Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
The Nullifidian Volume 1 Number 05
===================================================================
*******************************************************************
===================================================================
____
/ ) ___ ()
/ __ * / / ^
/ / / / ) / _/_ ___ /__ / \
__| / / / / / /___) / ) \/ \
(_/ \____(__/___(___)___/_____/______(________/________/\___ )
_____
/ ) /
/ _ / _ _
>-- / ) /___ / (_)___
/ / / ) / /
(_______)___(___)___/ (____(____/
===================================================================
******The*E-Zine*of*Atheistic*Secular*Humanism*and*Freethought*****
===================================================================
###################################################################
########## Volume I, Number 5 ***A Collector's Item!***##########
###################### ISSN 1198-4619 ###########################
########################## SEP 1994 ###############################
###################################################################
In the mythology and symbolism of our name, "Lucifer" is not to be
confused with ha-Satan, the mythological source of evil. Lucifer's
ancient identity was a bearer of light, the morning star, and it is
as such that this journal intends to publish.
As the religion virus depends on obscurity, obfuscation, confusion,
irrationality and darkness in order to flourish, it is natural that
it would see light as an enemy. Rational, skeptical inquiry has
ever been the enemy of all religions and is ultimately fatal to all
gods.
The purpose of this magazine is to provide a source of articles
dealing with many aspects of humanism. Humanists have been
vilified by the religious as immoral. Apparently, the most
horrible thing they can think of is an atheist.
As we find their values, such as faith in the non-existent,
obedience to the imaginary and reverence of the ridiculous,
repulsive, we adopt the name of their ancient antagonist with
pride.
We are atheistic as we do not believe in the actual existence of
any supernatural beings or any transcendental reality.
We are secular because the evidence of history and the daily
horrors in the news show the pernicious and destructive
consequences of allowing religions to be involved with politics and
nationalism.
We are humanists and we focus on what is good for humanity, in the
real world. We will not be put off with offers of pie in the sky,
bye and bye.
==><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><==
|| Begging portion of the Zine ||
==><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><==
This is a "sharezine." There is no charge for receiving this, and
there is no charge for distributing copies to any electronic
medium. Nor is there a restriction on printing a copy for use in
discussion. You may not charge to do so, and you may not do so
without attributing it to the proper author and source.
If you would like to support our efforts, and help us acquire
better equipment to bring you more and better articles, you may
send money to Greg Erwin at: 100, Terrasse Eardley / Aylmer, Qc /
J9H 6B5 / CANADA. Or buy our atheist quote address labels, see below.
==><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><==
|| End of Begging portion of the Zine ||
==><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><==
Articles will be welcomed IF:
(
they are emailed to: ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA; or,
sent on diskette to me at the above Aylmer address in any format
that an IBM copy of WordPerfect can read; ) and
they don't require huge amounts of editing; and
I like them.
If you wish to receive a subscription, email a simple request to
ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA, with a clear request for a subscription.
It will be assumed that the "From:" address is where it is to be
sent. We will automate this process as soon as we know how.
1994-05-08 Yes, please DO make copies! (*)
Please DO send copies of Lucifer's Echo to anyone who might be
interested.
The only limitations are:
You must copy the whole document, without making any changes to it.
You do NOT have permission to copy this document for commercial
purposes.
The contents of this document are copyright (c) 1994, Greg Erwin
and are on deposit at the National Library of Canada
You may find back issues in anyplace that archives alt.atheism,
specifically mathew's site at ftp.mantis.co.uk. Currently, all
back issues are posted at the Humanist Association of Ottawa's area
on the National Capital Freenet. telnet to 134.117.1.22, and enter
<go humanism> at the "Your choice==>" prompt.
/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\
Shameless advertising:
Atheistic self-stick Avery(tm) address labels. Consisting of 180
different quotes, 30 per page, each label 2 1/2" x 1". This leaves
three 49 character lines available for your own address, phone number,
email, fax or whatever. Each sheet is US$2, the entire set of 6 for
US$11; 2 sets for US$20. Indicate quantity desired. Print address
clearly, exactly as desired. Order from address in examples below.
Laser printed, 8 pt Arial, with occasional flourishes.
Order now to celebrate the rebirth of the Invincible Sun!
_________________________________________________
|"Reality is that which, when you stop believing |
|in it, doesn't go away." [Philip K. Dick] |
|Greg Erwin 100 Terrasse Eardley |
|Aylmer, Qc J9H 6B5 Canada |
| email: ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA |
|________________________________________________|
_________________________________________________
|"...and when you tell me that your deity made |
|you in his own image, I reply that he must be |
|very ugly." [Victor Hugo, writing to clergy] |
|Greg Erwin 100 Terrasse Eardley |
|Aylmer, Qc J9H 6B5 Canada Ph: (613) 954-6128 |
| email: ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA |
|________________________________________________|
Other stuff for sale:
Certificate of Baptism Removal and Renunciation of Religion.
Have your baptism removed, renounce religion, and have a neat
8" x 11" fancy certificate, on luxury paper, suitable for
framing, to commemorate the event! Instant eligibility for
excommunication! For the already baptism-free: Certificate
of Freedom from Religion. An official atheistic secular
humanist stamp of approval for only $10!
Poster 8x11: WARNING! This is a religion free zone!
All religious vows, codes, and commitments are null & void
herein. Please refrain from contaminating the ideosphere with
harmful memes through prayer, reverence, holy books,
proselytizing, prophesying, faith, speaking in tongues or
spirituality. Fight the menace of second-hand faith!
Humanity sincerely thanks you!
Tastefully arranged in large point Stencil on luxury paper.
Likewise $10.
4. Ingersoll poster: "When I became convinced that the
universe is natural" speech excerpt. 11"x17" See the June
1994 issue of the _Echo_ for full text. $15
Order from the same address as above.
/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-TABLE OF CONTENTS-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
1. Can a Christian Be a Moral Person? Greg Erwin
2. Ernest Thompson Seton, BSA's first Chief Scout, a Freethinker
ltaylor@denali.CS.UCLA.EDU
3. THE PROMISE OF HUMANISM by Frederick Edwords
4. How Things Get Started on Internet Greg Erwin
5. OUR SUNDAY CHAPTER:THE INHABITANTS OF THE MOON, O. B. Huntington
6. ABORTION, A Humanist Response to the Bible Argument
===================================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
Can a Christian be a moral person?
