Secular Humanists

[mummymonkey]

Why would 69% of a focus group find "Secular Humanists" an offensive or embarrassing term?

The Big “Bright” Brouhaha (http://www.skeptic.com/BIG%20BRIGHT%20BROUHAHA4.htm)

[Some Friggin Guy]

I find it as offensive and embarrassing as any term which labels me into a group. This includes being described as a "bright" as well. I have a disbelief in god, so I am an atheist, but if I could, I would shake off that title, as well.

My dislike of being labelled as a part of a group is part of what brought me to choose my screen name.

[mummymonkey]

I don't want to start yet another Bright bashing thread. I was interested particularly in why "Secular Humanists" ranked so highly.

[Yahweh]

I like the term "Secular Humanist". It has a very positive ring to it. Also I have learned that if you ask enough people, most of them will be dumbfounded as to what "Secular" could mean.

Of course, I prefer calling myself an Evil Atheist, it gets the point across faster.

[Graham]

What sometimes annoys me about the various names is that I get shuffled into groups by default.

It's like - believe in god? no? off to the atheist group. "Believe" in science - oh! you're a bright, off to that group with you.

I don't object to the names existing as descriptive terms for particular types of belief, I just don't like being categorised as one thing, just because I'm not the other.

Does that make any sense to anyone except me?

Graham

[ReasonableDoubt]

Originally posted by mummymonkey
Why would 69% of a focus group find "Secular Humanists" an offensive or embarrassing term?
You're talking about the opinion of a whopping 9 out of 13 people:On September 7, following the Skeptics Society Distinguished Science Lecture Series at Caltech, we assembled a focus group of 13 first-time lecture attendees. In my opinion, both the topic and the reference are every bit as 'Bright' as the name, i.e., not very ...

[mummymonkey]

In a last ditch effort to prevent the thread being hijacked by bright-bashers and label-loathers: why should the term "Secular Humanists" be seen as offensive or embarrassing?

[Some Friggin Guy]

I gave my reasons. It just so happens that I don't like lables (and yes, this means the term Label-loather as well)

I cannot speak for anyone else.

I think you would find that many people find the term offensive and embarrassing for the same reason, so to discount them as not having a valid opinion doesn't allow your question to have a totally accurate answer.

[Graham]

Originally posted by mummymonkey
In a last ditch effort to prevent the thread being hijacked by bright-bashers and label-loathers: why should the term "Secular Humanists" be seen as offensive or embarrassing?

I think you're missing the point - for the most part, it's offensive because it's a label and for no other reason.

I think offensive is a bit strong though, for me anyway. I'm not really offended by it, it's not that big of a deal.

I haven't read the entire linked article - does it give the exact wording of the poll question?

Somtimes that makes a huge difference in interpreting the results (I'm talking to you Cleopatra! :p ).

Graham

[mummymonkey]

They were given a list of terms and asked to rate them. I don't think the like or dislike of labels would affect the results. I really wondered why "Secular Humanist" should rate so badly compared with other terms. It doesn't strike me as being offensive in the least.

[Graham]

Originally posted by mummymonkey
They were given a list of terms and asked to rate them. I don't think the like or dislike of labels would affect the results. I really wondered why "Secular Humanist" should rate so badly compared with other terms. It doesn't strike me as being offensive in the least.

Some people seem to think of "Secular Humanism" as a religion. Without wanting to ignite that debate again, perhaps that's the problem.

Graham

[CWL]

I don't mind "Humanist" or "Secular Humanist" as I think it is an adequate description of what I stand for. I also like the scholarly ring of "Humanist" (as it draws upon academic traditions from the Renaissance etc., cp. the "Humanities").

"Brights" I think sounds scary and sect-like. Wouldn't dream of categorizing myself as a "Bright".

[mummymonkey]

Originally posted by Graham


Some people seem to think of "Secular Humanism" as a religion. Without wanting to ignite that debate again, perhaps that's the problem.

Graham I see. I wasn't aware of that. Thanks Graham.

[Graham]

Originally posted by mummymonkey
I see. I wasn't aware of that. Thanks Graham.

I just Googled to see the exact definition of "Secular Humanist".

Once I got past secularhumanism.org, etc there were sites like this one: Christian Answers (http://www.christiananswers.net/q-sum/sum-r002.html) , which sort of give that impression.

It's only supposition on my part though, I don't know if this is a widely held misconception.

Graham

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by Some Friggin Guy
I find it as offensive and embarrassing as any term which labels me into a group. This includes being described as a "bright" as well. I have a disbelief in god, so I am an atheist, but if I could, I would shake off that title, as well.

My dislike of being labelled as a part of a group is part of what brought me to choose my screen name.
Bah, you're just one of those people who doesn't like being labeled as part of a group.



I prefer to think of myself as a secular inhumanist.

[Some Friggin Guy]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin

I prefer to think of myself as a secular inhumanist.

Well, that would make sense, seeing as you are a penguin.

[whitefork]

You can always quote Rick Blaine:

Strasser: What is your nationality?
Rick: I'ma drunkard.
Louis: That makes Rick a citizen of the world.

Just change "nationality" to "religion".

[Cleopatra]

I use the term " Secular Humanism" only when I discuss with Americans and to be exact I started using the term after I joined this forum.

For me Humanism had nothing to do with the Church, Humanism is secular by definition but the discussions in this forum made me realize that "over the ocean" some people make this distinction and I wonder why. :)


As for the term "Bright" we have been through this before, I am totally against it.

