Secular Humanism

Living in a troublesome world

Over the last 30 years or so we have experienced some of the most dramatic environmental, technological, and social advances you could ever imagine, culminating in the ‘digitisation’ of society. While these developments have improved the well-being and happiness of millions of citizens around the world, they have come at significant cost. For example:

· The climate is changing; with many experts saying it will lead to far more harm than good.

· The international political order is in disarray, with China, North Korea, and Russia flexing their military muscle.

· Democracy in general - and freedom of speech in particular - is under threat as Authoritarianism regimes gain a foothold across the planet.

· Capitalism - especially of the neo-liberal kind - is losing its attraction to rank and file voters.

· Economic inequality remains a major global problem despite the establishment of social welfare systems by many governments. 

· Religion has lost its ideological hold over government and citizens in western industrial nations.

· Many developing nations, on the other hand, have positioned religion - especially in its Catholic-Christian, Islamic, Hindu, and Jewish forms - as a conservative cultural centrepiece.   

· The globalisation of identity politics has divided society in more ways than ever before.

· The massive growth in ‘fake news’ the dissemination of global conspiracy theories, and the use of artificial intelligence to fabricate new realties are making it increasingly difficult to separate fact from fiction. 

While most of us have never been so well off materially, we have never faced to many existential threats. And with Covid-19 ‘hitting us for six’, so to speak, life has become a constant challenge. According to ‘expert’s, we have entered a period of deeply engrained anxiety across the generations. 

Can Humanism help?

Humanism is supposed to offer citizens comfort in challenging times.  It can be an escape, a coping mechanism, a tool for regaining control our lives, or an opportunity to make the world a better place. It would also be good think that Humanists would selflessly support those people whose lives have been thrown into disarray. But this begs the question: what, exactly, defines Humanism?

A useful place to begin is the Universal Humanists Credo as documented in the Humanists International Amsterdam Declaration of 2002 Now known as the statement of the fundamental principles of modern Humanism, it was passed unanimously by the General Assembly of Humanists International (HI) at the 50th anniversary World Humanist Congress. It was updated in 2022. It has been summarised below, but with quite few editorial changes:

· Humanists aim to be ethical. They affirm the worth, dignity, and autonomy of the individual together with the right to freedom compatible with the rights of others. Humanists have a duty of care to all of humanity including future generations. Humanists believe that morality is an intrinsic part of human nature that works to protect people from harm, enhance their capabilities, and enables them to satisfy their dreams and ambitions. So, to sum up, humanists believe that society works best when citizens feel safe, have basic rights, and envisage a prosperous future.

· Humanists aspire to be rational. Humanists believe that the solutions to the world’s problems lie in human thought and action rather than divine intervention. Humanism advocates the application of science and free inquiry to the problems of human welfare. It seeks to use science creatively, not destructively. Moreover, humanists believe that the application of science and technology must be tempered by human values. Science gives us the knowledge, economics gives us the means, but human values give us the purpose.

· Humanism supports democracy and human rights. Humanism aims to support the growth and development of every human being. It holds that democracy and human development are matters of right. Humanists also believe that the principles of democracy and human rights are not restricted to the structures and processes of government and can be applied equally to human relationships.

· Humanists insists that personal liberty must be combined with social responsibility. Humanism aims to build a world around the idea of the free person responsible to society. It acknowledges the strong interdependence between citizens, while also recognising the impact they have – both positive and negative - on the natural world. And, to ensure the freedom of others, humanism is undogmatic by imposing no specific creed or doctrine upon fellow citizens. It is thus committed to education free from dogma and indoctrination.

· Humanists believe there is a widespread demand for an alternative to dogmatic religion. The world’s major religions claim to be based on revelations fixed for all time, and many seek to impose their worldviews on all of humanity. Humanism recognises that reliable knowledge of the world arises through a continuing process of observation, reflection, evaluation, and revision.

· Humanists value artistic creativity, provide space for recuperation and reflection, and recognise the transformative power of arts and leisure. Humanism affirms the importance of literature, music, the visual and performing arts, while also understanding the importance of physical recreation for personal fulfilment and well-being.

