Scular Humanism aka atheism is a religion
Question:
NOTE: I AM NOT THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS POST. I POST IT HERE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION SHOULD ANYONE LIKE TO DISCUSS IT Newsgroups: alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1439150362d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=U… http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1F224EC8
Since when is Secular Humanism "aka" atheism? –Billy
Response:
Secularism is not incompatible with theism. A theist could wish for secular government.
Well, you know that bit about rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and rendering unto God what is God’s? Got your separation of church and state right there. It isn’t taken seriously by too many theists nowadays, but during the time when the US was founded, Quakers and others who did take it seriously were much more involved with history.
Response:
NOTE: I AM NOT THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS POST. I POST IT HERE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION SHOULD ANYONE LIKE TO DISCUSS IT
Well, you titled it. Secular Humanism is not the same thing as atheism. I am an atheist. I am not a Humanist, let alone a Secular Humanist.
Response:
NOTE: I AM NOT THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS POST. I POST IT HERE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION SHOULD ANYONE LIKE TO DISCUSS IT Well, you titled it. Secular Humanism is not the same thing as atheism. I am an atheist. I am not a Humanist, let alone a Secular Humanist.
Secularism is not incompatible with theism. A theist could wish for secular government. Humanism is not incompatible with religion in general, but it would be hard to reconcile the idea of "man as the measure of all things" with theism. BF
Response:
no …. it isn’t
Response:
Secular Humanism is a religion
Only if "bald" is a hair-color.
Response:
NOTE: I AM NOT THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS POST. I POST IT HERE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION SHOULD ANYONE LIKE TO DISCUSS IT Newsgroups: alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1439150362d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UT F-8&selm=mHCIc.107%24So5.27619%40news.uswest.net http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1F224EC8 Is "Secular Humanism" a "Religion"? —- John Dewey described Humanism as our "common faith." Julian Huxley called it "Religion without Revelation." The first Humanist Manifesto spoke openly of Humanism as a religion.
<etc… I find it quite amusing that some religious folks seek to denigrate atheism (and in this case Humanism) by equating it to religion. Do they not see the irony in this? Anyway, it all depends on what definition of ‘religion’ you have in mind. I would say that the generally accepted definition is something along the lines of "belief in, worship of or obedience to a supposed supernatural power or powers". Clearly atheism and Humanism do not fit this definition, since neither assert the existence of any such supernatural power. If we use a more colloquial definition then the term ‘religion’ could include anything that a person regards as being "of overwhelming importance in their life". In this case, religion could indeed include atheism or Humanism, or for that matter football or science or pornography or knots or anything else at all *for one particular person*. Such a definition would not therefore be very useful in characterising the object of such a religion. So, calling atheism or Humanism a religion is either false, or trivial and meaningless. Take your pick :-)
Response:
NOTE: I AM NOT THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS POST. I POST IT HERE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION SHOULD ANYONE LIKE TO DISCUSS IT Newsgroups: alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1439150362d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=U… http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1F224EC8 Is "Secular Humanism" a "Religion"? —- John Dewey described Humanism as our "common faith." Julian Huxley called it "Religion without Revelation." The first Humanist Manifesto spoke openly of Humanism as a religion. Many other Humanists could be cited who have acknowledged that Humanism is a religion. In fact, claiming that Humanism was "the new religion" was trendy for at least 100 years, perhaps beginning in 1875 with the publication of The Religion of Humanity by Octavius Brooks Frothingham (1822-1895), son of the distinguished Unitarian clergyman, Nathaniel Langdon Frothingham (1793-1870), pastor of the First Unitarian Church of Boston, 1815-1850. In the 1950’s, Humanists sought and obtained tax-exempt status as religious organizations. Even the Supreme Court of the United States spoke in 1961 of Secular Humanism as a religion. It was a struggle to get atheism accepted as a religion, but it happened. From 1962-1980 this was not a controversial issue. But then Christians began to challenge the "establishment of religion" which Secular Humanism in public schools represented. They used the same tactic Atheists had used to challenge prayer and Bible reading under the "Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment. Now the ACLU is involved. Now the question is controversial. Now Secular Humanists have completely reversed their strategy, and claim that Humanism is not at all religious, but is "scientific." This page examines two issues: a.. Secular Humanists and Humanistic courts have admitted that Humanism is a religion. b.. Why they now claim Humanism is not a religion, in order to avoid problems under the "Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment. For further reading, see R.J. Rushdoony, The Messianic Character of American Education, chapter 27, "Education as a Religion." He writes, [T]he state school is a religious institution. As pointed out in Intellectual Schizophrenia, the public school is the established church of today and a substitute institution for the medieval church, dedicated to the same monolithic conception of society. Some years ago, Dewey very candidly discussed "Education as a Religion" (John Dewey, "Education as a Religion," The New Republic, August, 1922, p. 64f.) As Whitehead observed, "The essence of education is that it be religious." (Alfred North