[Graham]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
I use the term " Secular Humanism" only when I discuss with Americans and to be exact I started using the term after I joined this forum.

For me Humanism had nothing to do with the Church, Humanism is secular by definition but the discussions in this forum made me realize that "over the ocean" some people make this distinction and I wonder why. :)


As for the term "Bright" we have been through this before, I am totally against it.

I suppose someone could be a "humanist" i.e. put the interests of humanity first and foremost but also be a part of a religion.

It would simply be a matter of priority. That person might, for example, put giving to charity over giving to the church.

Graham

[hgc]

The term Secular Humanist doesn't go over well because it's been pounded into the public consciousness as a pejorative by the religious fascists who continually try to equate lack of belief in superstitious nonsense with a communistic religious alternative.

[mummymonkey]

Originally posted by hgc
The term Secular Humanist doesn't go over well because it's been pounded into the public consciousness as a pejorative by the religious fascists who continually try to equate lack of belief in superstitious nonsense with a communistic religious alternative. That's interesting, I had no idea it had negative connotations in the US. Ta.

[hammegk]

Originally posted by hgc
The term Secular Humanist doesn't go over well because it's been pounded into the public consciousness as a pejorative by the religious fascists who continually try to equate lack of belief in superstitious nonsense with a communistic religious alternative.

Or, some (not non-religious) people distrust people who write things like "because it's been pounded into the public consciousness as a pejorative by the religious fascists who continually try to equate lack of belief in superstitious nonsense with .... " thinking the writers in question may be "secular humanists". :p

[Ratman_tf]

Or some people distrust people who write things like "Or, some (not non-religious) people distrust people who write things like "because it's been pounded into the public consciousness as a pejorative by the religious fascists who continually try to equate lack of belief in superstitious nonsense with .... " thinking the writers in question may be "secular humanists". :p" Thinking the writer may not get aound to his point. ;)

[rdaneel]

I like the term Humanist and I don't see why it matters what the believers think of it.
First, I think people who try to use it to denigrate others end up looking silly because it sounds like they're using "human" as an insult.
And second, we wouldn't be the first group to take ownership of a "derogatory" term and wear it proudly, thus confusing our opponents. :D

[EdipisReks]

Originally posted by Graham


I suppose someone could be a "humanist" i.e. put the interests of humanity first and foremost but also be a part of a religion.


yes, they are called Religious Humanists. there is plenty of info at www.americanhumanist.org. i generally consider myself a Secular Humanist, as i am quite in line ethically and philosophically with the Secular Humanist movement.

[ReasonableDoubt]

Originally posted by mummymonkey
In a last ditch effort to prevent the thread being hijacked by bright-bashers and label-loathers: why should the term "Secular Humanists" be seen as offensive or embarrassing? Nine out of a highly select thirteen people.

[espritch]

Personally, I like the term "Secular Humanist". Until I learned what it meant, I didn't know there was a word that pretty well sumarized my personal philosophy. :)

P.S. "Bright" sucks. It's stupidly arrogant and says absolutely nothing about what those who choose this label actually think. Or worse, maybe it does.

[Ladewig]

I agree with the previous posters

Perhaps these people who have negative impressions have been reading "Free Republic.com - a conservative news forum" where S.H. are not described in positive terms.

The secularists are gloating. They got a court order to remove the Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building and another court order to suspend Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore who put it there.

or InTouchMinistries.org where S.H. are described thusly
Yet we regularly allow secular humanists and the mass media to rearrange our thoughts and distort our perspectives. The secular media often erodes the faith of believers and in the sovereignty of God. Like vultures, many TV cameramen swoop down to focus in on the wars, famines, disasters and tragedies. They very seldom go on to present the wide-angle picture of what God is doing even in the midst of these tragedies and in spite of the suffering.

I do agree with them on one point. I have absolutely no idea of "what God is doing even in the midst of these tragedies."

It is not hard to find churches, websites, or tracts that define S.H. as those who put humans in the place that God should be. That's why it is a somewhat undesireable term in the U.S.

__________________________________

Put me down as a secular vogonist. In fact, I wrote a poem about it. Would you like to hear it?

[rdaneel]

Originally posted by Ladewig

Put me down as a secular vogonist. In fact, I wrote a poem about it. Would you like to hear it?

I was going to suggest you find some Fundies to read it to, but I decided I'm not that cruel. :D

[mummymonkey]

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
Nine out of a highly select thirteen people. Yes, I read the report. I would have found it odd for even one person to rate the term as offensive. Thanks to various respondents, I now know better. If the same question were to be asked in this country, I think it would get a positive rating.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by mummymonkey
In a last ditch effort to prevent the thread being hijacked by bright-bashers and label-loathers: why should the term "Secular Humanists" be seen as offensive or embarrassing?

Simple reason:
"Your beliefs are different from my beliefs. But not in the normal way... you want to kill God!"

[Darat]

Originally posted by Some Friggin Guy
I find it as offensive and embarrassing as any term which labels me into a group. This includes being described as a "bright" as well. I have a disbelief in god, so I am an atheist, but if I could, I would shake off that title, as well.

My dislike of being labelled as a part of a group is part of what brought me to choose my screen name.

I totally agree with you, perhaps we could form a group? ;)

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Ladewig
Put me down as a secular vogonist. In fact, I wrote a poem about it. Would you like to hear it?COLOR]

I love Vogon poetry! Please share some with the community on this thread! (adds Ladewig to the ignore list)