addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwchatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgoogleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Re: [humanism-174] I'm not going to argue for atheism anymore

From: Mike
Sent on: Friday, August 1, 2014 5:25 PM
I often wonder why I get caught up with the irrational when  I'm in a debate about religion. I would much rather get into a debate about a rational approach to humanity. Of course if you go down that road your inevitably going to run into political debate. I'm more then willing to talk political on issues but some are more willing to stick to rational thought versus religion. I realize that there are different political views within The Center For Inquiry and Freethinkers and I would love to hear and debate things that affect humanity not only within this country but also on world stage. What are your views,as Humanist,on all of the political discussions of our day. What is a humanist view on the national debt,what is humanist view on taxes,what is a humanist view on immigration,what is a humanist view on conservation and what is a humanist view on civil rights? In the end,what I would really like to see is a political party based solely on Humanism.

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 31, 2014, at 10:44 AM, "Susan H." <[address removed]> wrote:

I was reading some comments on an article, and I finally realized where the flaw in my debate is.

Believers roll out Stalin and Pol Pot.

My response would be that atheism did not drive their ideology. There is no reason to kill for atheism.

That's the flaw. It's pretty much a value-free description. Atheism is only the disbelief in gods.

So I will now always focus on arguing for secular humanism to make the values clear.

As I said in my own comment, secular humanism takes all of the good things from religions (which are only good because humans are capable of good and they made the religions) and leaves the bullshit behind. Sure, we can do good with religion. We're human after all, but we can do better without it because we won't be tribal and hateful about it, and we can use our resources and energy only on the things that actually work instead of diluting them with bead counting and preaching. And our goals can be more pure with the understanding that this is our shot, instead of draining our urgency with false stories that if we don't get it right, maybe we will have a better chance elsewhere.

Yeah--that's my plan moving forward. 

That is all.

Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Susan H. ([address removed]) from The Cleveland Freethinkers.
To learn more about Susan H., visit his/her member profile
To report this message or block the sender, please click here
Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy