Humanist Edd Doerr
The divergence of Humanism from atheism continued this month when Edd Doerr, the elected head of the American Humanist Association from 1995-2009 expressed his frustration with their latest campaign.
Writing in the NY Times (Dec. 9/09), Mr. Doerr commented that “…I am embarrassed by the A.H.A.’s “good without God” campaign of signs on transit vehicles. Humanists are philosophical naturalists, but more important than advertising, one item of the humanist worldview is emphasizing the many positive positions we hold in common with a wide range of religious believers. I refer to such matters as peace, civil liberties, religious freedom, the environment, social justice, democracy, women’s rights and so on.”
These “atheist bus” campaigns were initiated by the British Humanist Association in 2008 and are being copied across America, largely on billboards. The BHA, of which noted anti-religion author Richard Dawkins is a VP, is being criticized for being a Humanist organization in name only, and with orchestrating religious acrimony in lieu of worthwhile activism.
Mr. Doerr clarified, saying that “Our planetary society does not have the luxury of engaging in angry debates about philosophy. We, all of us, are faced with immediate problems like global warming, endless wars, environmental degradation, denial of civil liberties, widespread economic turndown, misogynistic patriarchalism, the triumph of greed and selfishness over empathy, unemployment and the need for health care reform. Progressive and mainstream humanists, Catholics, Protestants, Jews and others of good will need to concentrate on what unites us, not on what divides us. Divisive ad campaigns invite blowback and stimulate both ends of the religious spectrum to engage in fruitless bouts of name-calling and invective.”
It is not the first time that a free thought leader has expressed strong reservations about over-identifying with atheist attitudes.
Sam Harris, a poster boy of the “New Atheist” movement, in 2007 warned that “…our use of this label is a mistake—and a mistake of some consequence. My concern with the use of the term “atheism” is both philosophical and strategic. I’m speaking from a somewhat unusual and perhaps paradoxical position because, while I am now one of the public voices of atheism, I never thought of myself as an atheist before being inducted to speak as one…I think that “atheist” is a term that we do not need, in the same way that we don’t need a word for someone who rejects astrology. We simply do not call people “non-astrologers.”
It should be noted that these two men did have some complicity in this situation – it was in full cry on their watch.
Still, despite its potential as the one credo capable of uniting our species, this most human of philosophies will not easily escape its hijackers. “Secular Humanists” and their namesake organizations must review their ironic obsession with religion and become inclusive, or youth may never discover Humanism. In the meantime it will remain a pale prisoner - a captured flag for commercial atheism.
Photo:
http://www.prlog.org/