Generally speaking it is not possible for a Christian to be a
completely moral person, as history bears out, for the following
reasons:
Many Christians have believed in predestination, therefore they
feel that they are not responsible for their actions, as God has
destined what these are to be and what the consequences are.
Many Christians believe in demonic possession, therefore they feel
that they are not personally responsible for their actions, but can
blame what they have done on possession by an evil spirit.
Christians do not understand the difference between damage, harm
and simple violation of taboo. They equate a harmless act, such as
masturbation, or heavy petting, with a harmful crime such as theft,
rape or murder. As these are all equally "sinful" to the Christian
mind, they cannot be trusted to refrain from criminal activities.
Christians believe that they have been forgiven in advance for all
of the sins that they may commit. All a Christian has to do is
"believe in Jesus Christ" and the Christian's sins are forgiven.
Over the centuries, this horrifying doctrine has been responsible
for innumerable criminal acts by Christians who believe they can
"sin" and evade responsibility through confession or believing
afterwards.
Christians believe that the "afterlife" is more important than the
real world. They feel that any injustices they may commit will be
straightened out in some supernatural way, so it is not necessary
to try to fix things here and now.
Christians believe that they can find an accurate guide to their
code of conduct in a 2,000 year old book, which favors slavery,
misogyny, tyranny and religious intolerance, but contains no
reference to environmental caretaking, population control or
democratic civic responsibility. With no incentive to be good
citizens or to make this a better world, many Christian groups live
a hermit-like existence, divorced from society, or as
uncomprehending parasites on society.
Christians are taught that they are sheep, and that their "pastor"
or shepherd is the one ultimately responsible for their actions.
They are specifically relieved from rationally thinking about the
consequences of their religious doctrines and are taught not to
question religious or civic authority but, rather, to delude
themselves by pretending that everything is OK. This is called
"faith."
Christians believe that "God's Law" is higher than "man's law."
Therefore they feel that they can violate national and local
criminal codes with impunity. No Christian can really be trusted
hold a position of responsibility in government or law enforcement,
as they do not believe in enforcing merely "man-made" laws. Many
Christians have gladly committed murder and other heinous acts,
justifying their actions as defence of "God's Law," or "punishing
sinners."
Christians routinely practice discrimination against non-
Christians, believing themselves to be superior. Christians
constantly attempt to divert public tax money to specifically
Christian purposes. Christians attempt to force others to abide by
their taboos, such as forcing people to observe the sabbath, to
pretend to pray, or to practice Christian sexual morality. As
well, they have denied everyone access to information on
contraception and abortion, and censored or destroyed works of art
and literature.
Christians believe that their religious organization (the "church")
is more important than the state. When the laws of the state
conflict with the taboos of their church, they will violate the
laws of the state. When men in their church organization violate
the laws of the state, Christians attempt to exempt them from
justice. If they are in the law enforcement system, they conspire
to evade the law.
Visions; talking to invisible entities; superstition; inability (or
refusal) to understand history, geology, cosmology and biology;
complete misunderstanding of causality; glorification of ignorance
and denigration of reason; all point to the pernicious effects of
this deleterious doctrine on the minds of its deluded followers.
Not all of the reasons stated above apply to every Christian, and,
of course, some Christians have lead reasonably crime-free lives
despite the teachings of their religion. However, it is likely
that they are the exception, rather than the rule. I believe that,
just to be on the safe side, all those professing to be
"Christians" should be barred from public office, and perhaps,
denied the vote.
Of course, they should not be harmed or mistreated in any way.
Just because it is necessary for a secular society to take
reasonable precautions against Christians' irrational behaviour, is
no excuse for atheists, people with a rationally based morality, to
begin behaving like them.
===================================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
AFTERWORD
This was originally published as a posting to soc.religion.
christian. (And I would like to point out that the moderator of
that group has never hesitated to post articles which have often
been severely critical of christianity in general, fundamentalism in
particular, and which were often rather sarcastic in tone. The
group exists to *discuss* christianity, not simply to promote it.)
Response was so overwhelming that the moderator of the group had to
cease posting replies. I personally received about 50 email
messages from outraged christian defenders of the faith. If you
are an outraged christian, and wish to communicate that emotion,
please say something original.
===================================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
Ernest Thompson Seton, BSA's first Chief Scout, a Freethinker
>From ltaylor@denali.CS.UCLA.EDU
(Originally distributed on InterNet.)
The Boy Scout Handbook, tenth edition (1990),
p. 582, acknowledges Ernest Thompson Seton as a
pioneer in boy scouting, and the first chief
scout of the Boy Scouts of America.
E. T. Seton, artist and naturalist, was more than
that. A great part of _Scouting for Boys_, by
Lord Baden-Powell, was taken directly from Seton's
_Birch Bark Roll_. Many of the games were taken
from Seton's book, with just the names changed.
Seton invented the merit badge system for his
group, _Woodcraft Indians_.
When Baden-Powell's version of Boy Scouting came to
the United States, Seton wrote large sections of
the BSA manual (1911). Soon BSA became led, not
by a naturalist, or a ``boy-man,'' but by lawyer
and bureaucrat James E. West. Due to personality
conflicts and underhanded manipulation, E. T. Seton
was finally forced out as Chief Scout in 1915, despite
having dedicated years of his life to the advancement
of the Boy Scouts of America.
Guess what. Ernest Thompson Seton, first Chief Scout
of the BSA, originator of the spirit if not the form
of scouting, did not believe in a personal God, and was
antagonistic to traditional forms of religion.
If he applied today as a scout leader, he would likely
be rejected.
Occasionally using the word God, or more likely, Great
Spirit, it may be quibbled that he was not technically
an atheist. I will give you a section of his autobiography
verbatim, in which Seton defines his terms, as well as
reveals his character (pp. 355-6).
