of these questions if you attend a Town Hall meeting or another event where candidates for office will be gathering.

So we ARE a Christian Nation!

2007-12-13T12:14:00.000-07:00

The House on Tuesday passed a resolution 847 that while not explicitly saying we are a Christian Nation, sure implies it. It includes implications that:

Christianity is the primary religion of the country and the world

Acknowledges the importance of Christianity, but not others.

Recognizes that Christianity had a lot to do with the founding of this nation

It is ridiculous that the house feels compelled to even deal with such a resolution let alone that it would pass one thereby slapping every other religion and the non-religious in the country (and world) in their collective face.

I'm appalled and I feel like it is one more step towards making this country a Theocracy.

Christian Shooter in Colorado obviously not a Humanist

2007-12-11T09:58:00.000-07:00

While starting to read the unraveling story of the two recent shootings at churches in Colorado (where I live), I found myself expecting the shooter to be a religious person.
This article through Google says the shooter was enrolled in religious training at one point and it has a quote: "He is said to come from a deeply Christian family."

Now, it may not always be true, but I find that many of the people that do such horrible things are frequently very religious. I wonder if there is some tendency towards extreme passion/obsession (to the point of doing or believing the impossible) that is common between the religious and people who would do such a horrific thing.

Certainly I have a hard time thinking of a Humanist doing such a thing. Being a Humanist has strong implications that you think about what is right and wrong and about compassion and that you see the beauty in life.

It is interesting to note that anyone can be religious without any real morality (and many do), but to say you are a Humanist actually means a lot more.

Something to smile (and be proud) about.

Norway a secular nation?

2007-12-06T12:39:00.000-07:00

NORWAY FLOURISHES AS SECULAR NATION

Montgomery Advertiser - Montgomery, AL, USA

Link

Rev. Rick Mason notes that atheism is on the rise. He blames Christian
fundamentalism. Certainly the ineptness, dishonesty and lack of ethics
of the overtly God-fearing Bush administration may be turning people off
on God.

A case study shows what this could mean for America. Norway has embraced
secularism at the expense of its Christian roots. A 2005 survey
conducted by Gallup International rated Norway the least religious
country in Western Europe.

In Norway, 82.9% of the population are members of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church. (They are automatically registered at birth and few
bother to be unregistered.) However, only approximately 10% regularly
attend church services and identify themselves as being personally
Christian.

A 2006 survey found 29% believe in a god or deity; 23% believe in a
higher power without being certain of what; 26% don't believe in God or
higher powers; 22% have doubts.

Depending on the definition of atheism, Norway thus has between 26% and
71% atheists. The Norwegian Humanist Association is the world's largest
humanist association per capita.

And what has secularism done to Norway? The Global Peace Index rates
Norway the most peaceful country in the world. The Human Development
Index, a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education and
standard of living, has ranked Norway No. 1 every year for the last five
years.

Norway has the second highest GDP per capita in the world, an
unemployment rate below 2% and average hourly wages among the world's
highest.

Reprinted under the Fair Use section of international copyright law at
http://www.eff.org/IP/fair_use_and_copyright.excerpt. Full copyright
retained by the original publication.

The Golden Compass, a Humanist movie?

2007-12-03T10:43:00.000-07:00

The Golden Compass movie comes out this Friday, December 7th. Some are billing it as a Humanist (or in this case Atheist) movie, though I think that is a stretch. The books do take a stab at the Catholic church, but that is more just treating the church as the dogmatic, authoritarian organization it is. The movie tones this down some and isn't quite as blatant, but it is still a statement against authoritarian rulers.

But, the Catholic church is causing some of the problem it self by trying to ban the reading of the books and boycott the movie. Of course, this will probably make the movie and books even more popular. I know it makes me want to go :)

Check out the AHA article here or a YouTube interview with author Philip Pullman here

Sunday School for Atheists

2007-11-27T13:38:00.001-07:00

Time magazine published an article this last week on a program, started at the Humanist Community of Palo Alto in California called Sunday School for Atheists. This is the kind of program we need and I think the success of this ground-breaking program is testament to a growing non-theist world.

Check out the article.

Mentioning Atheism

2007-11-26T12:01:00.001-07:00

I've had a few recent encounters where I mentioned either atheism or being without religion and got some interesting responses.

One was in an a casual business meeting with a couple of women. We got to talking a little about my book and I said it had to do with parenting without religion and her immediate response was "why would you want to?". I could have taken offense at it or gotten belligerent, but after a moments thought, I smiled and said, "well, there are many people out there who are not religious and some of them are parents or want to be parents." She at least agreed with that and so we could talk about the topic from a theoretical standpoint. We continued with the conversation for a few minutes, though we could all tell she was distinctly colder after that.

Another was with my Uncle. I'm recently separated and in the middle of a divorce. While I'm not too interested in dating right now, I will be at some point and my uncle asked me if it would be hard to find a woman who would go out with me if I'm atheist. Interesting idea and unfortunately it has some validity. The percent of non-believers across the population in the U.S. is small. But, fortunately for me, the percent among the intelligentsia is much higher. Numbers vary, but roughly 93% of scientists don't believe in a God. Since I'm in a high-intelligence industry (computer software), I find the percent of people who are non-theists to be quite high.

The other one was on the airplane coming back from Portland, OR last night (to Colorado). I got to talking to the woman in the seat next to me about Humanism. As always, I presented it as separate from religion and that there are many people that are Humanist and of a specific religion. At the end though, I said I was of the Humanist Atheist sort and you could see her face go blank. The conversation dried up fairly quickly, she put on her ipod-headphones and didn't talk to me the rest of the flight.

I've commented before on this Blog about how the world is changing to be more accepting of the non-theists, but I still encounter this kind of bias frequently. As a Humanist and an Atheist, what is different for me today from the past is that I'm ignoring that ignorance and am speaking out anyway. Maybe in speaking out, I'll sow some seeds of doubt or at least make the person think.

Good Definition of Humanism

2007-11-21T09:53:00.000-07:00

SumoGirl posted a nice article on a definition of Humanism she found. See Definition of Humanism. She actually refers to the Progressive Living website, which is site about Confucianism. It is a really nice definition of Humanism that I didn't see when i did my previous post on definitions.

Humanism is an anti-authoritarian philosophy that emphasizes the importance of reason and the indispensability of both evidence and compassion for others in the formation of values. Contemporary humanistic morality judges acts primarily on the basis of their affect upon other human beings. Humanists believe that the purposes of life are found in the meeting of human needs -intellectual, emotional, and spiritual-and in the fulfillment of human capabilities, mental and physical.

The definition is a little long for me, but I really like the first half.

Nice find SumoGirl!

Humanism and Homosexuality

2007-11-07T14:14:00.000-07:00

I recently gave a talk on Humanism and Contemporary issues that covered an overview of Humanism along with various contemporary topics and how Humanists might view them. The talk went well except for the section on Homosexuality. In it, I presented a view that came from research for my book Humanism for Parents. In that view, there have been various types of homosexuality throughout history and they included:

Egalitarian where the partners are equal

Gender-based where the two partners take on male or female roles

Age-based where there is a wide discrepancy in ages

The audience was upset (mildly at the talk, but vehemently later) about my including age-based homosexuality with either of the first two. Most of my point was that this has been an accepted practice in some past societies (e.g. Rome). They baulked at this saying that it was pedophilia (paedophilia) and not homosexuality.
I'm interested to hear opinions on this and (hopefully) references so that I can look into it. The research I did was pretty clear, but I can't read everything and so I'm interested in reputable references to read in this area. Opinions are also welcome of course.

Some HS students think being Christian is "odd"

2007-10-22T12:01:00.000-06:00

Thought you all might like to hear this.

My daughter, who started 9th grade this year at an IB school here in Denver is in a Computer Science class and was on a team project this last week. The subject of religion came up in casual conversation and one of the students said he was a Christian. All the other students in the group looked at him and said something link "Really, that's odd".

She (my daughter) has been trying to convince me for a long time that the attitude about religion is changing. In her mind, HS students are either not religious or just don't care. She said there are always a few odd ones that still believe, but not many.

I think the next 50 years with the cultural changes that appear to be happening will be an interesting and exciting time.

Cherry Creek, CO Schools Illegally Urging Churchgoing

2007-10-19T08:21:00.000-06:00

Sara Burnett of the Rocky Mountain News reports on this local Colorado story...

The Freedom from Religion Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit against Cherry Creek Schools, saying a project aimed at helping students reach their full potential illegally encourages going to church.

The complaint, filed on behalf of two parents who have children in Cherry Creek schools, accuses the district of violating laws regarding the separation of church and state.

Tustin Amole, spokeswoman for the district, said today the district is confident the project is not illegal because it does not mandate participation in any religious activity.

Known as the 40 Developmental Assets, the project is promoted to families as a way to help students grow into "responsible, confident and healthy young people," according to a newsletter sent to parents.

The document says research has shown students with 30 or more of the assets are more likely to exhibit positive behavior.

Among the assets is having family support, doing at least one hour of homework each day and telling the truth, "even when it's not easy."

Recommendation number 19 — which prompted the lawsuit — is "religious community." It suggests young people spend one or more hours each week in activities at a religious institution.

The project, which was created by a private research group and is used nationally, has been in the Cherry Creek district for 18 years, Amole said.

The complaint asks the court to order the district to stop endorsing Developmental Asset 19. It does not specifically seek damages, but asks for any other relief the court deems proper.

Sigh of relief re: Left Behind series

2007-10-15T14:40:00.000-06:00

Previously I posted an article about the Left Behind book series. The first few books actually frightened me.

Well, I'm now almost done with the sixth book and am much less scared. The series has turned more and more fictional, complete with monsters and magic and so has become much more just fun reading and less serious material with vast conversion potential.

What a sign of relief.

Boulder High School students protesting Pledge-of-Allegiance

2007-10-03T12:44:00.000-06:00

Students at Boulder High School in Colorado are protesting the Pledge-of-Allegiance every Thursday.

Read the Daily Camera report.

Their new version goes: "I pledge allegiance to the flag and my constitutional rights with which it comes. And to the diversity, in which our nation stands, one nation, part of one planet, with liberty, freedom, choice and justice for all."

Nice going Boulder and keep it up!

Hitchen's anti-religion statement getting attention

2007-10-02T09:48:00.000-06:00

The Washington Post published an article in the On Faith section asking for comments on Hitchen's anti-religion statement:

"Religion is violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism and tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive toward children." Why is he right or wrong?

Go to On Faith and chime in...

Atheist Aliance Inc. Convention Starts Tomorrow

2007-09-27T17:02:00.000-06:00

The Atheist Aliance's 2007 convention in Virgina starts tomorrow and runs through Sunday. There are some exciting speakers and attendees.

Check it out.

Divorce and Humanism

2007-09-26T15:31:00.000-06:00

For various serious reasons that I won't go into here, my wife and I are divorcing after 17 years and with four kids that have no choice in the matter. This was actually my second marriage, the first one having been a bad mistake on my part that ended after a few years and no children were involved. This is completely different. Darcie was my soul mate, or so I believed for the first 10 years of our marriage. It was perfect - at least I thought so. We loved each other deeply, enjoyed life, met challenges head on and when there weren't enough challenges, we created them (like moving overseas). And, we had four incredible children that prove out our parenting ability.

Going through a divorce with someone you considered your best friend and when there are children involved is so much more difficult. I have to continually think of what is best for the children or I would end up lashing out at my soon-to-be-ex-wife and would try to screw with her as much as possible. But, that just isn't good for the kids in the long run and so I have to restrain myself, even if she doesn't.

I've realized two related things during this process. First is that I should have had a chapter in my book (Humanism for Parents) on divorce. Second is that writing and performing weddings, as I do as an AHA Humanist Celebrant, is more difficult when you are having a hard time believing in marriage yourself. I have a wedding to perform this Saturday that I was looking forward to, but it has been difficult to help the couple write the vows and even to read them. I'll suck-it-up and do a good job at the ceremony as they deserve nothing less; but I find it a challenge.

Eventually, maybe I'll write some thoughts on divorce for the Humanist. Other than religious people having a built-in support group, I don't think there is a lot of difference; but it would be worth the exercise anyway. If you have any comments about this, just send them my way - maybe they will end up in a future version of my book :).

Atheists Deluded?

2007-09-23T14:26:00.000-06:00

Here is a nice little clip on glumbert about how atheists are deluded (not). It is quite funny.

Atheist Delusion

Left Behind [Series]

2007-09-20T17:12:00.000-06:00

Sorry I have been lax on posting, I'll try to make up for it...

I've been reading the Left Behind series, and I have to tell you it disturbs me - on multiple levels.

The first is that I can imagine these books having significant conversion capability for those with any religious inclination. The books do an incredible job of making it sound and feel like there is a personal God out there who has tangible, physical impacts on our planet and our lives. Of course there has never been any real, scientific evidence to back this up, but many people want to believe in a God and in something more meaningful than the lives they are living. Having the hope in a God and reading these books and feeling that connection could easily aide in the conversion of many otherwise skeptical people. Frightening stuff...

Now, I am very skeptical and rational and have a lot of confidence in my Humanistic stance - but these books were able to kindle (rekindle?) very old, base feelings in me that made me (ME!) want to believe. I have to give it to the authors (Tim F. LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins); they know how to invoke deep-seated religious feelings in a person and how to give a person hope that there is some truth to heaven and God and the possibility of a personal relationship with Christ.

If you are secure in your Humanistic (or Atheistic) beliefs, then read them just to understand the other side. If you have any religious tendencies, but don't want to be converted fully into religion, then stay away from them until you are secure in your beliefs.

Deciding to have a child

2007-08-31T12:40:00.000-06:00

I recently took part in a debate on Amazon about Parenting and more specifically about whether to have kids and if so, how many. It was an interesting debate with many different turns and side issues and was sometimes quite heated with some participants deciding to no longer participate.

It is an emotional issue for so many people. Through nature, we are drawn to having children - it is one of our most basic instincts. But, in modern society we finally have a choice. We can decide to have children or not and it doesn't limit our desire and need for intimacy and sex. We also can now try to balance the root desire for children with our ability to support them and the appropriateness of having more children in an already crowded world (see world population counter).

Unfortunately, the people willing to strike this balance and who consider the choice of having children against the bigger picture (world over population, global warming, financial stability, etc.) are the very people who would best serve humankind by having children. I once wrote a lengthy paper on The De-Evolution of the Human Race that included research on the sinking intelligence and abilities of humanity in western civilization because of the propensity for the middle and upper classes to not reproduce at will and the lower classes to ignore the choice. Unfortunately, there hasn't been enough years of this potential de-evolution to substantiate the idea. There has also been general increase in apparent intelligence and capability (or productivity) because of new technologies like the Internet that introduce free and easily available information to the masses. But, look around and you will see many capable, successful people who are unwilling or at least hesitant to have children. On the other side are people like the woman who rented a house of mine at one point and told me that her job was to make babies for the state - and indeed, she was getting paid more each time she had another baby. She didn't care who the father was and she was on number nine at the time.

So, in the debate on Amazon, I argued that anyone asking the question of whether or not to have children is already likely to be a better parent, a better provider, and someone who would produce better citizens than the average person out there having children. That argument started the first firestorm. It was interesting to see the reactions - they were emotional and heartfelt, but few had any logic or reasoning behind them and I stood my ground as there was nothing in the arguments to counter what I was saying.

Then the discussion turned to only-children (one child in a family) and again I started a firestorm, this one probably more deserved. I have observed many families and parenting situations (part of my research into writing Humanism for Parents - Parenting without Religion and found many parents that mistakenly enable their children - in other words give them what they want to quiet them down. Sometimes this is done as part of an (IMO invalid) parenting philosophy, but more often it is because they struggle with conflict and the personal will power it takes to stand up to a screaming child. In multi-children families where the parents tend to enable, the children end up learning that they can't always get there way. In single-child families, the child really is the center of the universe. In childhood s/he almost always gets his/her way. Then, later in life it is difficult for them to be happy because they never can get back to that situation where they get whatever they want. It makes for an adult who is difficult to please and struggles to be happy.

Of course all of the people in the debate who were only-children vehemently objected. They believed they had turned out fine thereby disproving my arguments. Of course my arguments were never about a single person and they shouldn't have taken it so personally. Also, any person tends to think s/he is "ok" (turned out well), it is an attribute of human psychology. There also hasn't been (to my knowledge) impartial studies on this, so it is difficult to prove. But it does make a lot of sense.

On the other hand, anyone who is thinking about having children and actually spending time trying to decide is much more likely to parent a single child better than those who just have children without deciding to. Again, don't take any one case and object to this - it is a blanket statement that can't be applied to a specific situation.

This isn't exactly a Humanist issue, but you can try to look at it from a Humanist standpoint. In that case we would use logic, reasoning and compassion to explore the ideas for validity (and leave emotion and reaction aside). In this case, however, I don't know of any applicable research. Maybe it is time for a graduate student or team to do just such a research project.

Incompetent Gonzales finally gone

2007-08-27T12:39:00.000-06:00

WASHINGTON (AP) - Alberto Gonzales, the nation's first Hispanic attorney general, announced his resignation Monday - ending a nasty, monthslong standoff over his honesty and competence at the helm of the Justice Department.

It is about damn time.

One of the few things the Republicans and Democrats have agreed on recently is the need for Gonzales to resign. He has proven incompetent at best and at worst a threat to the checks & balances that keep our democratic system alive by turning the justice department into a political arm under the Bush administration.

Now they need a real (read independent) leader who can clean up the mess. But, that isn't likely with the current administration's inability to admit any wrong.

Christian Proselytizing in the Armed Services

2007-08-20T16:17:00.000-06:00

This has, frankly, been an embarrasement for some time - our armed forces have proven some of the most prejudicial organizations in the government today (second to the white house of course). Humanists, Atheists and non-Christians have all been harassed and shunned by all the services. The Air Force being one of the worst offenders.