· Humanism is a life stance that encourages the cultivation of creative and socially responsible living. It also and offers a moral framework for addressing the challenges of our times. Humanism can be a way of life for everyone no matter what land they occupy, what they do for a living, their physical features, or their ethnic and religious traditions. 

· Above all, Humanists believe that through free inquiry, the power of science, and creative imagination, we have the means to solve the problems that confront us all. Humanists call upon all who share this conviction to join them in this noble endeavour.

This an impressive, indeed, inspirational explanation of what Humanism is about, and how it can help build a better world. It also provides a sturdy intellectual and ethical platform for launching agendas, disseminating ideas, and taking social action. 

Bob Stewart

24 July 2024                                       

What do Humanists stand for specifically?

The Amsterdam Declarations 2002 and 2022 got me thinking about exactly what Humanists stand for, how Humanism can give people’s lives a bit more meaning and purpose, and how Humanists can make the world a better place. The following points came to mind. 

The first thing to be said about Humanists is that they don’t identify as religious, and do not believe in omnipotent and omnipresent deities. Humanists believe in the notion of personal choice free from religious dogma, and that they can lead a ‘good and full life’ and become better citizens when they are makers of own destiny. At the same time, Humanists defends the right of others to belong to religious organisations and practice their faith. At the same time, Humanists concede that religious bodies can be instrumental in alleviating poverty and disadvantage, giving society a diverse and cosmopolitan tone, and opening doors to productive debate. 

But Humanists believe that society will, in the long run, be better off by relying on science, reason, and secular sensitivity to guide their life-journey rather than depend on revelations from supernatural sources. For Humanists religious beliefs are not a precondition for ethical sensitivity or interpersonal empathy. On the contrary, the moral beliefs of religious organisations need to be challenged from time to time, especially where birth control, sexual conduct, gender relationships, and death and dying issues are concerned. History shows that punitive religious decrees, even when viewed as a reflection of God’s will, often do more harm than good.

Humanists also believe that in today’s complex world where education has become a human right, and knowledge is a wealth producing asset, society’s best interests are served when religious bodies are disentangled from the education sector, especially at secondary school and university level. Humanists are also unconditional proponents of what we call the secular state. A secular state is centrepiece of Humanist philosophy and provides a frame within which to treat all citizens equally regardless of their religion, personal belief system, or cultural disposition. A secular state provides space for religion to flourish but is careful to ensure its often-extreme social conservatism does not get in the way of progressive political change. Humanists believe that the use of religious dogma to shape government policy and related legislation is recipe for social oppression, suffering, and a miserable life. The destructive impact of the Taliban on the lives of Afghanistan citizens, the mayhem created by extreme religious groups in the Middle East, and harms perpetrated by religious zealots in western nations says it all.

Humanists believe that everyone has the right and opportunity to enhance their capabilities and secure meaningful and fulfilling lives. But Humanists also understand that not everyone is born equal. Some individuals are more privileged than others, while some are disadvantaged even before they are born, with the disadvantage compounded as they move though childhood and adolescence. In these instances, Humanists believe that the intrinsically ethical thing to do is redirect resource from those who are economically and socially privileged, to those who got short shrift from the lottery of life. This simple principle also underpins the discipline of welfare economics, where any resource re-allocation initiative that adds more to the overall welfare of citizens than it takes away is beneficial to society. Humanist also take a next step by arguing that the societal benefit will always be greatest when the loss is born by the wealthy and the gain is secured by the poor. This is the type of egalitarianism that Humanists value above all else. 

When it comes to pursuing meaningful and fulfilling lives, Humanists trust each individual citizen to walk the path that best suits them. Humanists understand the importance of liberty, free-will, self-determination and individualism, but they also acknowledge the benefits that come with a collectivist approach to life, and the security that follows.  Humanists concede that each approach has its strengths and weaknesses, so whereas individualism and its ideological ‘sidekick’, libertarianism, prioritises freedom and liberty, collectivists and socialists place great store in community and togetherness. Individualists believe in hard work and ambition as the key to success, while collectivists believe a lot of it is about privilege and luck. But either way, Humanists believe in the capacity – and indeed, the right - of every citizen to develop their capabilities, build a family, establish a career, contribute to their communities, and make their mark. 

