What can you guys tell me about Humanists? I've never dealt with one before.

[MrScorpio]

Last edited Wed Feb 19, 2014, 07:50 AM - Edit history (6)

I ran into one in Raw Story, and maybe I'm wrong, but this guy sounds like an anti-religious bigot. Mind you that I'm not religious myself. But whenever I feel as if I'm being subjected to religious intolerance of ANY kind, whether it be in the name of for or against the belief in any faith, I don't like that shit at all.

Every American has the right to believe, or not to believe, as they see fit, and no one has the right to tell anyone otherwise.

These are the kinds of things that start religious wars in other countries. Check this out and tell me if I'm wrong or not.

Article: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/17/how-to-tell-a-mexican-from-a-muslim-a-guide-for-the-panicky-american/?utm_source=disqus-dashboard

Me:

Here in Southeast Michigan, we've made peace with Muslims eons ago. The Potato Farmers have nothing to fear.

Him:

"The most potent antidote to religion is education. I am sure many of those people who you call Muslim are not Muslim at all but just people who came from a Muslim ancestry. Keep up the good work and in a generation the mosque will close due to lack of interest."

Me:

I have to ask. Do you actually know anything about Southeast Michigan, or was that your standard take on anything said about Islam or Muslims in America?
And why do we need to close Mosques? Do we need to close Temples and Churches too? What's wrong with anyone following whatever religious belief they want to have?
Heck, I may be personally non-religious, but I stand by anyone else worshipping as they see fit in this country. That's called religious freedom, my friend.

Him:

"Whoa, calm down fella. My point is not anti-religion but that religion can't compete with education and TV. All religions have to indoctrinate their children. Still even a child that is indoctrinated but is exposed to counter ideas, such as science, history, TV or life without a religion, may not stay in the religion.
That is my point. In the home countries, where the Muslim religion is mandatory and all counter ideas are eliminated, children grow up to be Muslim. In Michigan, even Muslim children are exposed to science, history, TV and the idea life can be lived without religion.
My point is the Muslim religion is no different than other religions. They are losing members. The fasting growing group in America is atheist. No child has to be indoctrinated to be an atheist since that is what all children start with."

Me:

No, that's not right. Not all Muslim countries have universal Muslim indoctrination. I take it that you're not aware that there are Christians Arabs and Persians, Jewish Iranians, so forth and so on in this world. Here in Michigan, many of the Arabs are from predominantly Muslim countries, like Iraq, are actually Christians. Go to Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, Algeria and Morocco and you'll see something quite different from what you're asserting.
Dude, I'm a retired AF Vet as you appear to be a retired Navy vet. I'm sure that you must have served with other people from different faiths and nationalities and gleaned from them a much better knowledge of the world. Or perhaps you were deployed overseas. But you don't seem to indicating that at all.
Where are you getting this stuff from?

Him:

"We are talking past each other. You are correct that many Muslim societies are tolerant of other beliefs, even if the tolerance is only grudgingly allowed and slowly disappearing. I am correct that many countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Northern Sudan, state governments in Indonesia and Malaysia, actively persecute anyone who is not a Muslim or is the wrong type of Muslim.
I am sure many of the outstanding people in Michigan fled their native countries because they were not the right type of Muslim or were not a dedicated enough Muslim.
I am a proud member of the American Humanist Association. ( http://americanhumanist.org/ ) Everyday there are stories about atheists in Muslim countries who are brutally treated, even killed, or imprisoned because they committed the crime of not believing.
Sharia law is rapidly spreading in many parts of the world. In those areas, the worst crime is to question Islam or even worse, not believe in a god.
The reason why sharia law is imposed is because the enforcers know modern life in general and education in particular would destroy their religion if people had freedom.
That is my point, modern life and education is the antidote for religion. Even people who fled sharia law, but are still strong believers, will find their children questioning the faith once they learn there is an alternative, such as atheism.
You try to deny facts and tell me I am somehow wrong for pointing out the obvious. There is a reason atheism is the fastest growing group in America and even in Michigan's Muslim communities.
Oh yea, I spent time in 35 countries and was stationed overseas for nine years in my Navy service. I know a thing or two about other cultures."