Seton and an Archbishop Corrigan had attended the same
social function, and had inadvertently switched coats.
The clergyman invited Seton over, and after drinks were
served, asked (begin quote),
... ``To what church, may I ask, do you belong?''
I replied: ``I was brought up in the worship of
Moloch.''
``_What!_'' he exclaimed in loud horror.
``Yes,'' I answered, ``the demon-god of fire -- burn
your children -- the more of them you burn alive,
the greater your merit and likelihood of favor from
the grim fire-god.''
For a moment he gazed in astonishment; then his
expression changed to one of understanding and
amusement, as he said: ``I see. You mean Scottish
Calvinism.''
I nodded. Then he went on: ``I wish I could bring
you into the True Church.''
``There's no reason why you should not try,'' I
responded.
``What would you give me for a starting point?'' he
asked.
``Well,'' I said slowly, ``I will grant you that I
exist, because I think. I will grant you that you exist,
because we are here facing each other, and exchanging
ideas; and we must postulate the reliability of our
senses.
``I will grant that the universe exists, because if we
exist, we must exist somewhere. That is all I will grant.''
``Will you,'' he said, ``grant that this universe whose
existence you admit, must have a first cause?''
``Yes, as a necessity of debate, not as a proven fact.''
``Will you let me go another step, and call that first
cause by the name of `God'? ''
``Merely as a polite, but dangerous, concession to one's
respect for terminology.''
``Since you grant that the first cause is God, will you
further concede that God is a personal God?''
``No, I will not,'' I said firmly. ``And I see no reason
in logic, biology, or dynamics to justify any such
assumption.''
``Oh, bother,'' laughed His Grace, ``let's have another
glass of wine.''
End quote.
Seton's version of atheism/ nature spiritualism/ whatever
is enough for me. I hereby claim him as a Humanist.
Welcome, Chief. You won't believe what your boys are up to.
**********************************************************
Ernest Thompson Seton. _Trail of an Artist-Naturalist:
Autobiography of Ernest Thompson Seton_.
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1940.
Ernest Thompson Seton. ``The Spirit of the Woods.''
_Century_ 103 (Dec. 1921): 213-24.
H. Allen Anderson. _The Chief: Ernest Thompson Seton
and the Changing West_. Texas A&M University Press, 1986.
Betty Keller. _Black Wolf: The Life of Ernest Thompson Seton_.
Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 1984.
**************************Editorial Comment************************
Why is it no surprise that the religionist is guilty of plagiarism,
theft and then lying about it, and yet the religious organization
continues to refuse to admit atheists because the basis of morality
must be a belief in god?
===================================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
===================================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
THE PROMISE OF HUMANISM
by Frederick Edwords
Every religion has its promise, the special reward it offers
to the faithful. Such a promise is often the main feature that
attracts outsiders in. As such, it can become a primary selling
point and motivator.
The ancient promise of Christianity is eternal life in
heaven. I can remember a number of years ago listening to one
radio preacher describing it in detail with vivid word pictures as
he rhapsodized over how wonderful it would feel to be there. I
can remember as a child learning about the streets paved with gold
and rivers flowing with milk and honey.
Different denominations also offer secondary promises, such
as wealth and happiness in this life, God's helping hand in times
of trouble, and even physical healings.
In Buddhism, the promise is somewhat different. If you
follow the Noble Eightfold Path of conduct, you will experience
inner peace and eventually, through a series of rebirths, the
state of Nirvana. This state is the blowing out of all craving,
attachment, and desire.
New Age religions tend to promise increased powers of mind
that will bring about inner peace, happiness, power over external
events, cosmic knowledge, and ultimate union with God.
Like in politics, so in religion: the key is PROMISE BIG.
In the past, Humanists have sometimes thought of themselves
as too noble and honest to stoop to such strategies for gaining
converts. So, instead of offering our own "campaign promises," we
used to prefer to run down the promises of all the other groups.
Instead of focusing on a better way of our own, we kept the
spotlight on those ideas we disagreed with. Only we didn't seem
able to do it with the captivating music of Omar Khayyam:
Of threats of Hell and Hopes of Paradise!
One thing at least is certain--This Life flies;
One thing is certain and the rest is Lies;
The Flower that once has blown for ever dies.
This seemed to be our message, and to some it still is.
But, if this is our message, are Humanists merely the consumer
crusaders of the metaphysical world, the Ralph Naders of the
religious realm? Is our only role that of protecting the gullible
from the purveyors of spiritual Florida swamp land?
This is, of course, a noble calling, worthy of the best
efforts of talented individuals. But is it ALL we should be
about? From much of our older rhetoric, you would think so. On
the other hand, today many Humanists are directing their focus
on what HUMANISM has to offer.
And when that is done, the relevant question becomes "What is
the promise of Humanism?"
Well, we already know what we can't promise. As sober
realists and no-nonsense straight-shooters, we're experts in
throwing the wet blanket of rationalism over the fondest hopes of
our fellows. We know the "bad news," but what's our "good news,"
what is the gospel of Humanism?
One way to find out is to ask ourselves how we would present
Humanism to someone who has never been exposed to traditional
religion. Here would be a person in no need of disillusionment
and possessing no idols in need of smashing. We could now go
directly to the goal of offering the "good news" of Humanism.
If some Humanists would find themselves speechless in a
situation like this, it could be because they believe Humanism is
simply the "default" condition of humanity, the "natural state"
that prevails when no brainwash is present. And I've known a
number of Humanists who have put it to me in exactly those terms.
But, if that's the case, then the solemn duty of every
Humanist when confronting a person unexposed to religion is to
immediately teach him or her all about it! In this way, the
person will learn what to watch out for, will be prepared, and
will be put on guard.
But I don't accept that Humanism is the default condition of
humanity. And I am indeed confronted with individuals unexposed
to traditional religion. I confront them every day. They are my
children.
How do I teach my children Humanism? Well, I don't do it by
running down religions they have never heard about. I don't do it
by exposing them to the varieties of religious experience.