Finally, some good news on this front:

Three faculty members from United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) in Colorado Springs, Colorado--one of whom is also a former cadet--have gone public today with their criticisms of evangelical Christian proselytizing at the USAFA. They are joined by another former cadet now serving in Iraq. Of the three faculty members, only one now remains at the Academy. Two have been reassigned, one to the Air Command and Staff College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama and one to Afghanistan.

See The Humanist Magazine article published by the three faculty members.

Improving on your Parents

2007-08-09T13:44:00.000-06:00

One of the most impressive things I can think of for a parent is something my father (Edward M. Curley) accomplished. His father abused his wife and kids; actually beat them up when he was upset and/or drunk. Then, when my father was around 12, he left them to fend for themselves and disappeared for 40 years.

But, not only did my father never beat us up or hit his wife, he only ever spanked us if it was for a lesson. He broke that cycle of child abuse and that has to be one of the hardest things to break. I have felt the deep-rooted desire to hit a kid many times and if I had grown up in an environment where I was beat up, I wonder if I could refrain from hitting a child during any of those many times s/he was completely misbehaving. But, I don’t have to struggle with that because my father broke the cycle and taught me that physical punishment should only be used when trying to train or accomplish something, not out of anger or spite.

I’ve often thought that every person would do well to try to improve on one thing s/he thinks his or her parent(s) did poorly. I’ve told each of my four kids this – that one of their jobs as a parent will be to improve on what my wife and I have done as parents. But, in no way did I ever think I could match the improvement my Dad did. And I didn’t need to. There are many other ways I’ve thought I improved on parenting from what he did. Some are:

• Played with the kids a lot more
• Participated in their lives a lot more (births, events, competitions)
• Talk with them a lot more (as a confidant)

These were things my Dad didn’t do, but that I do at least better than he did. Obviously they are nowhere near as important as his breaking of the abuse cycle.

Then the other day I began reading The End of Faith by Sam Harris. He made an interesting point in how difficult it is to break away from religion and it started me thinking that maybe the biggest improvement I made isn’t on the day-to-day tactical sense that those above are, but rather in my breaking away from religion.
Religion is so out-dated and detrimental to society and so difficult to break out of that my going from the hardcore Catholic school boy (I was an alter boy and frequently lead the rosary during my lunch hour) to the Humanist advocate I am, is just about as difficult as my father breaking out of the child abuse cycle.
I know that there are many (very many) good religious people. But as a whole, religion has been responsible for more atrocities in the world than anything else. Most recently is the total destruction of the World Trade Center and the resulting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Despite what politicians say, these are totally about religion – do you think the Taliban would have attacked the WTC without Islam? And think about the Bible and Koran that both basically say that if another does not believe in God as this book says (and you believe), then you must kill them. The Islamists are just living by the book they believe in – in some ways that is more admirable than the Christians who say the Bible is the word of God, but then don’t live by it.

Anyway, Religion is so archaic and unneeded and in fact damaging that we have to as a race stop the irrational faith in it. But, taking that step is very difficult. When you grow up in a family that totally believes and has total faith (something you believe with no evidence), then it becomes very difficult to break away. It is also scary for many people to think that they aren’t going to live past death and that they have nobody to rely on but themselves. This stance of course would make everyone stand up and be responsible for who they are without relying on some deity, but it is still scary to most and one of the reasons they can’t easily break away from it.

So, I’m now wondering if maybe I did improve on something really big instead of those little things. Not that I wasn’t happy with them – I didn’t say that every generation had to improve to the level my Dad did; that is pretty much impossible.

Your job of course is be to improve on something that you think is important in the way of parenting. It doesn’t have to be huge, it just has to be something – if for no other reason than that this will make you think about what good parenting is and who you want to be as a parent.

Video of Rabbi Wine's Memorial

2007-07-31T14:59:00.000-06:00

Rabbi Wine's memorial was quite emotional and inspirational. Anyone interested in Humanism and just how pervasive and life-changing it can be should review Rabbi Wine's past and read some of his books. The video is available on line now from the organization he founded:

"Rabbi Sherwin T. Wine, the founder of Humanistic Judaism, was killed in a car crash on July 21, 2007, while vacationing in Morocco. He was 79. Rabbi Wine laid out the intellectual foundations of Humanistic Judaism, creating many of its celebrations, rituals, and educational materials. In 1963, he founded The Birmingham Temple in suburban Detroit, the first congregation of Humanistic Judaism, and in 1969 established the Society for Humanistic Judaism.

You can view it at: The Birmingham Temple

Joyce Carol Oates 2007 Humanist of the Year

2007-07-30T17:20:00.000-06:00

Joyce Carol Oates named 2007 Humanist of the Year

Joyce Carol Oates, the prolific award-winning writer, was named the 2007 Humanist of the Year by the American Humanist Association. The award was presented at the Association’s 66th Annual Conference, held in Portland, Oregon.

“Oates has long been recognized as a giant of literature," said Roy Speckhardt, the Association’s executive director. "And now we’re thrilled to formally honor her humanistic endeavors. Ms. Oates’s work reflects a deep respect for humanist values and expresses a devotion to humanistic social change.”

See the Celestial Timepiece web site for more information on Oates and for a list of her works.

EvolveFISH

2007-07-25T15:56:00.000-06:00

I'm sure you have all seen those Darwin or evolved fish emblems on the back of cars. The one that made me laugh the most was a fish with legs that was eating a religious fish symbol. Well, those and many other irreverent paraphernalia comes from a company called EvolveFISH. From their site, they "are dedicated to countering the destructive aspects of religious zealotry... they create and gather enlightened symbols and materials and sell these products online; with special focus on areas where zealots are trying to usurp the freedoms of the targets of their bigotry.".

Great Stuff Huh!

Now for the even better news - EvolveFish has agreed to sell my book Humanism for Parents - Parenting without Religion. Check it out on their site

WebCast of Memorial Service for Rabbi Wine

2007-07-25T09:18:00.000-06:00

Arrangements are being made for the memorial service for Rabbi Wine being held at the Birmingham Temple on Friday morning at 10:am EDT to be streamed live through a link on our website – www.shj.org. People will need Quicktime Player, which can be downloaded, to view the live feed.

The family of Rabbi Wine has suggested that contributions in his memory be directed to support the Secular Humanistic Jewish Movement he established. They have selected the 21st Century Fund, which benefits the International Institute for Secular Humanistic Judaism, the Society for Humanistic Judaism and the Birmingham Temple. Donations may be made payable to the 21st Century Fund and sent to:

Rabbi Sherwin T. Wine Memorial Fund
c/o The Birmingham Temple
28611 West Twelve Mile Road
Farmington Hills, MI 48334

In the next day we hope to post some readings on hope and courage, which were favorites of Sherwin, on our website for you to include in your community memorials if you so choose. These are passages that Sherwin wrote.

Thank you all for your support.

Parenting without Religion

2007-07-23T10:44:00.001-06:00

The press release for my book Humanism for Parents - Parenting without Religion finally went out. You can see a copy on PRWeb at:

PRWeb Press Release

The book is also available through my site or you can use the links to the right.

The book covers aspects of raising children without reliance on religion. It goes over rites, rituals, and practices that you might want to consider when raising children. It also has Q&A chapters for younger children and teens so that they can try to get an understanding of Humanism in a way they can relate to.

If you take a look at it or read it, please send feedback to me at humanismforparents@spiritualhumanist.info.

Farewell Rabbi Sherwin T. Wine

2007-07-23T10:36:00.000-06:00

Much of this is taken from a letter from Greg M. Epstein of the
Humanist Chaplain of Harvard University

Rabii Wine was a teacher, a fellow Humanisst, AHA Humanist of the Year, and one of the greatest Humanist leaders of the 20th Century. Rabbi Wine and his longtime partner, Richard McMains, were vacationing in Morocco. Returning from dinner Saturday evening July 21 in Essaouira, their taxicab was hit by another driver. Both Rabbi Wine and the taxi driver were killed instantly. Richard survived the collision and currently is hospitalized in stable condition.

For a press release with more detailed information about Wine, dubbed "the atheist rabbi" by Time magazine in 1965, including regarding the memorial service currently being planned, click here or visit the Society for Humanistic Judaism. To hear Rabbi Wine speak on Humanistic Judaism, click here for an interview recorded at Harvard University in April 2007. A video of Rabbi Wine’s stirring speech at Harvard in April 2007 will be available later this week at http://harvardhumanist.org.

Around the world, Wine taught that human dignity, courage and love are our most important values, not religious obedience. He publicly debated religious fundamentalists such as Jerry Falwell and Meir Kahane. And he refused the religious veneer that America so values in its leaders -- though he kept the title rabbi he did not pray or praise a god he did not believe in.