Me:

OK, let me tell you what I'm finding objectionable in your posts. To me, you seem to be unfairly focused on Islam, to the exclusion of the problems of intolerance imposed from any other religion. It's not as if it's only the Muslims who are causing problems out there, Right? And your point about Sharia indicated to me that you might be concerned that Sharia Law could be imposed here in the US… Which, in my observation is a completely irrational fear, coming exclusively from the Right Wing.
Instead of Sharia law coming to America, I'm way more concerned about the Dominionists who are hellbent on turning this country into a so-called "Christian Nation," bound by some warp interpretation of the Book of Leviticus.
Sure, as Humanist, must have some concern about that, and I right?

Him

Your leaps of logic are truly galactic. I point out people are fleeing sharia law overseas but you claim I am worried about American government imposing sharia law here in the United States.
You fancy yourself a liberal but what you did was out-Limbaugh - Limbaugh. Limbaugh did the same thing to Sandra Fluke. She testified about the need for health care and Limbaugh claimed she wanted government to pay her for having sex.
I agree the Muslim religion isn't the only religion that has intolerant believers. There is an old saying in America, "Jesus protect me from your followers."
The difference is our Constitution protects us from religion. If it wasn't for the Constitution, we would have a Christian version of sharia law in many parts of our country. The same hate and ignorance found in fundamentalist Muslim areas is also found in fundamentalist Christian areas here, fundamentalist Hindu areas in India and even in African tribal religions.
If it wasn't for the rule of law, Americans would see the same religious based killing that Iraqis woke up to when Dubya liberated them from peace and tolerance.
Even though you invented things I never said or implied, I still point out that freedom to get an education is incompatible with religion, be it Michigan or Tehran.

Me

OK, Bro., I took some time to reassess this conversation we're having and I've come to the conclusion that I've misjudged you.

I apologize for that. I guess that miscommunication is something that's inherent in this this process.

Frankly, I think that you and I have more in common that we have apart. Your point about us talking past each other was correct.

Can we call a truce?

Him

Agreed, we are both knowledgeable on why intolerance is destructive to society in general and to the victims in particular. I enjoyed your replies. Please keep up the good work.

All done!

[MineralMan]

1. Yes, probably a bigot, which is odd.

Humanists probably shouldn't be bigots, but when it comes to religion, some are. I'm an atheist and a humanist, but I'm not concerned about others' beliefs, except when those beliefs impinge on the rights of others.

I don't find religious beliefs to be supportable, logically, but I'm not an evangelist for atheism. I consider it a personal thing. Personally, I cannot believe in supernatural entities or causes. If others can, well, that's not a problem for me. I won't unfriend them for it.

OTOH, where religions affect how people treat others who don't share their religion, and if a religion teaches bigotry, I oppose it.

[MrScorpio]

9. I'm always wary of anyone bringing out the "Sharia law" trope

As if it's coming to America and it has to be stopped. There are no American Muslims advocating for Sharia Law to be enacted in this country, over all Americans, to my knowledge. OTOH, the Dominionists are hellbent on making America a so-called "Christian nation," and they need to be stopped. But Sharia law isn't on the American Muslim agenda.

You're quite correct about the problem with teaching religious bigotry. And like you, I believe that faith is personal and not something to be impinged on others, the same goes for Atheism, as far as I'm concerned. I would never, for one second, stand to have my own personal belief, or anyone else's forced on others in this country.

But I don't know where this guy is coming from… I'm just not comfortable with his anti-religious bias and apparent willingness to impose it on others.

[Bigmack]

12. What you said...

The problem comes when the religious people simply will not stop proselytizing and codifying their beliefs into laws.

When Catholics take over hospitals (state of Washington) and install their beliefs, when religious groups determine what is to be taught in our schools, when churches tell their parishioners how to vote.... it's easy to develop a variety of bigotry.

I feel that I don't have to respect religions...I find them irrational. I do respect the adherents as fellow humans.

