I just reviewed your post and added Humanist to my profile. I am a political activist and fight against social injustice and discrimination by sex, sexual orientation, race, religion, and disability.

I joined the Humanism community a few years ago, but let my membership lapse. If I was to join a community today, Humanism would be the group. I still receive their emails all the time. I have a niece and nephew who attend a Humanism center in their town. I can see Humanism being the eventual "church" of society if people finally give up Religion.

Yes, I consider myself a humanist. And yes, inexplicably, as I've never heard this term before, its tenants very much describe my moral compass. Thank you for the opportunity to explore this concept more fully by bring it to my attention.

I am a member of Omaha Metropolitan Area Humanists Association (OMAHA) and pretty much consider myself as much a Humanist (or secular humanist) as much as a atheist.

I was at a Humanist Conference in Chicago summer before last and Bishop Jack Spong was a guest speaker. He said that he is a secular Humanist, but he didn't describe what he meant. I have heard him speak many times and have become friends with him and his wife, Christine. His views are extremely liberal. He believes in a higher power, but doesn't define it as a Christian does. He seems to believe more that there is a certain power that doesn't control people/things with any direct purpose that would be for the benefit or not of man, or any special interest in man. I am not sure how to describe how he believes, but I can tell you that although he may use the word God, he doesn't have the Christian idea of God in mind. He seemed to agree with all that was said. He is one of the world's foremost Bible scholars and tends to regard the unscientific view as ungrounded.

Who came up with this definition of Secular Humanism?
I am use to humanism being defined as "an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems". By that definition, I am not a humanist.

I wonder if humanism hasn't gone the way of feminism. That is to say that as more people have naturally come to value some of the virtues it espouses the movement itself, and what defines it, has simply taken a backseat in the public eye perhaps allowing it to become misunderstood and maligned in some quarters.

In many respects I am a humanist, and yet it is never the first word on my mind when I try to define myself.

yes yes yes

The American Humanist Association has the current form of the Humanist Manifesto. Their detailing of humanism is still in a similar line with your definition of humanism above, but updated in language and given a more flexible, less dogmatic form.

[americanhumanist.org]

Yes yes yes ????

I really appreciate the core values of Secular Humanism.

To my mind, "atheist" and "secular humanist" are the same thing, interchangeable descriptors. Since I do much to not label myself, I usually just go with "humanist."

The reactions from people differ between "atheist" and "humanist" as they do between saying "f*ck" and "frak" (or frig, freak, frick, frell, smeg and tanj).

When I was 20, someone called me "a humanist" and I was offended. (I was very "into" being a Pentecostal) Then I researched it, and realized, I was a Humanist. For I care about my fellow humans, and want all them all to be cared for and taken care of and have all they need to survive and enjoy this one life we get.

Secular humanist would be fine with me, also happy with atheist and godless pagan. Of course, I don't use real rigid definitions.

In the grand scheme of life, this matters little to me. Whatever floats your boat. It is not my choice. There are many prostitutes now. Why legal> So they can collect income tax? Nevada has legalized prostitution. They seem to manage their state.

I like to consider myself a secular humanist. All this idea means to me is that there is inherent value to mankind because we are unique to nature as far as we can tell. If there are other attachments to this idea, I think ideas are made to evolve. There is nothing wrong with having a unique conception of something. I agree beliefs are active, but there are colloquial definitions that essentially boil them down to ideas. There's no cost to valuing human life as far as I can tell. It's a worthwhile belief

I consider myself a secular humanist, but I have a couple bones to pick with this extended definition.

• I don't hold the childish belief that the world is fair; I support equality of opportunity (true equality, not discrimination intended to "correct" former discrimination). The "social justice" movement and its support of equity (equality of outcome) could go to hell imo (if hell existed).
• I want to limit the government, slowly removing as much power from it as is safe, until ideally it could be eradicated in its entirety without merely creating a power vacuum.