And yet the movement Sherwin founded and the career he pioneered, was never about being against god but rather about moving beyond god to create humanist community, led by humanist professionals, for the benefit of all human beings. If we learn one thing from Rabbi Wine's loss, let it be this: now that the world's attention has turned to the 1.1 billion non-religious people on earth, and now that bestselling books on atheism by authors such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have shown millions what Humanists do not believe in, let us follow Sherwin's example and dedicate ourselves to building a positive alternative to traditional religion. Let us build communities, organizations, and families that do good for ourselves and others, based on the Humanist ethic of reason, compassion and creativity

More Americans accept creationism than evolution

2007-07-16T15:51:00.001-06:00

This is shocking.
In June, a Gallop Poll showed that more Americans accept the hogwash called creationism than the scientifically-backed evolution. See the article:

Majority of Republicans Doubt Theory of Evolution

There article is especially disconcerting because it states there is debate over the validity of evolution. The only place there is debate is in religious circles and where those circles interact with politics. There is no real scientific debate over it (other than the background dissenters that open communication often has).

It is astonishing to me that something as sound as evolution, backed by huge masses of data can be up for debate because people want to take a book written (and I use the term loosely) 2000 years ago as literal fact. How blind can people be?

It makes me want to back belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which is just as valid of a belief as Creationism (and a lot more fun).

AHA getting modern on us?

2007-07-16T15:08:00.000-06:00

The American Humanist Association, EvolveFISH, and Rational Responders teamed up to bring the positive message of Humanism to YouTube!

Can you believe it - AHA and YouTube. It is great to see the leaders at AHA embrace modern technoligies. The video below is the winner of their Humanist Vision Contest.

Check it out. It is a nice little video on the meaning of Humanism. If you ever wondered what Humanism is really about, this video gives a good 30-thousand foot view.

America a Christian Theocracy?

2007-07-03T11:14:00.000-06:00

This is a topic near and dear to my heart and one that has had a profound affect on me and my life.

I grew up a strict Catholic with very conservative views. Included in my teenage years, I happened to witness the results of abortions when viewing garbage cans full of baby parts. This turned per permanently against abortion, especially late-term abortion. Once you take the step that abortion of a late-term baby is murder the only reasonable place to stop (or so my teenage logic argued) was at conception. Ever since then I have based much of my voting on the candidate’s stance on abortion – which led me to almost always vote Republican.

Bush, the Christian Fundamentalists, and the movement to turn this country into a Christian Theocracy has finally overridden that stance. I no longer consider abortion the most critical issue in America today. Instead it is a bunch of right-wing fundamentalists who are trying to re-write the American history into one based on religion and now are trying, and in many cases succeeding, in turning this country into a theocracy run by Christians with other religions (and non-religious) being subjugated.

This movement scares the hell out of me!

Many reasonable religious people agree and are voicing their opinions on this and on the separation of church and state, which is a very related topic. There are also many Jewish holocaust survivors who recognize in this movement the same horrifying events that preceded fascism in Nazi Germany. Very frightening stuff!

If you have doubts about this or want to read more, there are two excellent books out on the subject. Be forewarned though that they are disturbing books and will cause you to lose sleep at night if you have any concern for America remaining a fee country. The books are:

Michelle Goldberg’s Kingdom Coming
Damon Linker’s The Thocons

Buy and read both immediately!

You can also visit the First Freedom First foundation for more information.

Bush out-of-touch on Stem Cell Research

2007-06-20T13:29:00.000-06:00

Once again, President Bush has vetoed a bill that would ease restraints on federally funded stem cell research. His stance is based purely on religious beliefs and isn't scientifically-based. The difficult question here is whether you consider a fetus life at conception. I struggled with this one most of my life, electing to agree with the fundamentalists because I couldn't see how a baby, just prior to being delivered couldn't be considered life; and once you make that step it was difficult to see where to stop - when is it life?

Some would say that it is life only once delivered, some when it has a heart beat or when "quickening" happens (when the mother can feel it move). In some countries/societies, the baby isn't considered life until well after birth. I struggled with all of these until recently when I read an article suggesting that we have a clear definition of when life ends - with the cessation of brain wave activity; why isn't the definition of when life starts based on the same premise - that life begins when brain wave activity is detected.

Given this perfectly reasonable scientific definition of the beginning and end of life, there is no reasonable argument against stem cell research. President Bush’s vetoing this bill is another example of him foisting religious views of right and wrong on the country and further is an example of just how out of touch he is with his constituency.

From a Humanist standpoint, our views of right and wrong have to be based on scientific, rational reasoning and on eliminating pain and suffering for sentient, aware people – not on ill-defined and personal religious opinions.

Humanism for Parents - Parenting without Religion

2007-06-19T14:45:00.000-06:00

Well, I've been neglectful of blogging for the last month or so. Between gutting my master bathroom and starting the rebuild, starting a new job, and completing the book, I've just been too busy.

The good news is that the Humanism for Parents - Parenting without Religion book is not generally available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Borders, and Google Books. Please, take a look at it and let me know what you think. It is slightly cheaper to order through the publisher as they don't gouge you for shipping.

The following is the short description from the publisher.

By some estimates, over 1 billion people in the world are non-religious (humanist/secular/atheist) yet we base some of our parenting techniques and traditions on religion. There are many books available on parenting around each of the major religions, but few around parenting in a Humanist household. This book is an attempt to outline how non-religious parents can have rites, rituals, and practices needed for a healthy, spiritually fulfilled family.

You can also preview it on-line through my site via the page on
parenting.

Cheers, Sean

BIHI presenting The Rise of Christian Nationalism.

2007-05-09T14:45:00.000-06:00

The Boulder International Humanist Institute is putting on a great event in a couple of weeks. The full title is: Secular America under Siege – The Rise of Christian Nationalism. If you are anywhere near Boulder, CO, you should make a point of going to this event. Michell's and Damon's books are excellent!

Here is the BIHI announcement

On Tuesday, May 22nd, BIHI and the AHA present an evening with Michelle Goldberg and Damon Linker entitled, “Secular America under Siege – The Rise of Christian Nationalism.” If you value preserving the separation between Church and State, you won’t want to miss this! The event includes discussion and book signing by both speakers. Location is the Glenn Miller Ballroom at the UMC at CU, corner of Broadway and Euclid in Boulder. Tickets are $7.00 in advance and $10.00 at the door. Students and faculty free with ID. Online ticket purchasing and parking information is at www.bihi.info. For general questions, call Gordon Gamm at (303) 543-9166.

Michelle Goldberg, a senior political reporter for Salon, has been covering the intersection of politics and ideology for years. In her book, Kingdom Coming, she demonstrates how an increasingly bellicose fundamentalism is gaining traction throughout our national life, taking us on a tour of the right-wing evangelical culture that is buoyed by Republican political patronage. With her trenchant interviews and the telling testimonies of the people behind this movement, Goldberg gains access into the hearts and minds of citizens who are striving to change our nation into a Christian nation run according to their interpretation of scripture.

Damon Linker, author of The Theocons, is intimately familiar with the rise of the “theoconservatives.” His experience working in the center of the theocon world as an editor of its flagship journal, First Things, led to his resolve to write a critical history of the movement. The Bush administration’s overt religiosity represents the triumph of an ideological movement that for the past several decades has devoted itself to fashioning a theocratic governing philosophy for the U.S. and has actively sought to roll back the division of church and state in American life.

Boulder International Humanist Institute seeks to build a more humane society by asserting that values and public policy choices should be based on the most beneficial human consequences and not on faith or ideology. BIHI is not concerned with the proof of the existence or non-existence of God, but how one's God belief or disbelief affects their values and public policy decisions. BIHI’s niche in the Humanist world is to challenge both traditional religious values which are based on unquestionable supernatural sources, as well as those “create your own reality” values emphasized in new age religion. The organization’s Web site can be found at www.bihi.info

The American Humanist Association (www.americanhumanist.org) is the oldest and largest Humanist organization in the nation. The AHA is dedicated to ensuring a voice for those with a positive outlook, based on reason and experience, which embraces all of humanity.

Go here for more information and to buy tickets on-line.

Humanism for Parents

2007-04-25T08:47:00.000-06:00

I am in the final stages of publishing a book called Humanism for Parents that provides information to parents and potential parents (or even caregivers) about how to raise children without reliance on religion. By some accounts there are 1.1 billion people who don't believe or don't practice religion. There are plenty of books out about parenting with religion but few that are specifically secular. This book describes the aspects of parenting that are particular to a non-religious household.

It is currently available at the publisher (Lulu), and will be available at Amazon, Google Books, Barnes&Noble, and Borders within 6-10 weeks. You can also preview the book through my page on The Spiritual Humanist web site here.

Cheers, Sean

Global Warming

2007-04-24T09:57:00.000-06:00

This week’s edition of Newsweek has a special report on Leadership & the Environment. It’s nice to see such a prominent, mainstream magazine get it right. There is way too much politics involved in this “debate” and it is obscuring the real science. I still hear people, usually ones impacted by energy companies or big business, say that global warming isn’t real or isn’t anthropogenic (man-made) and it really irks me.