Instead, I expose them to the varieties of worldly experience. My
children, ages 4 and 5, already enjoy travel, pictures, movies,
music, people, animals, flowers, daydreams, stories, words,
numbers, shapes, colors, and the joy of learning. I want them to
live the good life envisioned by Humanism, to experience the
promise first hand. That's why, when I asked my eldest daughter,
Livia, what the praying hands in front of the Oral Roberts medical
complex were doing, she exclaimed, "They're clapping!"
Are my children Humanists yet? Time will tell, but other
Humanist parents I know who have used a similar approach have been
pleased with the results. And the implication is clear. The
promise of Humanism is a good life here and now.
So, let's discuss it in detail. What IS the "good life?"
Can it be pursued directly? Can EVERYONE have it (that is, do we
have a promise we can keep; can Humanism deliver the goods)? And
finally, will it play in Peoria?
Lloyd and Mary Morain talked about the good life in their
1954 Beacon Press book, Humanism as the Next Step, when they
wrote:
As a starting point let us take the idea that this life
should be experienced deeply, lived fully, with sensitive
awareness and appreciation of that which is around us.
This was the first of their seven key ideas of Humanism. They
elaborated further, saying:
Back through the centuries whenever people have enjoyed
keenly the sights and sounds and other sensations of the
world about them, and enjoyed these for what they were--not
because they stood for something else--they were experiencing
life humanistically. Whenever they felt keen interest in the
drama of human life about them and ardently desired to take
part in it they felt as humanists.
Referring to this attitude as "zest for living," they were
following the lead of Bertrand Russell who, in his book The
Conquest of Happiness, referred to "zest" as "the most universal
and distinctive mark" of the happy individual. People with this
quality, Russell argued, are those who come at life with a sound
appetite, are glad to have what is before them, partake of things
until they have enough, and know when to stop.
This vision reminds us again of Omar Khayyam:
A Book of Verses underneath the Bough,
A Jug of Wine, a Loaf of Bread--and Thou
Beside me singing in the Wilderness--
Oh, Wilderness were Paradise enow!
Ah, make the most of what we yet may spend,
Before we too into the Dust descend;
Dust into Dust, and under Dust to lie,
Sans Wine, sans Song, sans Singer, and--sans End!
Which sounds like the hedonistic doctrine Humanists are accused of
advocating:
Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.
Or, as Mad magazine once put it --
A Jug of Wine, a Loaf of Bread, and Thou--
Pretty soon I'll be drunk, fat, and in trouble.
But there is much more involved in the Humanist notion of the
good life. The physical pleasures are only a part of it, not to
be denied of course, but far from representing the whole. For the
Humanist there are also the pleasures of an unfettered mind making
new discoveries, solving problems, and creating. There is the
enjoyment of art, music, dance, and drama. There is the joy of
helping others and the challenge of working to make the world a
better and more peaceful place. And, of course, there are the
joys associated with love and family. The Humanist seeks the
enjoyment of as many of these as possible.
In this, we are clearly at one with the ancient Greek ideal
of wholeness and the integration of life. For example, in the
ancient Olympic games, competition included not only athletics but
drama, music, poetry, and philosophy. And the whole combination
was viewed as a religious event. The Greeks put it together and
did it all. So can we.
In having zest for living, we join with the ancient Chinese
who, in following Confucius, saw much of life as play--which
accounted for their enjoyment of ceremony and especially their
love of toys.
This worldly and good-natured view of life that claims no
ultimate knowledge, stands out when contrasted with Hinduism.
Whereas the Yogi is often seen as renouncing desire, living an
ascetic life-style, and acquiring eternal knowledge, Socrates,
the sage of the ancient Greeks, deliberately provoked certain
appetites in himself, lived a social and active life, and
professed to have no knowledge whatever!
It is also radically different from traditional Christianity,
which has sometimes called this world a veil of tears, has seen
pleasures as vanity, and seems to find the goal of human life
beyond the grave. Such believers might quote Ecclesiastes--
Better to go to the house of mourning
than to the house of feasting;
for to this end all men come,
let the living take this to heart.
Better sadness than laughter,
a severe face confers some benefit. Jerusalem Bible
As an antidote, Robert Louis Stevenson offered these words in
his Christmas Sermon:
Gentleness and cheerfulness, these come before all morality:
they are the perfect duties. If your morals make you dreary,
depend on it they are wrong. I do not say, "give them up,"
for they may be all you have; but conceal them like a vice,
lest they should spoil the lives of better men."
Edwin H. Wilson, the grand old man of religious Humanism who,
for 90 plus years, lived the promise, summed it up when he wrote:
The Humanist lives as if this world were all and enough. He
is not otherworldly. He holds that the time spent on the
contemplation of a possible afterlife is time wasted. He
fears no hell and seeks no heaven, save that which he and
others created on earth. He willingly accepts the world that
exists on this side of the grave as the place for moral
struggle and creative living. He seeks the life abundant for
his neighbor as for himself. He is content to live one world
at a time and let the next life--if such there may be--take
care of itself. He need not deny immortality; he simply is
not interested. His interests are here.
The way those interests should be carried out here is
described by Havelock Ellis in his book, The Dance of Life. There
he presents living as an art, one best characterized as a dance.
In this, he follows the ancient Greeks who chose the image of
dancing because, unlike walking or running, dancing is not
generally viewed as a goal-oriented activity leading from point A
to B. One dances for the sheer joy of the activity. It is the
process more than the product that counts. And this is how the
Humanist good life is to be lived.
So, when someone asks a Humanist, "What is the purpose of
life?" the Humanist should answer, "Life is not purpose, life is
art." The meaning is found in the doing.
This is a revolutionary and truly unique way of looking at
the world. It is a way that finds the question of cosmic purpose
irrelevant, one that is unmoved by the author of Ecclesiastes who,
in contemplating the question of ultimate value, writes--
I have seen everything that is done under the sun, and what
vanity it all is, what chasing of the wind!
The Humanist response is that Solomon missed the point. The
people, ideas, things, and actions we love do not depend for their
worth on how long they last or their supposed cosmic significance.
They are things in themselves to be enjoyed for their own sakes.
Life is an art, not a task. Life is for us, not for the universe.
And life is for now, not for eternity.
