Latest post of the previous page:
I am not going to (yet again) get into the same endless argument with Nick which has gone on since before HVG was established, to no one's benefit as far as I can see. But there are two key points I will comment on as I see them as fundamental errors, or at least the reverse of my perception:Quote: "The more we have separate groups for separate ethical positions, the less inclusive we are likely to appear."
No, not so. The more inclusive we are seen to be.
For example, the Humanist Gay and Lesbian Group shows we welcome people of (and supporters of people of) different sexual orientations, and it does not demonstrate the 'Nick nonsense' of suggesting its members claim everyone has to be homosexual to be a Humanist! The four (at present) Party Groups show Humanism is for Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem and Green supporters and none of these Groups claim you have to be a supporter of their Party to be a Humanist (and if in the unlikely event a BNP Group were to be proposed and then as is likely rejected, it would show our inclusiveness has limits, for very good reasons.) If the Peace or Pacifist Group were to be recreated no one with any sense would conclude that it meant you have to be a pacifist to be a Humanist. The existing Armed Forces Group does not claim, suggest, imply that all humanists / Humanists have to be supporters of armed conflict nor should any sensible person conclude from its existence that Humanism is militaristic. Special Interest Groups attract different groups in society to the BHA. I know of a number (probably more than a score) of vegetarians attracted to actual BHA membership by HVG and probably many more who have become Humanist supporters. I know of no one who has left the BHA because it has a vegetarian Group. Does anyone?
I believe the BHA will grow the more it has Special Interest Groups, speaking meaningfully to groups of people with a wide variety of concerns (market segmentation). The only type of Group we should not welcome are those who advocate a way of life or an ideology in direct contradiction to the broad consensus on Humanist principles (such as those advocating racism or the supremacy of one religion). I was a founder member of one of the Party Groups, having worked for that Party both professionally and as a volunteer most of my adult life. I welcome the other Party Groups even though we compete in the political arena (and have made suggestions to them about eventually working together on some issues of common Humanist agreement, such as education).
Quote "However, I do care that a very few people ....... continue to state that they are veggie because they are humanist. So long as they do so, I will continue to point out that that is not so for all humanists."
Nobody to my knowledge claims that all humanists / Humanists should be veggies because they are humanists; or that all veggies who are humanists are so because of their humanism. Such a view would be contrary to the repeatedly stated 'policy' of HVG since its foundation, although Nick endlessly demonstrates that he does not understand this. In my own case Humanism is the basis of my ethical beliefs and these beliefs are the reason why I am a vegetarian, but they are also why I support the Party I do, why I am an active member of Dignity in Dying, why I support campaigns for various causes and contribute to a number of charities. The fact that all this flows from my own Humanist ethical stance on these things, does not in any way mean that I think others must or should share my positions in order to be a humanist / Humanist. I know humanists who do not support Dignity's aims with regard to assisted suicide / euthanasia and do not expect them to do so just because they are humanists. Likewise I know of religionists, including many Christians, who do support Dignity. The stand they take is based on their ethical beliefs. They come to different conclusions.
I have said all this before and like others am 'frustrated' at having to say it all over again.
Note: when I use upper case for 'Humanists etc' I am referring to those who identify themselves as such by involvement in organisation like the BHA, Local Groups and so on.
Chris