lew (03/14/83)
While I agree with many of the specifics of "The Secular Humanist Declaration", I am out of sympathy with the general tone of the thing, which seems to be that religion should be exorcised from society. This comes across quite well in the last point: 10. Committed to using education to build humane, free, and democratic societies. We are against the pro-religious bias of the mass media. Preachers, faith healers, and religious hucksters promote their views without any challenge and the secular outlook is not given an opportunity for a fair hearing. That first sentence is a real blockbuster, and I can't blame fundmentalists (and others) for taking that as a direct threat against them. Humanists have no more right to take over the educational system than does any other ideological group. Just declaring yourself to be above religion in your intellectual sophistication doesn't make you a philosopher king. And a pro-religious bias to the media? This is a gross distortion. Norman Lear is a good example of one who steadily propagandizes a secular ethic in the popular media. The "Christian media" has its own popular base. However much humanists might lament the continuing appeal of this kind of message, they have no right to presume that the idiot masses should be trained away from it. That last bit about hucksters etc. going unchallenged really gets me. The presumption here seems to be that the state should step in and quash them. I myself find the political forays of the creationists to be frighteningly successful, but if you look at the supermarket literature, you will find that evolution is still unchallenged by creationism in this popular medium, holding sway with such colorfully attractive books as "Animals of the Past". Humanists should be willing to fight it out in the popular pit with all these primitive religions and superstitions. The urge to take the reins of state only betrays fear of losing on this ground. Lew Mammel, Jr. ihuxr!lew