But there's more. We can take Edwin Wilson's statement that
this life is all and enough and beef it up a bit to declare that
this life is more than enough. Then it will express the Humanist
optimism of Robert Louis Stevenson when he wrote:
The world is so full of a number of things,
I'm sure we should all be as happy as kings.
(We ought to get some rosary beads and repeat this every day.)
There is more in this world than I could experience in a
thousand different lifetimes. There is a richness here, a
cornucopia of choices, a wealth of opportunities. There is so
much to see, to do, to read, to learn. The question is not, "What
shall I do with my life?" but "What shall I do next?!"
Different people choose different things. Most Humanists
will choose a life oriented outward, not only to enjoying the
good life, but sharing the good life through helping others. Yet
other people may choose the inner life of meditation. By making
such a choice, each one misses something the other is enjoying.
But that can't be helped. Any time one makes a choice in the use
of one's time, one fails to engage in all the other possible uses
for that time, including having other experiences.
So, if a monk or celibate priest speaks to me about the
ecstasies of spiritual contemplation, I respond by sharing how
thrilled I was in the birthing room watching my children being
born. If a young fundamentalist describes to me the experience of
being "born again," I can't wait to talk about the exciting moment
when I first appreciated geometry. If heaven is described to me
in graphic detail, I immediately want to show my slides of
sunsets, seascapes, and mountain ranges.
I'm in love with life, and too busy with it to find time for
things allegedly outside it.
But now we can ask, if this is the promise of Humanism--if
this is the promise of liberal religion--is it a promise limited
only to the affluent, the intelligent, the educated? If so, then
are we making a promise we can't always keep? This is the
criticism leveled against us by the otherworldly religions. While
we say that they can't keep their otherworldly promises, they
explain that they turned to this other world because we Humanists
didn't keep our worldly promises.
Otherworldly faiths offer the "joys of the spirit" to those
who have been denied "the pleasures of the flesh." And the claim
is that such spiritual joys are more permanent and universal than
is our pleasure. But why give up so easily, denying oneself
worldly pleasure to feed on a mirage in its stead? Isn't this
settling for less, and retreating into an unwarranted resignation?
Bertrand Russell thought so when, in chapter 2 of The Conquest of
Happiness, he took the author of Ecclesiastes to task for
denouncing the very things that make happiness possible and give
life meaning.
Nonetheless, I must admit that I benefit from growing up in a
middle-class environment in a wealthy country where I have access
to such variety. But all is not lost in more impoverished
environments in less wealthy countries. At the Atheist Centre in
Vijayawada, India, an extended family of Humanists teach the poor
the joys of traditional folk dance, music, athletics (especially
acrobatics), science, animal husbandry, occupational skills, and,
most important of all, the vast world made possible only through
reading. Many of the beneficiaries of this effort are not only
poor and uneducated, but are often crippled and abandoned. Yet in
a country steeped in an ancient tradition of other-worldliness due
to just such harsh realities, the promise of Humanism is offered
and met. The International Association for Religious Freedom, the
world organization of liberal religions, has similar projects in
India and is getting similar results. The promise is no illusion.
And I look at my own life, asking myself how useful the
promise of the good life would be to me if I suddenly went deaf,
or blind, or couldn't walk. And yet I can answer with Robert
Louis Stevenson that the world is indeed so full of things that
can make me happy. A calamity is a limitation, but if I were
limited only to reading, I would find the world is so full of a
number of books that I could not read them all in this lifetime.
If I were limited only to seeing, I could not see all I want to
see in this lifetime. If I were limited only to hearing, I could
not hear all I want to hear in this lifetime. I have not tested
all the thoughts I want to test, or worked out all the ideas I
have started but don't have time to develop. I haven't written
all the speeches I want to write. I haven't met all the people I
could meet or faced all the challenges I could face. Calamities
destroy the promise usually because we concentrate on what we have
lost instead of letting the misfortune simply focus our pursuits
in a new direction.
The Stoic remedy for misfortune is as much a part of this
promise as is the Cyrenaic enjoyment of good fortune. When
misfortune limits you, shift your focus and move on. I would
argue that we can, in most cases, keep the promise of joy in the
here and now. And even when all cannot be joy--for life indeed
includes a large share of obligations, struggles, sorrows, and
pain--the larger context can still be that of an artful life.
And when, in those rare instances, we find that the
realization of the promise is futile, as in the case of an
agonizing terminal illness, Humanism offers the freedom to exit
this life at will and with dignity. This is voluntary euthanasia,
an area of great importance to Humanists, so much so that there
will be two major workshops on this topic at the national
conference of the American Humanist Association next weekend.
So, in the end, the promise is not a perfect one. But we
admit that. Others may seem to offer more perfect promises, but
can they deliver? I have no evidence that anyone has ever gotten
to heaven, realized Nirvana, or merged with God. But I see
evidence every day that the promise of the good life is no mirage.
So, I'll stick with the honesty of Humanism, that this life
is all there is, and with the promise of Humanism, that this can
be more than enough. And this promise will serve as my motivation
to make life better when all is not as it should be. For I can
better enjoy the promise on a clean rather than a dirty planet.
And I can enjoy it better when I am helping others to participate
in it.
This is a philosophy I can be proud of. And, being proud of
it, I can confidently share it with others. I can offer the "good
news" of its promise and know I am doing something valuable
for others.
As a result, Humanism need no longer be a philosophy
exclusively for those bold enough to face an uncaring cosmos with
defiance, for those fearless enough "to go where no one has gone
before," and for those impudent enough to call the majority of
humanity cowards for fleeing to a sweeter tale. Most people are
moved by exciting promises. They are captivated by thrilling
visions. And this philosophy can be for them to.
There's nothing wrong with offering a zesty promise if we
have one. And have one we do. So let us Humanists stress it,
publicize it, and present it as our entry in the religious/
philosophical sweepstakes. I submit to you that this one shift in
our focus will do more to counter the harmful effects of
otherworldly belief than all the rationalistic arguments of
history's greatest freethinkers. So let's give it a shot.
We have nothing to lose but our minority status.
------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the text of a talk presented to various audiences over the
years. Its author is the executive director of the American
Humanist Association.