Humanists respect individual differences, but also believe people are motivated to do more with their lives than accumulate material possessions and show them off to friends and acquaintances. Deep down in the psyche is a desire to go beyond the banality of everyday life and do something that delivers joy, pleasure, and feelings of deep satisfaction. It may have no material pay off, or receive any public recognition, but will deliver not only a prolonged and intense feeling satisfaction, but also a sense of having a made a difference and made someone somewhere just that little bit happier. In short, Humanist assert the right of all citizens to maximise their potential and reach their goals, which is to say, self-actualise. But Humanists also believe that world will always be a better place whenever some else shares the benefits. 

Humanists believe that democracy is essential for social progress and enshrining human rights. Authoritarianism, on the other hand does the opposite and demands to be confronted at every turn. When it comes to the economy, Humanists are less united, but generally agree that citizens are better off when there is a mix of markets, government business enterprises, not for profit entities, and strong regulatory regimes. Humanists understand that free markets can be exploitative, and full-blown socialism can be oppressive.

When it comes to civil society, Humanism understands its pivotal role in promoting not only empathy, compassion, and goodness, but also justice, equality, and the sanctity of human life.  And when engaging with communities Humanists try to do as little harm as possible, while also delivering benefit to others when the opportunity arises. 

Using Humanist principles to make the world a better place. 

The tenants of Humanism are intellectually appealing, but when rationality is given free rein space can be denied to the imaginative, creative, and aesthetic aspects of life. There is, on the other hand, a lot to be said for doing things that are frivolous, ephemeral, fictional, and done for no other reason that it feels good. 

Ther are times when intuition and judgement are valid ways of making decisions, and no matter how instrumental we pretend to be, we also have a strong need for ceremony, ritual and especially play. This is part of what it is to be human. Fairy tales, stories couched in myth and mystery, the use of archetypes to gain audience attention and move a narrative along, and even the borrowing of biblical parables to illuminate a moral issue, are things that can give Humanists as much joy as anyone else. They also expose the dark side of human nature and give us an ethical framework for guiding our life journey. 

At its core, humanism has more to do with leading a good and full life and helping others to do the same, while also making it happen without the assistance of gods, prophets, priests, vicars, evangelists, proselytisers, and the like. For Humanists, holy books are interesting historical documents which contain some enlightening parables and occasional words of wisdom. Political ideologies are treated in a similar vein. They are only as good as their ability to make the lives of ordinary people better. In the minds of Humanist, a large part of public life is little more than political grandstanding and narcissistic posturing. 

Humanists can be on both the right and left side of politics, which can in many instances be troublesome. But anyone true to the Humanist ideal will not let party politics interfere with humanist values and principles, which includes the right of others to hold opposing views about the way the world is run and how it can be made a safer, environmentally friendly, more materially equal, and more caring place. And, while some Humanists might want to call themselves postmodern Marxists or radical socialists, and others identify as Thatcherite neo-liberals, the Humanist cause and its underlying ethos of benign tolerance and doing more good than harm will provide a sense of common purpose. 

Humanists also agree that a fully functioning society depends on well-managed, accountable, and transparent governments. Moreover, governments have a responsibility to not only deliver core services like welfare, education, health, justice, and safety, but also regulate commercial enterprises.  While the world of business drives the economy and has delivered a level of material wealth that we could have only dreamt about a couple of generations ago, it can frequently fall into the trap of measuring their success by the price of its shares and the dividends it delivers to shareholders. Humanists believe that the corporate sector also has an obligation to serve the public interest. And it if regularly fails to do so, then Humanist believes that government regulation is essential. While there will be a loss of corporate liberty, there will be a big gain in the overall benefit to society, be it lower prices, higher quality, greater reliability, improved service delivery, or a cleaner and safer environment. 

For Humanists, the right to free speech is a front and centre value, and it is their duty to protect it as much as is humanly possible. In parts of south-east Asia, when given the choice, many citizens are prepared to trade of some free speech to secure social harmony.  Humanists also want to see greater social harmony, but not by making free speech conditional on an assurance that nothing will be said that causes offence to others, especially when it has something to do with religion, ethnicity, royalty, business, or the conduct of government.   