I'm not a militant atheist, but an atheist nonetheless. Atheists are the most persecuted minority in America... in at least seven U.S. states, constitutional provisions are in place that bar atheists from public office and one state, Arkansas, has a law that bars an atheist from testifying as a witness at a trial.

The idea that the overwhelming number/percentage of theists in this country bear any burden of bigotry against them is laughable.

Atheists, on the other hand... "A new study finds that atheists are among society's most distrusted group, comparable even to rapists in certain circumstances."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-10/religion-atheism/51777612/1

[Schema Thing]

2. : a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. - so, no.

[Lost_Count]

3. Is he wrong?

[rbrnmw]

4. I am know a few Humanitarians no Humanists

it appears there is a stark difference from this article.

[tkmorris]

5. I'm not seeing any bigotry at all

Furthermore my initial read doesn't reveal any mistakes in his facts or logic. There seems to be a focus on Muslims versus other religions there, but that may be merely contextual.

Perhaps you could point out the bigotry you perceive?

[MrScorpio]

10. It's his primary focus on Muslims, to the exclusion of other religions that bothers me

As if other religions have never done, or are not doing the same shit that he's accusing Muslims are doing.

That's my primary objection.

[tkmorris]

15. I understand

That's the only part that seemed possibly objectionable to me as well, but I assumed that the conversation taking place was about Muslims in particular. Now if he had started pontificating about Muslims during a convo about baseball that would rather stand out. It sounds as if he is perhaps former military, which lately would mean that his personal experiences with religion and the excesses which it's followers sometimes resort to would almost certainly be of a Muslim variety.

If he had been living in the South Sudan he might have noticed that Christians can be just as persecutory towards Muslims as the other way round.

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. However, the article is about Muslims, as was your first comment

It wasn't his choice to make the conversation primarily about Muslims - it was the article author's.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. You know what is bigoted? That law religious folks just passed in Uganda which puts

those unlike themselves in prison. Catholic, Anglican, Muslim and Protestants joined hands and made a pogrom against a minority group. That's bigoted.
I'm sure you agree.

[DetlefK]

7. Two things:

1. As an agnostic and humanist myself, I can say that he's a bigot for the sin of simplification.

2. There is a secret muslim civil war raging in the Middle-East and Europe: Salafists vs. Shiites.
Each side regards the other as heretics that have to be wiped from the face of Earth. There is no "muslim" community outside the Middle-East: They are either salafite or shiite communities and if there are members of the other denomination in it, they keep it a secret out of fear to get murdered.

[TBF]

8. Tolerance is a virtue -

and I have experienced cases of humanists being just as bigoted towards others as anybody else.

I agree with this statement: "Every American has the right to believe, or not to believe, as they see fit, and no one has the right to tell anyone otherwise."

When groups try to add prayer to public schools or otherwise push their beliefs on others (for example creationism classes that slam up against accepted science) then I would push back, but other than that I agree that folks should be left alone to believe what they'd like.

[Puzzledtraveller]

42. Tolerance can be bad

Putting it up with something often delays progress.

[TBF]

50. Did you read only the title

or my entire post?

I gave an example of when tolerance could go bad. I could give others - such as putting up with folks not vaccinating. That of course affects the entire "herd".

[Puzzledtraveller]

51. I did

And I was not admonishing you. I was agreeing.

[cbayer]

11. They are as varied as those who call themselves christian or jewish or muslim, etc.

There are some right here on DU who are clearly bigoted against the religious and some who are not at all.

There are some who also consider themselves religious, while there are some who would advocate for the elimination of religion.

I was surprised at first that some were as intolerant and prejudiced as some RW fundamentalists, as I thought it would be a total contradiction.

But I have come to understand that bigotry can be found everywhere, even amongst those who claim them have built their philosophy on a bedrock of anti-bigotry.