Whitehead, The Aims of Education, NY: Mentor Books, 1952, p. 26) The public or state schools have thus been inescapably religious. Their "common faith" has been described as "made up of elements provided by Rousseau, Jefferson, August Comte, and John Dewey. ‘Civil religion’ is an apt designation for this faith." (G.H. Williams, Harvard Divinity School Bulletin, 1948-1949, p. 41.) —- In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Secular Humanism was a religion. Nevertheless, many Humanists deny the significance of the Court’s assertion. In order to buttress the claim that the identification of Secular Humanism as a religion in a footnote in the Torcaso case is more than mere "dicta," here is a memorandum prepared "[a]t the request of the staff of the Committee on Education and Labor" by Congressman John B. Conlan. —- The U.S. Supreme Court cited Secular Humanism as a religion in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins (367 U.S. 488). Roy Torcaso, the appellant, a practicing Humanist in Maryland, had refused to declare his belief in Almighty God, as then required by State law in order for him to be commissioned as a notary public. The Court held that the requirement for such an oath "invades appellant’s freedom of belief and religion." The Court declared in Torcaso that the "no establishment" clause of the First Amendment reached far more than churches of theistic faiths, that it is not the business of government or its agents to probe beliefs, and that therefore its inquiry is concluded by the fact of the profession of belief. Actually, the Court in Torcaso rested its decision on "free exercise" grounds, not the "Establishment Clause." Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 264-65 (1962) J. Brennan, concurring. The Court stated: We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person to "profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers,10 and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs.11 Footnote 11 concerning "religions founded on different beliefs" contains the Court’s citation of Secular Humanism as a religion. It states Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others. See Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127; Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal. App. 2d 673, 315 P.2d 394; II Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 293; 4 Encyclopedia Britannica (1957 ed.) 325-327; 21 id., at 797; Archer, Faiths Men Live By (2d ed. revised by Purinton), 120-138, 254-313; 1961 World Almanac 695, 712; Year Book of American Churches for 1961, at 29, 47. It is important to note that this citation of Secular Humanism as a religion is not merely dictum. The Supreme Court refers to the important 1957 case of Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia (101 U.S. App. D.C. 371) in its holding that Secular Humanism is a non-theistic religion within the meaning of the First Amendment. The Ethical Culture movement is one denomination of Secular Humanism which reaches moral and cultural relativism, situation ethics, and attacks belief in a spiritual God and theistic values of the Old and New Testaments. The Washington Ethical Society case involved denial of the Society’s application for tax exemption as a religious organization. The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the Tax Court’s ruling, defined the Society as a religious organization, and granted its tax exemption. The Court Stated, The sole issue raised is whether petitioner falls within the definition of a "church" or a "religious society" . . . . The taxing authority urges denial of the tax exemption asserting petitioner is not a religious society or church and that it does not use its buildings for religious worship since "religious" and "worship" require a belief in and teaching of a Supreme Being who controls the universe. The position of the tax Court, in denying tax exemption, was that belief in and teaching of the existence of a Divinity is essential to qualify under the statute. . . . To construe exemptions so strictly that unorthodox or minority forms of worship would be denied the exemption benefits granted to those conforming to the majority beliefs might well raise constitutional issues . . . . We hold on this record and under the controlling statutory language petitioner qualifies as "a religious corporation or society" . . . . It is incumbent upon Congress to utilize this broad definition of religion in all its legislative actions bearing on the support or non-support of religion, within the context of the "no-establishment" clause of the First Amendment. —- Other Justices have reflected back on the Torcaso opinion and confirmed our analysis.
In Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 495, n. 11 (1961), we did indeed refer to "SECULAR HUMANISM" as a "religio[n]." Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987) note 6 Justice Harlan summed it all up: [Footnote 8] This Court has taken notice of the fact that recognized "religions" exist that "do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God," Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 495 n. 11, e. g., "Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, SECULAR HUMANISM and others." Ibid. See also Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 101 U.S. App. D.C. 371, 249 F.2d 127 (1957); 2 Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences 293; J. Archer, Faiths Men Live By 120-138, 254-313 (2d ed. revised by Purinton 1958); Stokes & Pfeffer, supra, n. 3, at 560. Welsh v. United States 398 U.S. 333 (1970) note 8 But many who favor a secularist "separation of church and state" will contend that fundamentalists invented the idea that Humanism is a religion. Like most Americans, these secularists do not understand the legal issues involved here. The Humanist-dominated Court is permitting Secular Humanists to have their cake and eat it too. Secular Humanism is a religion "for Free Exercise Clause purposes." The Court has undeniably defined Secular Humanism as a religion "for free exercise purposes." When Secular Humanists want the benefits of a religion, they get them. Tax Exemption. Secular Humanism has been granted tax-exempt status as a religion. The Torcaso quote cited the cases. Conscientious Objection. Even though Congress originally granted conscientious objector status only to … read more »