All the serious scientists and all the real, peer-reviewed work says that global warming is happening and that it is anthropogenic. The only real debate happening is around what we can do about it. Newsweek’s article makes the valid point that to get everyone behind fixing the problem; we have to make energy produced by the burning of fossil fuels more expensive than renewable energy and we have to apply the changes worldwide. Until you do that, people in general will continue to use energy that is helping to cause global warming.

There are some serious efforts under way to apply technologies to remove CO2 from the atmosphere and sequester it underground or in the deep ocean (below a certain level, it sinks instead of rises). I have hopes that our ability to apply technology will yet save us (I did a master’s thesis on Technological Mitigation Options to Anthropogenic Global Warming which evaluated many of the potential technologies we might apply (and no, Ethenol isn’t one of them). But, we need to get the federal government behind the changes. Right now, they are being implemented piecemeal by individual states (e.g. CA) and cities (e.g. Seattle), but these won’t be sufficient. This will take a worldwide, concerted effort.

I have actually heard some fundamentalist Christian people say that we don’t really need to worry about global warming because the second coming is happening soon and so the health of the planet won’t really matter much longer. This is at the heart of the difference between Humanism and some religious people (not necessarily the religions). We believe that we all have to lead a reasonable, sustainable life without reliance on faith or a potential afterlife. There is no way they can know for sure when (if ever) the second coming will happen, so how can they say we don’t need to worry about the planet. Do they really want to leave this mess to their kids to figure out? It is frustrating to see such blind stupidity contribute to the planet’s man-made sickness.

With magazines like Newsweek printing a fairly accurate view of global warming, I’m hoping more of the general public gets behind serious change.

If you want to look at discussions between real climate scientists about the subject, try http://realclimate.org.

Goodbye Kurt Vonnegut

2007-04-12T12:46:00.000-06:00

Kurt Vonnegut (November 11, 1922 – April 11, 2007) died yesterday. He was a profound American novelist who combined dark human and science fiction. But, most notably for this blog, he was an avid Humanist. He won the 1992 Humanist of the Year award and took the place of Issac Asimov as Honorary President of the American Humanist Association.

"I am a humanist," he wrote in a letter to AHA members, "which means, in part, that I have tried to behave decently without expectations of rewards or punishments after I am dead."

Indianapolis, where he lived, named 2007 "The Year of Vonnegut."

Goodbye Kurt, the world is a lesser place with you gone.

If you are interested in furthering his cause, you can contribute at The AHA. You can also leave a personal message honoring him. The AHA compile those comments in the coming days and create a special online memorial page.

Homosexuality and Humanism

2007-04-09T09:51:00.000-06:00

My career happens to be in Computer Science. One of the things that really irked me off at one point was learning about the homophobic plight of Alan Turing. Turing is arguably one of the founders of modern computer science and he played a huge role in defeating the Germans in WWII by deciphering their code. He should have been hailed as a hero for the war, but was instead vilified, tried, and convicted for homosexuality. Punishment was either prison or being chemically neutered.

It is shocking to me that this is still such a heated topic. Homosexuality has been around for as long as we have records. There have been various forms of it:

Egalitarian where the partners are equal

Gender-based where the two partners take on male or female roles

Age-based where there is a wide discrepancy in ages

In modern western society, the egalitarian type of homosexuality is most prevalent, but in roman times, it was common and accepted for men to have homosexual relationships with young boys. The Koran also discusses young boys as a reward for men.

It is difficult to tell just how prevalent homosexuality is in modern society, mostly because of the rampant homophobia in some parts of the country. In addition, there is the difficulty in defining homosexuality – does a single homosexual experience make a person homosexual; does it require multiple experiences; or is it only when someone is exclusively homosexual, or self-identifies as homosexual? Generally, though, most research indicates that 35% to 40% of the population has had some homosexual encounter and an estimated 4% of the population claim to be exclusively homosexual. Homosexuality is also present in various animal species including a number of primates. Some report that it is well-documented behavior in more than 500 different species.

From a scientific standpoint, there is no evidence that a gene or genes exist that promote homosexuality. In addition, the American Psychiatric Association has been clear that “treatment attempts to change sexual orientation are ineffective” . They go on to say, however, that the risks are great and can include anxiety, self-destructive behavior, depression, and suicide.

I can’t specifically explain how homosexuality made it past evolution, but then attributes acquired through natural selection are extremely complex and sometimes very difficult to explain. What we can say is that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon and we must give homosexuals the same rights as every other citizen, including marriage and all the rights that that includes.
However, this stance is one that tends to cause even liberal religious people to baulk. It has been a rallying force for religious people across the country, but especially in the Bible belt. Otherwise conflicting groups like Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons unite in their stance that homosexuality is evil. As Michelle Goldberg puts it:

“Homosexuality has become the mobilizing passion for much of the religious right. A populist movement needs an enemy, but one reason the Christian nationalists are so strong is that they’ve made peace with many old foes, especially Catholics and African-Americans. Gay people have taken the place of obsolete demons.”

The Humanist stance on this topic is quite clear. Homosexuality is natural and is here to stay. We must provide the same rights to homosexuals that heterosexuals have and we should never be prejudiced or homophobic.

References
Steve Jones, Darwin’s Ghost

Sara Goudarzi, LiveScience, November 2006, Homosexual Animals Out of the Closet

www.medicow.com/topics/Reparative-therapy

Michelle Goldberg, Kingdom Coming

Sean Curley, Humanism for Parents

Separation of Church and State

2007-04-06T14:32:00.000-06:00

Blogswarm is sponsoring a blog promotion about separation of church and state. This isn’t exactly on-topic for this blog, but it is an incredibly important topic. There are active organizations in this country who are trying to undermine the bedrock American stance on separation of church and state. If they succeed, our ability to believe as we want will evaporate. We will become a Christian Nation, which is exactly what they are after.

The most prominent recent successful actions undermining separation of church and state is the faith-based initiative President Bush has put in place and the politicizing of the judicial system. The first is using millions of dollars of taxpayer money to promote Christian values without the checks-and-balances the secular system has in place. The second is an attempt to institute faith-based laws by overloading the judicial system with judges who base their decisions on the Bible instead of the Constitution and rational thought.

If you doubt any of this, try reading any of the following books:

Michelle Goldberg, Kingdom Coming
Damon Linker, Theocons
Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

Or read through some of the material at any of the following:

The Interfaith Alliance Foundation
Americans United for Separation of Church and State
The First Freedom First Foundation
The American Humanist Association

Nontheists and Politics

2007-03-15T12:39:00.000-06:00

It is accepted (though it shouldn't be) that a politician who declares himself or herself to be atheist (or any nontheist) is finished. The founding fathers would have been shocked at such a political environment. Many of them were nontheists themselves or at the very minimum thought that religion should be kept stickily separate from politics and it shouldn't matter whether the politician is religious or of what religion. As the following quote from George Washington in a treaty signed by John Adams says:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion...

Despite what some say, this is not a Christian nation, it is a secular nation with firm footing in an environment where everyone is allowed to believe and practice as they wish, including atheism.

This last week Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) publicly acknowledged he does not believe in a supreme being. The declaration, it said, makes him the highest-ranking elected official — and first congressman — to proclaim to be an atheist.

Roy Speckhardt of the AHA said: "With Stark's courageous public announcement of his nontheism, it is our hope that he will become an inspiration for others who have hidden their conclusions for far too long."

Stark said he was "a Unitarian who does not believe in a supreme being." He also wrote "I look forward to working with the Secular Coalition to stop the promotion of narrow religious beliefs in science, marriage contracts, the military and the provision of social services."

Unitarian Universalism describes itself as creedless, allowing members to shape their beliefs based on personal experience rather than an authoritative statement of religious belief. Some members believe in God, but not all do.

Stark has represented Fremont in Congress since 1973 and chairs the health subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee.

So, is this brave, political suicide, or both? Certainly it is more honest. In both Sam Harris' recent book The End of Faith and Richard Dawkins recent book The God Delusion, the authors explain how statistically a high percentage of intelligent, college educated people are nontheists, yet 100% (until now) if congress and the senate say they are believers (593 total people). The conclusion is inescapable - either they are lying or they are stupid. It is great to see a politician trying to be honest

What is more important, however, is what do we need to do to get back to the secular, freedom from religious discrimination foundations that this country was built on?

Sean

AHA's Humanist Celebrant Program

2007-03-13T11:47:00.000-06:00

This past week I was approved by the Humanist Society (associated with the American Humanist Association) to be a Humanist Celebrant. This is a program that certifies celebrants and gives them the rights of clergy to perform weddings, birth celebrations, funeral, etc.

The program itself is a valuable one. I’m honored and excited the AHA has accepted me as a Celebrant. The process itself is straightforward though it takes time. You have to be a member of the AHA for a prescribed period, fill out a detailed application about your views, and get four recommendations. They want to see that you will uphold the Humanist ideals, that you are active in the community, and that you will purport yourself well as an AHA representative.