[Bluenorthwest]

41. The bigotry of the religious right is defined by Uganda. If you are saying 'as bad as'

it has to be 'as bad as stoning and mass jailing.' To casually claim that 'they are as bad as religious fundamentalists' while religious fundamentalists are starting actual pogroms is to serve the fundamentalists. It is also not accurate.
What stuns me is that in a week when the news contains stories of gay people being tried under Sharia law and arrested under Christian law both in Uganda, anyone on DU would see it acceptable to defend Sharia law or Christian religious law in any way at all, or to claim 'humanists are just as bad as fundamentalists'.

[cbayer]

44. I agree about Uganda, but was aiming my opinions more at individuals than

at groups or organizations.

I'm not defending Sharia law or Christian religious law in any way. I am just noting that slapping a label on oneself does not provide immunity from hate or prejudice.

And there are some humanists that are "just as bad" as some fundamentalists when it comes to that, though, again, I agree that the groups persecuting GLBT people in places like Uganda are much worse than any particular individuals posting here. There is no comparison.

[WinkyDink]

13. Humanists are descendants of Renaissance and Enlightenment thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism

[riderinthestorm]

14. The second sentence of your entire piece indicates you've picked up the convo in the middle

So without further context its impossible to indicate one way or another.

The snippet you've provided indicates that this is part of a larger conversation and you've only picked out part of it.

It MAY be that your colleague is only focused on Islam but its impossible to know since his reply seems to indicate that YOU are the one who focused on Islam first.

Context matters in this case imho.

[MrScorpio]

16. Cool, I'll edit with my replies

Gimme a sec

[riderinthestorm]

20. He's not a bigot then. You brought up Muslims first. He's simply using your own example

imho

[Bluenorthwest]

35. He also says this

"My point is the Muslim religion is no different than other religions. " Which indicates he sees Islam as no different from other religions, it's just the one you brought up.

[MrScorpio]

37. Right

Thanks

[NuclearDem]

17. Humanist is an interesting label.

Under the basic definition of wanting humanity to rely on itself to solve its own problems, I would qualify as one.

I tend not to associate with the humanist community (or atheist community for that matter) as a whole because it really has become just a straight white men's club. Some of it's just that naive "I don't see race", and some of it's outright misogyny and Islamophobia.

[cpwm17]

18. I'm not fond of the word "humanist"

even though I'm a strong atheist. Frequently "humanists" are right-wing, pro-war, Islamophobes. They often dehumanize Muslims and believe that not believing in any gods automatically makes them morally superior.

From reading the conversation above I couldn't tell whether this "humanist" fell into this category, but he/she did show a particular interest in Muslims.

[jwirr]

19. I am wondering what the meaning of humanist is here. When I was younger I was taught that a

humanist was someone who placed mankind at the center of all things while the opposite was placing god at the center. And I can see how that could easily lead to bigotry. Under that definition I have always considered myself to be a humanist.

[LuvNewcastle]

21. A humanist isn't necessarily an atheist. I'm a humanist.

I think liberals in general are humanists. We believe in progress by human endeavor to make the world better. Some people say that depending on humanity for progress is elevating man to the status of God. I don't believe that. Are we supposed to suppress the genius we've been endowed with and just accept what the world throws at us? Humanists believe that humans can also play a part in the evolution of the world. We can strive to make it better.

Some religious people do object to that line of thought, but many don't. And just because someone criticizes a religious person doesn't mean he's anti-religious. A lot of religious people and non-religious people have regressive or fatalistic beliefs, and that comes into conflict with humanist progressive beliefs. There's nothing wrong with pointing that out.

[AverageJoe90]

22. I'm a non-atheist humanist who leans spiritualist. How's that? nt

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

23. Do you want to know if humanists are bigots, or just this guy?

If you go to the website he linked to, it seems pretty clear the humanists are not fans of any organized religion.

I do not consider myself a secular humanist because I hate those labels. I also have some spiritual beliefs.

But I believe in being consistent. I notice on DU there are people who will say every nasty thing in the book about Christians, but bristle when another group gets the same backlash. To me, this is about the cult of extreme. While I know Sharia Law is never going to be enacted here, I do know I oppose it strongly in other countries and condemn the radical brainwashed idiots who impose and blindly follow it around the world, the same as I detest those similar thinking idiots in this country regarding "Christianity" who would love to impose their backwards beliefs here. And I am more focused on the Christian idiots here, because I can't do a damn thing to stop what goes on in other countries.