(C) Copyright 1989 by Frederick Edwords
So long as profit is not your motive and you always include this
copyright notice, please feel free to reproduce and distribute
this material in electronic form as widely as you please.
Nonprofit Humanist and Freethought publications have additional
permission to publish this in print form. All other permission
must be sought from the author through the American Humanist
Association, which can be contacted at the following address:
AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION
PO BOX 1188
AMHERST NY 14226-7188
Phone: (800) 743-6646
===================================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
How Things Get Started on Internet
------------------------------------------------------------
Step #1 I receive a message from Colin requesting help in a calm,
rational debate.
Message #26 (28 is last):
Date: Sun Aug 7 07:47:35 1994
From: ag250@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Colin T Downie)
Subject: Catholic Basher Needed
To: ai815
Reply-To: ag250
Here's a favor you can do for me .
Respond to this thread which has been going in uk.misc and
alt.religion but started off in scot.general when someone posted a
message on the perils of Scientology . If you do post a response
make sure you post to all the affected boards .
Colin
Step #2 I look up the posting in question, which follows.
------------------------------------------------------------
Article #980 (980 is last):
From: cultxprt@indirect.com (Jeff Jacobsen)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,uk.misc,uk.politics,
news.misc,scot.general
Subject: Re: Campaign to Ban SellMoreSundayMails cult in the UK
Date: Sat Aug 6 19:20:52 1994
Stuart McGinnigle (smcginni@cs.strath.ac.uk) wrote:
[stuff deleted]
: Get your priorities right. if you really want to investigate : a
religion that screws up people's lives try the Catholic
: Church for a start off.
What is the Catholic Church doing that is so destructive?
[stuff deleted]
--
cultxprt@indirect.com
Jeff Jacobsen
PO Box 3541
Scottsdale, AZ 85271 YOWZA! (ack!poo!)
------------------------------------------------------------
Step #3 I post a calm, rational response to the inquirer's
question.
Date: Sun Aug 7 20:22:15 1994
Newsgroups: uk.misc,alt.atheism,scot.general,etc.
Subject: Re: Campaign to Ban SellMoreSundayMails cult in the UK
Reply-To: ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Greg Erwin)
References: <3215sk$hf8@herald.indirect.com>
<005311Z04081994@anon.penet.fi> <31t51t$hsk@dunlop.cs.strath.ac.uk>
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
In a previous article, cultxprt@indirect.com (Jeff Jacobsen) says:
>Stuart McGinnigle (smcginni@cs.strath.ac.uk) wrote:
>
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>: Get your priorities right. if you really want to investigate >:
a religion that screws up people lives try the Catholic
>: Church for a start off.
>
> What is the Catholic Church doing that is so destructive?
1) The Catholic church is the world's largest haven for
pedophiles. When children or their parents have complained, the
Church protects the priest, threatens the parents with damnation,
and transfers the priest to another parish where he can commit the
same crimes again. Only after years of losing expensive lawsuits
and being forced to pay millions in court settlements, has the
Church begun to take any action at all (obviously to save itself
money, not out of any concern for children).
2) In the US, the Catholic Church, along with the Mormons and an
alliance of other fundamentalists, provided the funding to defeat
the Equal Rights Amendment which would have put gender equality in
the US Constitution. Throughout the world the Catholic Church
works against women's rights.
3) Similar to the last, the Catholic Church has made it virtually
impossible to provide contraception information or abortion
services to women as part of international projects. Through this
method, the Catholic Church is responsible for killing tens of
thousands of women each and every year.
4) In the Americas, the Catholic Church provided the ideology
justifying the genocide of Native Americans. When given lands to
be held in trust for Native nations, the Church cheated the
Natives, and used the lands to benefit itself, as in Oka; Catholic
duplicity is the basis for the recent trouble with the Mohawk
nation there. The Catholic Church ran "Indian Residential Schools"
which were designed to aid in the genocide of Indian culture.
Death, sexual abuse and physical abuse, as well as simple
humiliation and garden variety racism were the order of the day in
these church-sponsored institutions.
5) In Ireland, the Catholic Church ran the Magdalen Laundry up to
1988, women who were sent there as "immoral" were imprisoned,
abused and kept as slaves. Many died.
6) The Church is responsible for the spread of AIDS through its
ridiculous prohibition of condom use. The Pope has stated that it
is better morally for a man with AIDS to forego the use of condoms
and infect his wife, if he cannot remain celibate. Add a few
thousand more women to the church's total.
7) The Church promotes dictatorships and anti-democratic
governments wherever it can as long as it can either protect itself
or, preferably, control them.
8) Catholic monasteries and nunneries in France (and possibly
throughout Europe) hid and protected Nazi war criminals for decades
after World War II.
9) Through its alliances and concordats with Mussolini and Hitler,
the Catholic Church gave both Nazism and Fascism the respectability
they needed to become established. Catholic support helped defeat
the elected democratic Spanish Republic and install the Fascist
dictator Franco.
10) Through its magical thinking and peddling of trinkets, selling
blessings, and extorting money from the ignorant by threatening the
dead, it drains billions of dollars from the world's economies.
These are just off the top of my head, I am sure there are more.
------------------------------------------------------------
Step #4 A grateful public responds
------------------------------------------------------------
Message #29 (47 is last):
Date: Mon Aug 8 09:03:42 1994
From: ar@zeus.uk.mdis.com (Alastair Rae)
Subject: Re: Campaign to Ban SellMoreSundayMails cult in the UK
To: ai815@freenet.carleton.ca (Greg Erwin)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,alt.atheism,alt.religion.scientology
Thanks for your excellent 10 bones of contention with the RC cult.
I was raised as a Catholic in Northern Ireland by liberal parents
who taught me to respect the religious beliefs of others. So when I
became an atheist I still held onto that tolerance and still find
it very hard to criticise actions motivated by strong religious
belief. It's refreshing to have someone do it with such well
informed flair.
--
Alastair Rae <arae@uk.mdis.com>
Message #30 (47 is last):
Date: Mon Aug 8 09:37:04 1994
From: ag250@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Colin T Downie)
Subject: Catholic Bash
To: ai815
Reply-To: ag250
Saw your post . Good Work - thanks .