The only issue I encountered during the process was that one potential reference refused to be one based mostly on the AHA site. These friends are conscientious and religious. I had talked with them about Humanism multiple times. My thinking was that it would be valuable to have input from Christians who knew me well.

These friends don’t just give recommendations though; they needed to understand Humanism more. They went to Humanist sites, avoiding anti-humanist sites because they wanted to hear about Humanism from “the horse’s mouth”. What they found on the AHA site disturbed them to the point that they couldn’t conscientiously be a reference.

They found the Humanist principles and actually agreed with those – they considered them noble and inline with their own thinking. But when they went to the articles and stories on the site, they found those very articles didn’t adhere to the Humanist principles. What they found were emotional, political and irrational thinking instead of the scientific, rational thinking they were expecting.

I’ve had this same complaint myself about some of the work that comes out of the AHA. When they talk Humanism, it is close to perfect, but when the get involved in politics and current affairs, they try to make their point and do so by emotion and passion and not clear and reasoned thinking.

It is frustrating that the very organization I represent as a Celebrant has such an emotional face to it through their web site. I had to get a different reference that didn’t have such conscientious objections for the Celebrant application. Happily this worked and I’ve been approved.

The entire process took a couple of years, but that was because I had to be an AHA member for a certain amount of time and I wanted to build up my Humanist activity with the community prior to applying to be a Celebrant. If you have already been an AHA member and are already active, then the process is really just an application, the references, and then a few weeks for them to review the material.

I’ve posted a page on our site here about my work and availability as a Celebrant (or Officiate).

Rev. Sean Curley

Aostach - Domestic Skills

2007-03-01T11:41:00.000-07:00

This is the second in a series of posts about a modern right of passage. This post is about the first section of the Aostach; Domestic Skills. I’ve trimmed each of the sections to keep the length down, but it is still fairly long; my apologies. Go here for the original post explaining the Aostach.

Domestic skills are those required to properly manage and maintain day to day life in the home. These skills range from sewing on a button to planning and cooking nutritious meals. The intent here is to prepare the individual for the time when s/he will be leaving the home, either for college or out on their own. These are basic skills that every person should have learned as they grew up, but we’ve heard from many that say they were forced to learn them on their own the hard way or many that never learned them at all who feel forced to pay others to perform the simplest domestic tasks such as mending or gutter cleaning.

Basic Nutritional Knowledge

This is basic knowledge of what makes up a balanced diet and healthy nutrition. A good diet with consistently healthy choices is not all that difficult when analyzed and broken out into simple clear advice. We explain to our kids that the general concept to keep in mind when planning for a healthy diet is simply concentrating on whole, natural, unprocessed, unsalted and un-sugared foods (foods that don’t usually come in a can, box or package.)

This area also covers vitamins and what we have to augment in our modern diet to have proper vitamin intake.

Balanced Menu

As follow-on to basic nutrition, the individual should be able to plan a week’s balanced menu; explain the various nutritional elements and why they are important. This task should assure everyone that the individual is capable of planning a healthy and varied menu designed to maintain health, energy and proper weight. Over 2/3 of Americans are overweight with over 1/3 of those clinically obese, (a category defined as being 20% higher than normal weight and the most dangerous of categories to be in), thus we believe this knowledge is incredibly vital to pass on to today’s teens. A discussion of portion control is also a vital part of this training section because modern adult America’s, and consequently most teen’s ideas of what actually constitutes an appropriate serving, are so out of proportion.

The individual has to actually produce a plan for an entire week meals (including snacks in between). S/he doesn’t have to shop for or produce the meals, just plan them.

Meal Preparation and Cleanup

The individual should be able to do all the tasks it takes to plan, buy ingredients, cook, and clean up a meal. This particular task is not about a balanced diet or nutrition, but about the mechanics of planning for and preparing a meal. This should include a discussion of comparison shopping, coupons and the possibilities in saving money when done correctly. This is especially useful to people leaving home for the first time that may be limited in available money.

In this case the individual actually has to perform all of this – do the shopping, preparation, serving and cleanup. It is fascinating to see a teenager realize just how much work mom or dad goes through for each meal.

Clothing Maintenance

Clothing is a fairly simple one that includes basic hemming, perhaps some small clothing repairs like unraveled seams, and the sewing on of a button. It also includes the basics of ironing and how to iron without burning a hole in the clothing. We actually call it the “I word” because we all hate it so much. It is one of those (luckily few) things that both my wife and I can’t stand to do. But, everyone should know the basics and how to do a reasonable job of it for those occasions they will actually need it.

Pet care

Most animals need shelter from the elements, food, water, regularly cleaned litter or an appropriate place to toilet, vaccinations and examinations from a qualified veterinarian, spay or neuter (we firmly discuss pet overpopulation, neglect and condition of overflowing animal shelters in the U.S. with all of our kids and why birth control is the most responsible, loving thing one can do for animals in general).

Choose and Wrap Gifts

This is easy and fun, but most kids when they start out have a tendency to choose gifts that they themselves would like to get. We like to discuss how to pick gifts for other people, taking care not to let one’s personal preferences figure in too strongly.

Other than that, this is a fairly simple task that includes how to wrap tasteful, age and station appropriate presents that look like you care and how to wrap them quickly when needed (e.g. via a gift bag). We also mention bringing small but thoughtful “thank you” gifts to hosts & hostesses.

On a related topic, we teach to always send a thank-you card for gifts. We make it fun and let them create and decorate their own, but we always make sure it gets done.

Being a “good guest”

Ideally all children would be taught from a young age that being a polite, thoughtful guest is important. It garners admiration (and a return invitation!) But it also helps to oil the wheels of life, which can be somewhat squeaky and uncomfortable without a bit of graciousness along the way. In our observation modern children may not always understand other people’s viewpoints and may simply forget to practice niceties such as offering to set the table, asking if everyone has had enough before taking last servings, clearing their dirty dishes after the meal, keeping their personal areas neat and clean, wiping muddy feet or removing shoes, saying “thank you for having me, I enjoyed myself”, etc

Home Maintenance

This is a huge topic and very few people know all of it let alone actually do what is supposed to be done for home maintenance every year. There are various lists of home maintenance tasks available on the Internet. Some are incredibly complete and others very superficial.

This topic covers indoor periodic/seasonal maintenance like checking the smoke alarms and air filters to outdoor maintenance like preparation for winter in cold climates.

Shop Skills

Finally we cover basic shop skills including the use of various tools and the potential dangers.

The individual is expected to be able to cut lumber and build a small project. We also explain basic electrical and plumbing maintenance and what should and shouldn’t be done by the individual. In our house, I so almost all home maintenance and am building a cabin on some property we have, so we make sure to tell them that this isn’t how it has to be and that they can hire professionals to do some of the more complex work.

Next post, when I get to it, will be about Financial Skills.

Sean

p.s. We are still looking for a new name for the Aostach...

Respecting the Elderly and Dieing

2007-02-14T12:19:00.000-07:00

My wife is in nursing school and has clinical duty where she gets to "be" a nurse. This past week she got to care for a 93 year old woman who was bed-ridden and suffering. The woman was pleading with my wife to let her go (meaning let her die). Of course my wife could not help, but it brought to mind just how disrespectful it is to let our elderly live beyond when they want to live. This religiously-based notion that suicide under all circumstances is an evil thing stops us from allowing the humane thing to be done.

I’m old enough now that I can imagine a time when I’ll be tired of living and would welcome the quiet sleep of death. Death shouldn’t be so feared; the act of dying might be a painful one, but death itself is not.

Many cultures in history have allowed their old to die gracefully when the time came. Our own Native American Indians are an example – the elderly (or really anyone) could wonder off into the woods or fields, as the case may be, and quietly die on their own.

In modern times, we have the luxury of methods that will allow us to quietly go to sleep and die. Why are we therefore hanging on to this notion that all suicide is bad and we force people that would rather just fade away suffer continuously until they get so far gone that technology can’t keep them alive.

It seems to me that this is just being disrespectful of the individual and their right to die when they choose to. Everyone dies, so why should we make the end so painful when there are alternatives?

Happy Birthday to Charles Darwin

2007-02-12T15:09:00.000-07:00

Charles Darwin was born today in 1809 (198 years ago). As we approach his 200th birthday and we see continued debate about his theory of evolution, more and more people are recognizing Darwin on his birthday as one of the most noteworthy scientists of the 2nd millennium. There are various celebrations and events going on around the world and a site that tries to tell you about all of them (http://www.darwinday.org).

At this point Darwin’s “theories” have turned into the widely accepted beliefs of evolutionary biology and have been applied to other fields as well. It is a rare (and probably misguided) scientist or intellect who does not believe in the basic theory of evolution. In Darwin’s times there were a number of unproven elements that Darwin himself was unable to resolve before his death; virtually all of those have since been resolved and his theories have stood the test of time better than any others.

It is shocking then that only 14% of Americans think that evolution is “definitely true” (pretty much the lowest in all “western” countries) and over a third think that the world was created “as is” 6000 to 10000 years ago and is immutable. America is falling behind in science and technology while there are people trying to turn it into a Theocracy. These are very frightening facts to me and they should be to you as well.

