Talk:Secular humanism

From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of Talk:Secular humanism as edited by RobSmith (Talk | contribs) at 14:03, 12 April 2007. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Very opinionated article.----John 22:42, 12 March 2007 (EDT)Elamdri 22:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Here's a site that might be useful for cites. [1] :Crackertalk 22:29, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
Even with these, we need to be careful to maintain that this organization does not represent ALL secular humanists. Also, I think the "anti-religion" assertion really needs some major support, as it's hard to define anti-religion (against all belief in supernatural? personally disbelieving but willing to accept others' beliefs? actively proselytizing against religion? believing that religion should be illegal?), and I think of secular humanists as being the segment of nontheism that emphasizes religion or lack thereof the least, aiming more towards social justice and such things. --John 22:42, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Why the rv of 17:24, 13 March 2007

I didn't see how that edit was wrong? Crackertalk 17:26, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

I have nothing against yours. I just think the article was way too polemic and makes us look bad, so I thought we should start from scratch. MountainDew 17:39, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Okay, though it wasn't my edit. Crackertalk 17:41, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

About the definition

Secular Humanist is not against religion. Rather, humanism is an ideology emphasizing the value of the human experience and interpretation of the world over more organized, "top-down" forms of religion. Thus, secular humanism is a brand of humanism that deemphasizes the importance of creeds, in order to focus on the shared aspects of humanity.

Note: 1. Secular humanists do not hate or conspire to overthrow religion. 2. Secular humanists are not required to hold ACLU memberships, nor do they engage in clandestine devil-worship. 3. Attack pages created to denounce various ideologies are not representative of encyclopedic content, nor do they reflect well on Conservapedia.