Colin
--
Message #33 (47 is last):
Date: Mon Aug 8 16:08:36 1994
From: eiaze@cent1.lancs.ac.uk (Zack Evans)
Subject: Re: Campaign to Ban SellMoreSundayMails cult in the UK
To: ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
Reply-To: Z.Evans@cent1.lancs.ac.uk
Newsgroups: uk.misc,alt.atheism,alt.religion.scientology
In article <Cu6xzw.Eqq@freenet.carleton.ca> you write:
>> What is the Catholic Church doing that is so destructive?
<your most excellent attack on the activities of organized
religion>
Can I use this in my web pages please? (URL in signature...) It's
only polite for me to ask first. :)
Thanks,
Zack
--
Opinions are mine and not the University's. Of course, it's fairly
unlikely that a square mile or so of concrete, bricks, and glass is
going to have any sort of significant world view in the first
place.
Zack Evans -
Z.Evans@lancaster.ac.uk
Step #5 I offer this to the world
------------------------------------------------------------
Zack does indeed have permission to use the article. As well I
will send this into _Fighting Back_ via the CODESH mailing list,
suggesting the topic, "What have you got against religion/churches,
anyway?"
===================================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
For your edification, a direct, unmodified excerpt from _The
Young Woman's Journal_, vol. 3, published by the Young
Ladies' Mutual Improvement Associations of Zion in 1892.
That is, the Mormons.
OUR SUNDAY CHAPTER
THE INHABITANTS OF THE MOON, O. B. Huntington
Astronomers and philosophers have, from time almost
immemorial until very recently, asserted that the moon was
uninhabited, that it had no atmosphere, etc. But recent
discoveries, through the means of powerful telescopes, have
given scientists a doubt or two upon the old theory.
Nearly all the great discoveries of men in the last half
century have, in one way or another, either directly or
indirectly, contributed to prove Joseph Smith to be a
prophet.
As far back as 1837, I know that he said the moon was
inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that
they lived to a greater age than we do -- that they live
generally to near the age of a 1000 years.
He described the men as averaging near six feet in height,
and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker
style.
In my Patriarchal blessing, given by the father of Joseph
the Prophet, in Kirtland, 1837, I was told that I should
preach the gospel before I was 21 years of age; that I
should preach to the inhabitants upon the islands of the sea,
and--to the inhabitants of the moon, even the planet you can
now behold with your eyes.
>From the first two promises we may reasonably expect the
third to be fulfilled also.
---
One truth after another men are finding out by the wisdom
and inspiration given of God to them.
The inspiration of God caused men to hunt for a new
continent until Columbus discovered it. Men have lost
millions of dollars, and hundreds of lives to find a country
beyond the north pole; and they will yet find that country--
a warm, fruitful country, inhabited by the ten tribes of
Israel, a country divided by a river, on one side of which
lives the half tribe of Manasseh, which is more numerous
than all the others. So said the Prophet. At the same time
he described the shape of the earth at the poles as being a
rounded elongation and drew a diagram of it in this form:
[crude drawing like a circle with handles at each side]
which any one can readily see will allow the sun's rays to
fall so near perpendicular to the center that that part of
the earth may be warmed and made fruitful. He quoted
scripture in proof of his theory which says that "the earth
flieth upon its wings in the midst of the creations of God,"
and said that there was a semblance in the form of the earth
that gave rise to the saying.
CEDAR FORT, Utah, Feb. 6, 1982
________________________________________
This is in _Mormonism - Shadow or Reality?_ by Jerald and
Sandra Tanner. Their addresss is:
Utah Lighthouse Ministry
1350 S. West Temple
P.O. Box 1994
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
their catalog can be heartily recommended for anyone seeking
information about the Mormons, or how Mormon doctrine
differs from and is contrary to standard Christian doctrine.
As you may suspect from the organization's title, they are
Christians, and their primary concern is to influence
Mormons to leave the false Mormon church and accept "true"
Christianity. However, the method they use is to reprint
accurate information about early Mormon history, accurate
information about Mormon doctrines which have been changed
and hidden over the years, and accurate information about
current Mormon business, political and doctrinal
shenanigans. Their information is good.
===================================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
===================================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
ABORTION
A Humanist Response to the Bible Argument
When faced with a moral dilemma, many people turn to a book like the
Bible, in the belief that it will offer them some sort of guidance.
This is particularly true for those who believe the Bible to be the
literal world of God and the only authority on morality. However,
their enthusiasm for what they believe the Bible says, rarely equates
with what it actually does say.
What Does the Bible Say About Abortion?
This is a very easy question to answer, because the word abortion does
not appear anywhere in the Bible. Out of the over 600 Mosaic Laws,
covering everything from the shape of a man's beard to the minutest
details of sabbath observance, not even one of them comments on
abortion. One of the only references to this issue at all may be
found in Exodus 21:22-25 "If men strive, and hurt a woman with child,
so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he
shall be surely punished according as the woman's husband will lay
upon him and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any
mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye,
tooth for tooth..."
Far from being any kind of pronouncement against abortion, this
passage suggests that the miscarriage is only punishable by a fine,
and is of little or no consequence and certainly does not involve any
loss of life. It is only in the case of harm to the woman that the
biblical rule of "an eye for an eye" is to be used. Other references
to untimely births occur in Hos. 9:14; Job 3:16; Psalms 58:8; and
Eccles. 6:3; but none of these imply in any way that abortion was
considered contrary to any religious or moral law. Nowhere is there
any reference to abortion that implies that it is in any way contrary
to the will of God.
What About "Thou Shalt Not Kill"?
The sixth of the "Ten Commandments" is to be found in Exodus 20:13 and
states quite explicitly "Thou Shalt Not Kill." Does this include
abortion?
Although this commandment is the most widely used argument in the
anti-abortionists' biblical arsenal, its meaning is nowhere near as
clear as they might like to think, because it does not explain just
what it is that must not be killed.