One of the difficulties with evolution is that it just isn’t intuitive; you look around and can’t see any evolution happening at all and to say that we have a vast majority of our definition (DNA) in common with a rat is, frankly, insulting. Finally though there is a modern example of evolution in the making. The HIV virus has evolved in recent years into two distinct strains (HIV-1 and HIV-2) that are no longer capable of mating (combining) and this is one of the distinctions of two separate races. Scientists have seen the variations happening and have seen how some variations are more successful than others; evolution in the making. The reason this can happen with a virus is the shear numbers of reproductions that occur.

It took us going into space to finally convince the Catholic Church that the Earth revolves around the Sun (something Galileo almost died for in 1633) and maybe this modern proof that life is not immutable will help prove once and for all that evolution is fact.

How this fits into Religion is debatable and not really relevant to this blog. But the fact is that we are connected, each and every one of us, to every other Human (after all, genetically, there is no such thing as race) and also to every other living organism on the planet. That is an astounding thought and hopefully one that makes you look around at the world in a different light.

Thank you Darwin!

If you are interested in reading up on the modern view of Evolutionary Biology, try Steve Jones' Darwin's Ghost, The Origin Of Species Updated from Ballantine Books.

Irreverence is a hallmark of humanism

2007-02-09T07:45:00.000-07:00

Irreverence is a hallmark of humanism. No writ is too holy, no image too divine to escape merciless critique, doubt, and even ridicule. It shouldn't be surprising, then, that even the most cohesive and organized humanist groups lack a defining cadre of sacred objects and ideas.

Yet sacredness is essential to spirituality for theists and non-theists alike. What we hold sacred forms the foundation for archtypes, traditions, mythology, rituals, and celebrations. It sets a context for the ethical and moral codes we use to guide our own behavior and to judge the behavior of others. It distinguishes doctrine from opinion and creates a living community out of a primordial soup of zealous individuality.

Humanists shy away from identifying anything as sacred because sacredness shapes behavior in a way that transcends rationality. If we refrain from murder, not because it is reasonable and evolutionarily adaptive to support a murder-free society but because life is sacred, does that defeat an essential humanist principle? Only if your goal is to have a religion of all bishops and no parishioners. And if humans are rational creatures, they are also social ones. Shared beliefs and traditions must be palatable by many, not only an elite few. If we deny our social selves by isolating ourselves into pockets of rationality, we deny our human natures and fall into the pits of hypocrisy. The compromise, then, is to use reason as the measure of sacredness rather than divinity.

There is precedent to guide us. In her novel The Fifth Sacred Thing, Starhawk (a neo-Pagan writer) envisions a future society whose inhabitants are religiously diverse but spiritually cohesive. The prologue to this book is the Declaration of the Four Sacred Things, which names earth, air, fire, and water as sacred. "Whether we see them as the breath, energy, blood, and body of the Mother, or as the blessed gifts of the Creator, or as symbols of the interconnected systems that sustain life, we know that nothing can live without them." Starhawk also names a fifth sacred thing -- spirit -- that requires freedom, justice, and equality to thrive.

Starhawk's Declaration wraps everything up in a neat little package, and I am not certain that I can improve on what she wrote. It is, of course, a western view of the spiritual elements. Wood and metal are not distinguished from earth, for example. It is also simplistic; carbon is given no more importance than nickel or einsteinium. But it provides a template for us to write the stories and traditions and mores of humanism.

In future posts, I intend to use the Five Sacred Things as a basis for recommending holidays, rituals, and codes of conduct for spiritual humanists.

Looking for a New Name for The Aostach

2007-02-02T11:38:00.000-07:00

I've decided to try to come up with a new name for the Aostach. Originally it was Jiyadj which, believe it or not, was from a Klingon dictionary and had something to do with their rite of passage (hard to recall since it has been 10 years or so) and that has been what we called it at home. But, it sounds too much like Jihad and so before writing the book or publishing any blogs, we renamed it to Aostach. But, that name doesn't flow off the tongue well and we never did switch to calling it that at home.

So, I'm after a new name; if you have any ideas, PLEASE send them my way.
Some things that might help (that I've been looking at):

"Iter" is the root for passage and "maturus" is the root for mature, so I tried some combination of those, but didn't come up with anything great.

Madura is the Spanish word for mature and "edad madura" means mature age. This sounds better, but it doesn't make sense to me to use Spanish (why that over any other language). Greek/Latin make some sense, but I haven't found a good combination there yet...

Any thoughts you send my way are greatly appreciated (you can comment on this topic or send me email).

Thanks, Sean

Aostach - a modern rite of passage

2007-01-31T13:14:00.000-07:00

One of the aspects of spirituality and humanism that we discuss on our http://spirutualhumanist.info site is the need for a rite of passage. Rites like this help mark the natural progression through life and are some attempt at assuring you are ready for the next "level". Many religions have these, but atheists and humanists tend not to. This post (and the ones to follow) will talk about the program we call Aostach that my wife and I designed and is part of my discussion on parenting in a humanist household.

We have four children and we have always spent a great deal of time trying to figure out the best way to raise children in modern America. One of the things we realized early on was that children no longer have a rite of passage or any point where they can say they are now an adult and ready for the world.

We set out defining a set of criteria that the children had to pass with a final test as a kind of modern rite of passage. We now have one through this process and two in the middle of it. We have spoken to quite a few parents (and some want-to-be parents) about it and they all thought it was such a great idea that we decided a while back to turn it into a book. It will [probably] be called "Aostach - A Modern Rite of Passage". Aostach is a Gaelic word meaning Adult.

I plan to put some of the concepts out on this blog and hope to get feedback from anyone reading it.

The Aostach is broken into a number of sections with each section having 6 to 10 topics that the child has to learn or demonstrate. The sections include the following:

Domestic Skills

Financial Skills

Safety and Survival

Physical fitness

Daily practical knowledge

Ethics, Morals, Social Responsibilities and Manners

You can see that it is a diverse set of knowledge and abilities. The culmination of all of it is a somewhat difficult test that the child has to perform.

The next blog will be about the first section of the Aostach, Domestic Skills.

Darwin’s Birthday Coming Up

2007-01-30T17:05:00.000-07:00

One of the aspects of spirituality that we talk about on the The Spiritual Humanist site is traditions and recurring celebrations. With Darwin’s 200th Birthday celebration coming up on February 12, 2009; it is slowly becoming a recognized celebration day in the Humanist and Atheist communities. Each year more and more celebrations are occurring around February 12th to celebrate Darwin’s Birthday. There is even a web site dedicated to various celebrations occurring each year on February 12th through 2009 and beyond (http://www.darwinday.org).

The Boulder International Humanist Institute (http://www.bihi.info) here in Colorado is having Professor Robert Tapp (Editor of The Humanist and Adjunct Faculty Chair of The Humanist Institute) talk on historical evidence of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad. I like the BIHI because their intent is to bring in speakers and provide an instructive environment around Humanism and not to tear down religion or the government. It is a very positive way to approach spreading Humanism to the community and the world.

Swearing on a Book in Court

2007-01-29T15:12:00.000-07:00

AHA Article: No Bibles, No Quarans in Courts

A court of appeals in North Carolina is considering adding the Koran as a valid book to swear upon.

This AHA article talks about how absurd this is even if the intentions are clearly a support for religious diversity. Today non-theists or theists of any religion can take the stand in all 50 states. But, what does it mean when they have no Bible or Koran to swear upon?

Isn't it time we came up with some other means of saying we will tell the truth or should we just start relying on the justice system and the punishments for perjury to protect us? Maybe we should base this on swearing an oath to the constitution or some other politically based document rather than a religious one.

It seems to me that holding on to this old tradition of swearing on a bible is saying that we can't believe a person if they are not Christian or at least not religious; which is just blatantly false. Maybe a better solution is to base it on a person's reputation. We could have a system like the financial credit score system that tracks a person's reputation then you could gauge whether or not to trust a person on their reputation score. This solution sounds a bit ludicrous to me also and there are a lot of inherent problems in how we define the reputation score and who gets to manage it.

But, this is yet another aspect where Religion has played a valid role and we need to replace that capability with some secular solution.

I'd love to hear ideas on this, so feel free to comment on the post and make your own suggestion.

A Distinction within Religious Criticism

2007-01-24T16:15:00.000-07:00

Secular Humanism with a human face: A Distinction within Religious Criticism

Interesting post, much in-line with Sam Harris, though I think we shouldn't eradicate the text within these books as much as eradicate the belief that they are the literal words of God. There is certainly a lot of hypocrosy going on within the Abrahamic religious communities when they indicate they believe their respective books are the literal word of God, but they don't follow them. Of course it is fortunate for all of us most don't follow the words as the world would be in a perpetual war with each religious faction being told by their God to kill all who don't believe the same way.

There is a great joke (by Simon Jenkins) that exemplifies this:

"I was walking along when I saw a man standing on a bridge getting ready to jump. I tried to find a reason to dissuade him, and asked :

Are you religious? Yes, he replied. Great, so am I

Christian or Buddhist? Christian, he said. Great, so am I

Episcopalian or Baptist? Baptist, he responded. Great, so am I
Baptist Church of God, or Baptist Church of The Lord? Baptist Church of God. Great, so am I.

Are you Original Baptist Church of God or Reformed Baptist Church of God? Reformed Baptist Church of God. Great, so am I.

Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God Reformation 1879 or Reformed Baptist Church of God Reformation 1915? Reformed Baptist Church of God Reformation 1915, was the answer.

Die heretic scum, I said, and pushed him off.

Definitions of Humanism

2007-01-23T14:18:00.000-07:00

Given Carmen’s comment on the definitions of Humanism, I thought it would be interesting to look up a few on-line and see just how they define it; and then critique those definitions.

www.humanists.org

Based on work by Corliss Lamont, the heart of humanism is: “Humanism, having its ultimate faith in humankind, believes that human beings possess the power or potentiality of solving their own problems, through reliance primarily upon reason and scientific method applied with courage and vision.”

This isn’t bad, but is probably a bit out of date and it unfortunately uses that “ultimate faith in” phrase that always bothers me. It also has extraneous verbiage like “with courage and vision”; I don’t see how that should be part of the definition of Humanism. The bit about “reliance primarily upon reason and scientific method” is good.

www.americanhumanist.org

“Humanism is a progressive lifestance that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead meaningful, ethical lives capable of adding to the greater good of humanity.”

So here is the first blatant example of what Carmen was talking about; they had to include “without supernaturalism”. I think the roots/base of Humanism are a life stance that is separate from supernaturalism, so this phrase really degrades the meaning here and isn’t needed. If they had left that out, it would be close, but then it doesn’t say much either (just that Humanism is a philosophy of being good, hmmm).

www.answers.com

“A system of thought that rejects religious beliefs and centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth.”

This one is even more blatant by saying “rejects religious beliefs” and for this it clearly misses the mark. Humanism came out of the Renaissance Christians who thought reason and intellect should apply to everything, including religion (as Humanists do); also, the first Humanist Manifesto was primarily written by Unitarian ministers.

www.thefreedictionary.com

“A system of thought that centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth.”

I like this one, it is clean, simple and to the point. Unfortunately it is so broad that it might include almost everyone.

www.wikipedia.org

“Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities—particularly rationalism.”

Leave it to wikipedia to come up with one of the best. If they had replaced “rationalism” with the “reason and scientific method” from Lamont’s, I might think it was perfect.

www.bihi.info

“Humanism is a world view informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by compassion. Affirming the dignity of each human being, it supports liberty and opportunity consonant with social and global responsibility. Free of supernaturalism, humanism thus derives the goals of life from human need and interest rather than from theological or ideological abstractions, and asserts that humanity must take responsibility for its own destiny”

This is another good one and much more complete than the others, though it does have that “Free of supernaturalism” clause; it also has that “Theological or ideological abstractions” - that sounds kind of like a shot at religions. I like the last phrase a lot and use it in my explanations.

Humanism vs. Faith in Humanity

2007-01-22T16:28:00.000-07:00

The LiveJournal Blog on Humanism (http://community.livejournal.com/humanism/37601.html?view=234209#t234209) posted an article on Humanism versus Faith in Humanity.

I think Steiner misses the point - equality is not the same as being treated equal. He seems to get off on a minor wording about Humanism that he thinks implies humanists believe everyone to be equal. That really has nothing to do with Humanism; but, we do tend to believe that all should be treated with the same rights as Human Beings.

But, it was nice to see him catch a lot of flack in comments on the Blog :)

Introductions

2007-01-22T13:12:00.001-07:00

Welcome to our Blog on Spirituality and Humanism. Carmen and I come from very different backgrounds (see below), but we both have a passion for ethical, moral behavior and for Humanism. We are also both parents (her of 3 and me of 4) and so have worked to bring Humanism into both our families and our communities. Religion and spirituality serve an essential function for both the individual and society. We believe that it is possible to have a humanist ideology that fills the role of religion morally and epistemologically. This blog and our site http://spiritualhumanist.info are our ways of communicating about humanist spirituality. Our diverse background will help by providing different approaches to this concept.

Sean Curley

Believe it or not, I grew up a fairly involved Catholic. Many people thought I would become a priest, but I always wanted a family and so refused to go that route. I did, however, go to Catholic Leadership training programs during high school and could frequently be seen as an alter boy or leading the rosary at church (mostly for the elderly) during my lunch hour.

But, my father taught me to think and reason even above believing and faith and during college I studied world religions and realized that all of them seemed to have good things to say and many bad things as well (read the Bible or Koran and see how harsh they really are). Then as my dive into science and philosophy continued, I began to see how wrong it was for us to be relying on a possible afterlife or a disconnected God to define our lives. And so began my ascent into Humanism.

For most of my life then I lived a Humanistic life without taking it outside the home. The belief here was we should each lead our own life the best way we see fit and not push our beliefs on others. I taught my kids about Humanism, but also about other world religions, but most importantly, I taught them about living a moral, honorable life irrespective of religion.

Then the 9/11 attacks came and I realized that unchecked religion is still a threat in the world and I looked around and saw how religious organizations are trying to control the political agenda in America. Both of these really frightened me and so I (along with many others) decided the time was right to get more active. So I have started to write more on-line, joined the Board of the Boulder International Humanist Institute (see http://www.bihi.info), developed the Spiritual Humanist web site (see http://spiritualhumanist.info), joined the Church of Spiritual Humanism and have applied to be a Humanist Society Humanist Celebrant. This blog is the latest addition to my attempt to get more active in this movement.

As for the topics I plan to write about, mostly they will be spirituality and humanism, but occasionally I'll write about parenting in a Humanist/Atheist home. There already exists a lot of information on the Internet about this topic, so I'll probably keep it to a minimum. Other related topics may come in if they seem relevant. Please feel free to comment on any topic you like as that is the best way for all of us to learn. If you don't want to comment in public, feel free to send me email at sean.curley@spiritualhumanist.info or you can visit the web site and use the contact form.

Carmen Mosley-Sims

I grew up Primitive Baptist in the cradle of fundamentalism: rural south Arkansas. For those of you who are not familiar with Primitive Baptist doctrine, please do not confuse it with Christian Coalition-Southern Baptist evangelicalism. No, the Primitive Baptists are the "foot-washing" Baptists. I was baptized at the age of 10 in a freezing cold catfish pond, because heated indoor baptisteries aren't mentioned in the Bible. Primitive Baptists are nothing if not sincere.

A mere two years after my baptism, I set my first steps on the path away from the religion of my childhood. I remember this as a heart wrenching decision, because I loved my church community, the lessons it had taught me, and the rituals that marked so many significant moments in my life. As compelling as the reasons were to remain in the church, however, I knew even as an adolescent that I had to find my own way. For one thing, the church doctrine was inexorably opposed to homosexuality, to the point of excluding gays and lesbians from the church. I could not continue following a religion that rejected my close friends and family members, including my own sister. Moreover, my mother had gone back to college around this time and was bringing home ideas and writings representing so many other ways of knowing. The scientific method struck a chord with me, as did eastern philosophy, existentialism, Jewish orthodoxy, and many other foundations of knowledge.

Since then, I have explored many different religions with the goal of finding the "Truth" in all of them. As an undergraduate, I majored in anthropology and became committed to the idea of cultural relativism. At the same time, however, I felt that certain lines should be drawn to moderate human behavior, that appreciation for diversity did not have to mean blind tolerance of anything and everything. I read Krishnamurti and Gandhi and Mary Baker Eddy and Daniel Quinn, and the more I learned of their practical approaches to spirituality, the more I came to equate world religions with the blind men describing the elephant. Each one offers a different and even contradictory description of the Truth, but if we could only step back and see the bigger picture, we would know that all of them are correct.

I'm no longer Primitive Baptist. I'm not even Christian; or Jewish or Hindu or Muslim or Pagan. But I am not an atheist, either. I cannot be atheist because I have directly and personally experienced God. Asking me to deny those experiences is like asking the blind man at the elephant's foot to deny that there are such things as toenails. But the most important questions to me, as a human being, do not concern the nature of God or the afterlife. The most important questions relate to the best way to live this life, and how to maintain constructive relationships with my fellow human beings. We can answer those questions through spiritual humanism.

I intend to focus most of my writings on the moral standards we can set through humanist ideals, and strategies on how to build humanist communities on the local and global level. I am also interested in humanist rites and rituals, stories, holidays and traditions, and other daily nuts and bolts of living as a spiritual humanist. I have personally experienced the challenges of conveying a sense of spirituality to my children while avoiding dogma and maintaining a humanist home. I hope that this blog will help me and others find the balance between critical thinking, and humility before forces that are bigger than we are. Please contact me at carmen@spiritualhumanist.info if you would like to communicate with me directly.