Humanists also believe in the value of civil society. While acknowledging that the commercial business sector is the driver of all things material, we also understand that the viability of commercial business is dependent on making a profit and paying dividends to its owners, the shareholders. This means that if there is a choice to be made between going broke, so to speak, and continuing to trade by cutting labour costs, the way forward is obvious. In civil society though, organisations are mostly driven by a sense of purpose rather than a desire for profits. What is more this purpose focuses on issues where disadvantage is the basic problem. Civil society thus offers a perfect fit with the Humanist desire to make the world a better place for all. 

When it comes to the local level, Humanists have an acute understanding of how a safe, supportive, and loving family life benefits both individual family members and society. And conversely, Humanists acknowledged the harm that comes from a family life that is embed with violence, drug abuse and general neglect. Children are not equipped to manage life on their own, and thus need not only a stable home, but also strong and empathetic parents who are committed to their well-being and social development. A 2016 Australian study into dysfunctional families found the lifetime costs associated with child maltreatment to be around $26 billion; a truly horrific finding. 

Humanists also have a deep concern for people with mental illnesses, and the challenges they face in their daily lives. It impacts on both adults and children, and in it most severe form can destroy people’s quality of life, and massively disrupt their personal lives and workplace experiences. Humanists also understand that to make good things happen in this space it is essential to secure a deep knowledge of the field. And, once again, Humanist put great store in not only government assistance, but also the importance of strong family support. About 44% of Australians aged 16–85 experienced a mental illness at some time in their life, which comes out as around 8.6 million people. Humanists are especially concerned about the increase in mental illness episodes amongst children. About 16% of male children and adolescents had experienced some form of mental illness in the previous 12 months, while the figure for females was about 12%). Mental illness has become a major public health problem. 

What exactly underpins Humanist philosophies and beliefs?

Everyone has a view on which saviour, prophet, guru, or philosopher (ancient or otherwise), can show us the best way to a better life. There are two that seem, at first glance, to fit the Humanist agenda. 

The first is John Stuart Mill who offered a sensible way of securing an optimal balance between rights and harms, and therefore securing a semblance of social justice, and an improvement in the overall well-being of citizens. Stuart Mill, a 19th century British political philosopher, had some especially insightful things to say about the liberty of individuals on one hand, and the tyranny of the majority on the other.

Mill's starting point was to claim that whenever the state, or society, more generally, interferes with the liberty and freedom of individuals, there will be a loss of pleasure happiness, or utility for anyone whose autonomy is constrained. According to Mills this was because their right to act in their own perceived best interests had been diminished. Mill identified three basic elements of human liberty, which were (1) the 'inward domain of consciousness', (2) liberty of 'tastes and pursuits' over one's life-course, and (3) and the freedom to unite with others.

But MiIl also conceded that there must also be 'rationally grounded principles' that allows a society and its governing structures to ’interfere' from time to time with the liberty and action of others. According to Mill there was only one purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over others. This purpose was to prevent harm to someone else.

The upshot of this claim was clear to Mill. When individuals were free to act as they choose - and cause minimal or no harm to others - overall social ‘utility’ would be maximised. This because there was no harmful imposition on others (which benefited all members of society) while at the same time, society was promoting the ‘free development of individuality’ and humanity.

Things get a bit hazier, though, when the benefits to the majority come with a cost (that is, harm) to the minority. Mill still thinks this is OK if, having weighed up the consequences of a gain in freedom it was found the harms were overwhelmed by the benefits. Mill’s utilitarian approach to rights, harms, and ethical behaviour has a lot to offer Humanists, but running one’s life around a cost-benefit calculus seems a little too mechanistic for some people.  

The second person who has something to offer is John Rawls on of the great political philosophers of the twentieth century. In 1971 John Rawls wrote a book titled Social Justice, which had a significant impact on what constituted a just society, and how it might be attained. Rawls noted, first up, that for society to function properly (where resources were efficiently and equitably distributed), there needed to be a social contract, which defined justice as ‘fairness’. But Rawls also argued that to deliver a fair [that is, just] society, a social contract had to be created from an original position in which the 'rules' for achieving a fair society were made behind a 'veil of ignorance' (VOI). 