We use the word kill to refer to the ending of the life of anything
that lives. We kill the weeds on our lawns, we kill the pests on our
crops, we kill to eat, in fact we literally cannot live without
killing something. To understand what this passage really means, we
obviously have to see what the Bible says about different sorts of
killing.
I doubt that anyone would argue that the killing of plants is
considered unacceptable in the Bible. Likewise there is nothing to
suggest that the lives of domestic or wild animals were in any way
considered of value. In fact the very opposite is the case as
demonstrated in Mark 2:14 where Jesus is said to have cast out demons
into a herd of swine which then drown themselves by running into the
sea, or Exodus 9:3-6 where God reportedly killed all of the Egyptian
cattle. Not to mention the Old Testament passion for sacrificial
slaying and burnt offerings.
So, we are left with just human life to consider, but again the
meaning is not clear. Many passages in the Bible detail the mass
slaughter of various enemies of the chosen people or their God. 2
Kings 8:12, "dash their children, and rip up their women with child",
or Isaiah 13:16 "Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before
their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished."
In fact if all of these divinely approved deaths were added up, the
victims wold probably number in the millions.
Time and time again, after making such an apparently unambiguous
statement in favour of not killing, the Bible documents and apparently
condones the killing of men, women and children for committing such
crimes as picking up sticks on the sabbath (Numbers 15:32-35) or being
a stubborn son (Deut. 21:18-21). The examples are almost endless and
a thorough reading of the Bible indicates that killing was not only
condoned but encouraged for such apparently trivial offenses and to a
degree that no civilized person would accept.
Surely Killing An Innocent Unborn Child Was Considered Wrong?
Abortion is not new, it has been practised with varying degrees of
success for thousands of years. However, there is not a single
reference in the Bible to any woman being guilty of having or aiding
an abortion and it is inconceivable to suppose that during the period
that the Bible was written, not one abortion was performed. Likewise,
it is inconceivable to imagine that this is merely an oversight, since
the Bible goes to such lengths to identify supposedly sinful acts.
If you believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, then you are
left with the inevitable conclusion that God does not condemn abortion
(which may explain the high number of natural spontaneous abortions).
If you believe that the Bible was written by ordinary human beings,
you are left with the conclusion that they placed no value at all on
the unborn human fetus and not a whole lot more value on it even after
it was born.
Without the Bible as a Guide, How Can I Make Such a Decision?
Even many dedicated Christians no longer regard the Bible as their
only source of guidance, and an increasingly large proportion of the
population are rejecting all religious beliefs and biblical authority.
Whether they know it or not, and whether they use the name or not,
these people are using humanistic principles as their guide. Simply
stated, humanism promotes the use of rational thought, human
experience and compassion to determine the most appropriate course of
action to be taken.
Some Christians ask how they can make a difficult decision on their
own without relying on a source of supposed authority such as the
Bible. However, most humanists would argue that once you have finally
rejected mystical or religious thinking, the real issues become much
clearer. You are able to rationally consider the likely outcome of
each available course of action and make your decision based on the
particular circumstances rather than on some religious dogma.
Humanists acknowledge that the exercise of their free will requires
the courage to accept that they may make the wrong decision sometimes.
They may not have all of the relevant facts, or may incorrectly
predict the outcome of certain events, but they regard the occasional
failure as the inevitable cost of their own humanity. They would
rather strive to be the best that they can be, even when they know
that they may suffer failures, than blindly sacrifice their
responsibilities to a rigid dogma.
What is the Humanist View of Abortion?
Humanists recognize that there are no absolute answers to this
question.
Each case is different and the decision must be based on individual
circumstances. A rational and scientific analysis of the issue
clearly indicates that there is a progression from single human cell
to fully developed fetus during the course of a pregnancy, which may
imply a changing value to that life. Likewise, not all children face
a life of equal value. Many are not wanted and cannot be supported,
or they may face a life of hunger, disease, neglect or abuse.
Humanists agree that every woman has the inherent right to decide for
herself whether to carry a pregnancy to term, or whether to terminate
it. They trust women to care about the quality of life of their
future children, and to be capable of making the best decision. They
believe that nobody has the right to impose their wishes or opinions
on a woman facing this decision, no matter what their motivation may
be.
Humanists believe that women can only exercise their rights in a free
society where there is easy access to a speedy and safe abortion, and
this is why humanists like Dr. Henry Morgentaler have fought and even
gone to prison in support of a woman's right to freedom of choice.
____________________________________________________________
This is a pamphlet distributed by the Humanist Association of Canada.
I am a member-at-large of the executive.
To find out more about Humanism, you may write to:
The Humanist Association of Canada
P.O. Box 3736, Station C,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
K1Y 4J8
or email me at ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
____________________________________________________________
Membership application and <<Humanist in Canada>> quarterly
subscription form.
Name:______________________________________
Address____________________________________
Postal
City___________________Prov/State___________ code/ZIP_______
Phone, Home: (____)_________ Work: (____)_________
I am sending
$500 for a Life Membership
$ 45 for a Household Membership
$ 40 for an individual membership
$ 30 for a full-time Student membership
(indicate institution _________________
student # _________________
$____ additional donation
Life membership does not include a subscription to <<Humanist in
Canada>>; however, all other memberships do.)
All HAC members receive the HAC Newsletter. Those who do not wish to
subscribe to the Humanist in Canada Quarterly (for example, where a
new member is already a direct subscriber or does not wish to read the
magazine) please deduct $15 from the membership fee. Membership fees
and additional contributions (except the $15 subscription portion) are
eligible for Revenue Canada income tax credits for persons with income
from Canadian sources.
Members with mailing addresses outside Canada please add $4 to cover
additional shipping costs for foreign mail.
===================================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
===================================================================
==================================================================
|| END OF ISSUE ||
==================================================================
Once again: ISSN: 1198-4619 Lucifer's Echo.
Volume I, Number 5: SEP 1994.
--
nullifidian, n. & a. (Person) having no religious faith or belief. [f.
med. L nullifidius f. L nullus "none" + fides "faith";] / If this is a
humanist topic then I am President of the Humanist Association of Ottawa.
Greg Erwin. ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