[MrScorpio]

25. Just this guy...

I'm wondering how his opinions jibe with other Humanists, in that, I'm thinking that he's a bit too focused on problem Muslims, more so than other religions.

I understand the concept of trying to build a world based on reason and science over religion. However, I believe that all faith choices are personal and should be free of coercion and intolerance of others. That's something that is fundamentally American, in that all beliefs are free and equal here… Or at least they're supposed to be free and equal.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

30. I'll be interested to see his reply to your last question

That will determine it, most likely.

[MrScorpio]

34. I'm posting it right now.

Check the edit

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

52. Cool

I kinda thought that despite being a bit abrasive, he would be consistent in his thoughts.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

24. "dealt with"?

Sounds like it's going to go really well for you!!!

[MrScorpio]

29. I can handle myself

I'm just trying to get a bead on something that I've never debated about before… The Humanism thing

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

54. Oh, I'm sure you can...

...with your "those people" attitude. You'll do just fine, I'm sure. That's always a good way to approach something new.

[Vashta Nerada]

27. I see nothing bigoted with what he said.

He sounds like he's from a country that is predominantly Muslim in his second box that you provided.

[mathematic]

28. You decided he was a bigot and went into attack mode.

1) You brought up Muslims first.

2) He specifically says Islam is no different from other religions when you ask him about churches and temples.

3) You brought up state/social indoctrination when he was talking about the private indoctrination of a religious family raising children into a belief system.

4) He points out that you two are talking past each other, which you were because you decided he was a bigot with his first reply, and tries to correct any misunderstandings.

5) You erroneously conclude that his comments about Sharia Law reflect a concern about its spread to the US-despite his prior statements (and optimism) that religious thought is on the decline!

Regarding your question about humanists, the list of famous humanists is a who's who of famous liberals.

[MrScorpio]

32. Thanks for pointing all of that out

This guy and I are probably going to hash out our differences eventually.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

31. Better than Chickenists, worse than Platypusists. nt

[Drew Richards]

33. NO! you're the Extremist and he rightly pointed out muslims in the discussion because...Thats what

the article was about; and the discussion started from a standpoint of talking about religion and islam...

You are the one being a bit extreme, hypersensitive and defensive even...he explained his belief clearly and correctly...

and just so you know...we are coming...

[Capt. Obvious]

36. I don't see bigotry

[sinkingfeeling]

38. Sorry, I think you missed what he was trying to get across to you.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

39. DU Rec

[jberryhill]

40. "no one has the right to tell anyone otherwise"

Anyone has the right to tell anyone anything they'd like.

They guy is not a bigot, and you engaged in some serious non-sequiturs.

He said that mosques would likely close for lack of interest in a generation, and he's probably right - just as most mainline Christian denominations have hemorrhaged congregants over the last couple of decades.

In response to his - correct or incorrect - prediction based on general trends, you then go postal:

"And why do we need to close Mosques? Do we need to close Temples and Churches too? What's wrong with anyone following whatever religious belief they want to have?"

Where did "need to close Mosques" come out of what he said?

Religious belief, in general and across the board, is declining. Observing that objective fact does not evince any "need to close" a thing.

You basically accused him of opinions he did not get anywhere near expressing.

[MrScorpio]

46. I appreciate your input, JB

My last post to him is a pull back

[hunter]

43. Some people quit religion without abandoning the frameworks of intolerance...

...of the religion they abandoned.

That's not "humanism," it's just intolerance of religion. One sees a huge amount of that, even on DU; all the culturally white male Protestants who have abandoned formal religion, but still express great animosity toward Catholics, Muslims, etc. (for example); who fail to recognize recognize the patriarchal, Puritanical, authoritarian and intolerant patterns of thinking that permeate this Christian Protestant society they exist within; the "religious" patterns that still permeate their own thinking.