According to Rawls, a VOI facilitated a setting where the parties negotiating a social contract were deprived of all knowledge of arbitrary facts about both them and other citizens that could influence, or even bias, the agreement that they came to. According to Rawls, it was as if every representative came to the negotiating table not knowing their place in society, their class position, social status, or individual capability. And, nor did they know their 'fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, [their] intelligence and strength, and the like'. 

Rawls found that most VIO participants 'played it safe' and maximised the minimum anyone could get (a policy he calls Maximin). Translated into everyday society, it meant that the worst-off people in society (which may well have been any one of the participants in this imaginary world) would be able to reach their potential unimpeded by discrimination or prejudice.

Rawls also opted for equality of basic liberties because he thought it was essential for people to see themselves as moral equals in society. But Rawls did not think absolute equality was essential in every circumstance. By allowing some inequality, we could make life better for everyone. For example, if higher salaries were attached to certain jobs, they might attract the hardest working people, and thus, by increasing productivity and taxable income, produce the greatest economic benefits for everyone. 

But Rawls also wanted limits set on allowable inequalities. Under his ‘fair equality of opportunity’ principle, he argued that all job positions must be open to people of equal talents and equal willingness to use them on an equal basis. In other words, if two people were just as capable of doing a job, and just as hardworking and willing to apply themselves, neither should have a greater chance of securing the position because of their wealth, status, occupation, personal appearance, race, or religion.

Rawls’ VOI aimed to strip away preconceived notions of what was good or bad, or right or wrong, and centre discussion on things like a minimum level of well-being, and maximum opportunity for advancement. Rawls wanted VOI to show us that imagining a world free from bias, blinkered ideological beliefs, and discriminatory attitudes, would ultimately be good for everybody.   

Bob Stewart

25 July 2024                                       

Making Things Happen from a Humanistic Perspective

It is one thing to debate the origins of Humanism, interrogate its philosophical foundations, and its role in combatting the undue influence of religious dogma on human affairs. It is another thing to belong to an organisation that offers a means of not only broadening people’s understanding of how the world works and building people’s sensitivity to the barriers to social progress, but also getting them involved in social causes and doing good to others. There are many ways of making this happen, but there are also some initiatives that can make a difference without having to spend massive amounts lot of time, money, and collective effort. They include:

Structural opportunities

As a long-standing civil society organisation with a strong public profile, Humanists have already forged a central sport in civil society. They are often figureheads for addressing major social and economic issues in an impartial light, free from divisive political ideology, strident and dogmatic voices, and religious dogma. A sample of initiatives are listed below. 

· Building networks with like-minded agencies and organisations. (Think tanks, political parties, government agencies, civil society, and related NGOs) 

· Conducting public forums and debates in a variety of spaces including, municipal libraries, universities, schools, service organisations, outreach agencies, U3A centres and the like.

· Providing space for collaborating with special interest groups to build policy, promote them, submit proposals to government committees of inquiry, and drive their implementation as social action programs under the Humanists banner. 

Projects and programs

But given the limited human resource base Humanists have worked, it has always been prudent to prioritise things. High priority Issues include:

· Making the school educational curricula spiritually impartial

· Building support networks for people breaking free from their religious upbringing

· Building ceremonial bridges with marriage celebrants

· Connecting with non-religious funeral centres. 

· Monitoring demographic, political, social, and liturgical developments in religious organisation 

· Reducing income inequality and wealth disparities

· Mitigating and adapting to climate change

· Building all electric households

· Compiling a repository of research into gross national happiness, social progress, quality of life, and community well-being, and using it to frame our social cause initiatives.  

Specific initiatives can involve organising campaigns to influence public opinion, making submissions to governments, issuing press releases, organise conferences and tours by prominent thinkers, maintaining an informational website, and publishing an online magazine and timely newsletters. 

Marketing and promotion

In democratic capitalist societies like Australia, getting noticed is the first step in communicating messages to the public. The second step is to create an image consistent with one’s mandate. Humanists aim to provide human solutions to human problems and do it with empathy and citizen-welfare front and centre. So, a promotion and public relations plan for 2024 and beyond could include the following statements of purpose: 

· If you want to join a group that will make both you and the communities you serve happier, more socially connected, and better off, you can do no better than join the Humanists.

· It is the perfect fit for life in the 21st century. 

· Humanists see democracy as the only form of government that generates real happiness for people.

· It also argues for the establishment of an Australian bill of rights where liberties are protected, and safety is assured. 

· It wants to see a world where families are built around loving relationships, child protection, and personal growth.

· It wants to help build an economy where business balance ethics against profits, and citizens to are able buy and sell assets (including property) but knowing that it is legitimate to tax the wealthy and redistribute it to the poor. 

· It aims to protect the vulnerable and disadvantaged and enable them to grow and achieve.

· It celebrates secularism and its determination create a world where religion plays no direct part in the affairs of state, the processes of parliament, and government decision making.

· It aspires for an education system that is not only free from religious dogma, but is also free from censorship, while also encouraging healthy and open debate.

· It wants to help build a society that value people’s self-esteem over self-aggrandisement, and citizen well-being over the accumulation of material possessions.  

· And finally, Humanists believes in the idea of social progress, while also understanding that it does not happen by chance but is rather a result of the collective effort of concerned citizens. In fact, Humanists view it as a fundamental human right. 

What makes the Humanist Movement Different from Rationalists, Secularists and Atheists?

At first glance there is significant overlap. Take, for instance, the Rationalist Society of Australia (RSA) is the oldest freethought group in Australia, promoting reason since 1906. It believes in human dignity and respect in our treatment of one another. It supports social co-operation within communities and political co-operation among nations. It thinks human endeavour should focus on making life better for all of us, with due regard to our fellow sentient creatures and the natural environment. It believes humankind must take responsibility for its own destiny. 

When it comes to morality, rationalists believe it is the natural product of human evolution, not dictated by some external agency or recorded in some written document. Humans live in social groups. This is why all societies, despite differences of culture or religion, share many basic moral tenets and social taboos.

And, finally, it believes that the scientific method is the most effective means by which humans develop knowledge and understanding of the physical universe. In addition, human progress and well-being is best achieved by the careful and consistent use of science and evidence-based reasoning. Rational have little time for religion and superstitious beliefs and the practices they promulgate. Education should thus be secular, rational, and non-ideological. 

The National Secular Lobby (NSL) is pro-secular rather than anti-religious. It works towards the separation of religion and state, and the removal of undue religious privilege in legislation. It has been able to mobilise a team of secular specialists headed by high-profile ambassadors able to liaise directly with senior media executives and parliamentarians. There is no public membership, but it works constructively with pro-secular groups around Australia to advance a national secular agenda. Its focal points in recent times have covered many important social issues and are listed below. 

· Legalise marriage equality for all same-sex couples,

· Legalise voluntary euthanasia,

· Abolish all laws criminalising abortion and provide legal protection for clients and staff,

· Prioritise government funding to public schools,

· Promote the principles of "religion-neutral" secular education,

· Abolish the National School Chaplaincy Program by replacing chaplains with experienced professional counsellors.

· Lobby to change the ‘closed’ Census question – “What is the person’s religion?” – to an unbiased ‘open’ question.

· Repeal employment laws that allow religious institutions to discriminate in employment for non-religious positions.

· Remove single-faith religious instruction (SRE) from schools; promote and replace it with philosophical ethics, critical thinking, and/or general religious education (GRE).

· Remove tax exemptions to "for-profit" Church businesses, their non-charitable properties, investments, and assets.

· Lobby for a stronger voice on all secular issues, with better access to mainstream print and electronic media.

· Encourage all MPs to include their religious or non-religious affiliations on their parliamentary webpage, for voter transparency.

· Remove prayers, religious icons and rituals from all "secular" public institutions, including all tiers of government.

· Withhold public funding from schools that continue to teach creationism over science and human evolution.

· Ban the religious practice of genital mutilation inflicted on both girls and boys.

· Legislate against Church hospitals banning clinical procedures based on religious grounds.

· Select 'secular rationalists' for boards/panels, based on ethics, not church leaders who claim to be society's "moral voice".