Having abandoned religion, an atheist can still be a sexist, racist, Puritanical, judgmental, religiously intolerant asshole; the guy you hated in church, but without the church.

Google's definition of humanism is pretty good:

Humanism is an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems.

Religious intolerance and bigotry are not rational ways of solving human problems. Religions exist in human societies, that's a scientific fact, deal with it. An anti-religious person can be as intolerant and bigoted as any fundamentalist religious person. That's not humanism.

I can be very critical of any single aspect of a religion or secular society, but lumping groups of people together as "atheists," Catholics, Southern Fundamentalists, Muslims, whatever, is never rational, and it solves no human problems.

Every human being is a bubbling stew of contradictions. Religious beliefs are just a small part of that stew.

[Tikki]

45. I am a humanist…Don't have to deal with me…Just follow the Golden Rule.

A large part of the time it works really well...




Tikki

[stopbush]

47. You wrote:

"Every American has the right to believe, or not to believe, as they see fit, and no one has the right to tell anyone otherwise."

Do you apply that bromide to political discussions? When you talk politics with a tea party type, do you keep in mind that you have no right to tell them that you think otherwise? Is it entirely OK that they believe the way they do, even if such beliefs are based on lies and fantasies?

If not, then why give a carve out to religious discussion? Why is challenging a religious person's belief off limits? It should be no more off limits than any other discussion.

I would say that every American is entitled to their beliefs (religious, political, whatever), but no American is obligated to keep their mouth closed about those beliefs if they don't agree with those beliefs. That's called the marketplace of ideas.

Let's face it, religious belief is a conceit. Facts really don't matter - it's all about faith (ie: the cheapest commodity around) and opinion (like an asshole, everyone has one). Everyone's allowed to have their opinions and fantasies, but that doesn't insulate those beliefs from challenge or criticism.

[alp227]

48. "no one has the right to tell anyone otherwise. "

that's the problem with modern people. they don't want to be told they're wrong. thus they play the "bigotry" card when encountering anything that contradicts their worldview. since when was it bigoted merely to criticize religion?

for some resources about what secular humanism really is instead of what Bill O the Clown has to say:

http://americanhumanist.org/Humanism/What_is_Humanism

http://infidels.org/library/modern/fred_edwords/humanism.html

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Humanism

[riderinthestorm]

49. You're a good egg Mr Scorpio. Your last response was lovely.

[Iggo]

53. Same thing I can tell you about religious people.

Some of them are bigots.

[LostOne4Ever]

55. A humanist is a person who

Bases their ethical framework upon the concept of humanism. Humanism more or less being an ethical philosophy the emphasizes improving the human condition for the individual and society in general.

Humanism is deeply associated with modern liberal thought and philosophy and can be found as a theme in many if not most religions. The golden rule is an example of a humanist philosophy.

Humanism can come in both a religious and a secular form. However, in modern political discourse I have found that most people are referring to secular humanism when they refer to humanism or call themselves or someone else a humanist.

Secular humanism is a very popular ethical philosophy among liberal non-theists such as myself as opposed to objectivism favored by conservatives or other secular ethical philosophies such as moral nihilism, utilitarianism, and a variety of other -isms. All of these philosophies have a variety of nontheist followers including implicit atheists (colloquially known as agnostics), explicit atheists, igtheists, and anti-theists.

Each and every one of these groups has its share of open-minded, tolerant individuals and intolerant bigots. This is true of all groups including religious groups. Honestly, I (like others in this thread) think you are not quite getting what SailorRet (i'm not sure if that poster is male or not) is trying to say. I can't see anything bigoted about their statements.

That said, based on your OP, I would imagine you probably would not get along with many if any anti-theist whether or not they are humanists. They tend to believe that religion is overall harmful to society and should be opposed. They would probably object to the statement that "no one has a right to to tell anyone otherwise."

Part of being tolerant means accepting that other people have a right to disagree. Toleration is different from acceptance. I would say that it is when people take direct action to squelch their opposition that one goes from tolerance into intolerance. But that is a discussion for another thread.