· Endorse the full UDHR definition of "Freedom of Religion and Belief" which includes the right to express non-belief.

· Lobby for the mandatory reporting of all child abuse by any personnel in religious and other institutions.

· Abolish existing blasphemy laws; still common law in all states and territories, except Qld and WA.

· Prohibit the fundamentalist religious indoctrination of children in home-schooling.

· Lobby for the full separation of Church and State; Church and Medicine; Church and Science.

· Remove religious bias from all government and legal documentation.

The Secular Party of Australia (SPA) It claims to be the only party that stands for comprehensive secularism. It also fights for the separation of religion from state institutions, impartiality between religions and the protection of human rights from violation based on religious doctrine. It believes that the separation of church and state is the only valid foundation for a free and liberal modern democracy.

It wants secular government. It wants legislation based on evidence, informed debate and equality for all. It wants a society that honours the universal humanist values of compassion, honesty, freedom and justice. It believes that building a better society requires greater respect for secular values and morals based on universal principles such as compassion, freedom and justice. It wants to developing freedom of thought unconstrained by artificial divisions caused by religion and prejudice. It also believes freedom of thought is the best way of inspiring dedication to this common purpose.

The SPA believes a strong secular, education system is an essential step on the path to a fair and equitable society. It also asserts that a rational solution to many social questions can be found by better application of the proposition that prevention is better than cure. It believes that the transparent application of balanced judgement in pursuit of objective principles is the best way of inspiring citizens to act responsibly. It believes that Justice must be seen to be done.

It believes that a society where compensation is based on inherited privilege rather than merit is inherently more inequitable. And, not surprisingly, it is in favour of an Australian republic because the concept of hereditary privilege, as embodied in the monarch as head of state, cannot be morally or practically justified.

Finally, SPA reckons Jeremy Bentham‘s principle of utility says it all … ‘that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever, according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the [benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or] happiness … not only of every action of a private individual, but of every measure of government.’ 

The Atheist Foundation of Australia (AFA) operates under several guiding principles. It first and foremost asserts that the scientific method is the only rational means toward understanding reality. According to AFA, to question and critically examine all ideas is essential for a healthy society, since testing them in the light of experiment leads to the discovery of facts. And since there seems to be no scientific evidence for supernatural phenomena, atheists reject belief in ‘God’, gods, and other supernatural beings. Thus, the universe, the world in which we live, and the evolution of life are entirely natural occurrences.

Atheists also argue that no personality or mind can exist without the process of living matter to sustain it. In other words, we have only one life – the here and now. All that remains after a person dies is the memory of their life and deeds in the minds of those who remain. And finally, Atheists reject superstition and prejudice along with the irrational fears they cause. They recognise the complexity and interdependence of life on this planet. As rational and ethical beings they accept the challenge of making a creative and responsible contribution to life.

The mission of AFA is uncompromising and bold – which is to encourage expression for informed free-thought on philosophical and social issues, safeguard the rights of all non-religious people, serve as a focal point for the community of ‘non-religious people’, offer verifiable information in place of superstition, and to promote logic and reason. Moreover, AFA is not only areligious, but also anti-religious in the sense that religion has, over the most recent millennium done more harm than good. 

AFA argues that with access to so much factual knowledge these days, there is no excuse for believing in gods, fairies or any supernatural concept. And neither is religion a natural phenomenon. It is a social constructed device based on wild beliefs, and is dependent on the indoctrination of infants by parents brainwashed in religious cultures.

Finally, AFA believes that the confrontations and fighting we see around us today provide ample evidence of the unstable nature of societies underpinned by a system of religious beliefs that shape the political climtae. And according to AFA the infantile concepts that find their way into religious holy books seriously hinder the full potential development of humans in a world with problems that require logical thought. Atheists, on the other hand, find their motive for action in the needs and problems of their fellow citizens and consider that the worship of, or reliance on, imaginary supernatural beings are a useless waste of time, energy, and resources.

So, why aren't there more paid-up members of Humanist organisations across the Australian continent? In the light of all the turbulence we have to deal with these days, there is a golden opportunity to attract news members, secure a prominent public profile, and make an impact on society? I cannot wait to be part of it.

Bob Stewart

26 July 2024.