The philosophy of secular humanism (alternatively known by adherents as Humanism, specifically with a capital H to distinguish it from other forms of humanism) embraces human reason, ethics, and social justice while specifically rejecting religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience or superstition as the basis of morality and decision-making.
Though it posits that human beings are capable of being ethical and moral without religion or God, it neither assumes humans to be inherently evil or innately good, nor presents humans as "above nature" or superior to it. Rather, the humanist life stance emphasizes the unique responsibility facing humanity and the ethical consequences of human decisions. Fundamental to the concept of secular humanism is the strongly held viewpoint that ideology — be it religious or political — must be thoroughly examined by each individual and not simply accepted or rejected on faith. Along with this, an essential part of secular humanism is a continually adapting search for truth, primarily through science and philosophy.
The meaning of the phrase "secular humanism" has evolved over time. The phrase has been used since at least the 1930s,[1] and in 1943, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, William Temple, was reported as warning that the "Christian tradition... was in danger of being undermined by a "Secular Humanism" which hoped to retain Christian values without Christian faith."[2] During the 1960s and 1970s the term was embraced by some humanists who considered themselves anti-religious,[3] as well as those who, although not critical of religion in its various guises, preferred a non-religious approach.[4] The release in 1980 of A Secular Humanist Declaration by the newly formed Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism (CODESH, now the Council for Secular Humanism) gave secular humanism an organisational identity within the United States.
However, many adherents of the approach reject the use of the word "Secular" as obfuscating and confusing, and consider that the term "Secular Humanism" has been "demonized by the religious right... All too often secular humanism is reduced to a sterile outlook consisting of little more than secularism slightly broadened by academic ethics. This kind of 'hyphenated humanism' easily becomes more about the adjective than its referent".[5] Adherents of this view, including the International Humanist and Ethical Union and the American Humanist Association, consider that the unmodified but capitalised word Humanism should be used. The endorsement by the IHEU of the capitalization of the word "Humanism", and the dropping of any adjective such as "secular", is quite recent. The American Humanist Association began to adopt this view in 1973, and the IHEU formally endorsed the position in 1989. In 2002 the IHEU General Assembly unanimously adopted the Amsterdam Declaration, which represents the official defining statement of World Humanism for Humanists. This declaration makes exclusive use of capitalized Humanist and Humanism, which is consistent with IHEU's general practice and recommendations for promoting a unified Humanist identity.[1] To further promote Humanist identity, these words are also free of any adjectives, as recommended by prominent members of IHEU.[2] Such usage is not universal among IHEU member organizations, though most of them do observe these conventions.
Various declarations and statements have been issued to attempt to unify the Humanist identity.
All member organisations of the International Humanist and Ethical Union are required by bylaw 5.1[6] to accept the Minimum Statement on Humanism:
| “ |
Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality. |
” |
To promote and unify "Humanist" identity, prominent members of the IHEU have endorsed the following statements on Humanist identity:[3]
- All Humanists, nationally and internationally, should always use the one word Humanism as the name of Humanism: no added adjective, and the initial letter capital (by life stance orthography);
- All Humanists, nationally and internationally, should use a clear, recognizable and uniform symbol on their publications and elsewhere: our Humanist symbol the "Happy Human";
- All Humanists, nationally and internationally, should seek to establish recognition of the fact that Humanism is a life stance.
According to the Council for Secular Humanism, within the United States, the term "Secular Humanism" describes a world view with the following elements and principles:[4]
- Need to test beliefs – A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted by faith.
- Reason, evidence, scientific method – A commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence and scientific methods of inquiry in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.
- Fulfillment, growth, creativity – A primary concern with fulfillment, growth and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.
- Search for truth – A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.
- This life – A concern for this life (as opposed to an afterlife) and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
- Ethics – A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
- Justice and fairness – an interest in securing justice and fairness in society and in eliminating discrimination and intolerance.[7]
- Building a better world – A conviction that with reason, an open exchange of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.
A Secular Humanist Declaration was issued in 1980 by the Council for Secular Humanism's predecessor, CODESH. It lays out ten ideals: Free inquiry as opposed to censorship and imposition of belief; separation of church and state; the ideal of freedom from religious control and from jingoistic government control; ethics based on critical intelligence rather than that deduced from religious belief; moral education; religious skepticism; reason; a belief in science and technology as the best way of understanding the world; evolution; and education as the essential method of building humane, free, and democratic societies.[8]
General doctrines of Humanism are also set out in the Humanist Manifesto prepared by the American Humanist Association.[9]
The term secularism was coined in 1851[10] by George Jacob Holyoake to describe "a form of opinion which concerns itself only with questions, the issues of which can be tested by the experience of this life."[11] Once a staunch Owenite, Holyoake was strongly influenced by Auguste Comte, the founder of positivism and of modern sociology. Comte believed human history would progress in a 'law of three stages' from a 'theological' phase, to the 'metaphysical', toward a fully rational 'positivist' society. In later life, Comte had attempted to introduce a 'religion of humanity' in light of growing anti-religious sentiment and social malaise in revolutionary France. This 'religion' would necessarily fulfil the functional, cohesive role that supernatural religion once served. Whilst Comte's religious movement was unsuccessful, the positivist philosophy of science itself played a major role in the proliferation of secular organizations in the 19th century.
Historical use of the term humanism (reflected in some current academic usage), is related to the writings of pre-Socratic philosophers. These writings were lost to European societies until Renaissance scholars rediscovered them through Muslim sources and translated them from Arabic into European languages.[12] Thus the term humanist can mean a humanities scholar, as well as refer to The Enlightenment/ Renaissance intellectuals, and those who have agreement with the pre-Socratics, as distinct from secular humanists. In the 1930s, "humanism" was generally used in a religious sense by the Ethical movement in the United States, and not much favoured among the non-religious in Britain. Yet "it was from the Ethical movement that the non-religious philosophical sense of Humanism gradually emerged in Britain, and it was from the convergence of the Ethical and Rationalist movements that this sense of Humanism eventually prevailed throughout the Freethought movement."[13]
As an organized movement, Humanism itself is quite recent – born at the University of Chicago in the 1920s, and made public in 1933 with the publication of the first Humanist Manifesto.[14] The American Humanist Association was incorporated as an Illinois non-profit organization in 1943. The International Humanist and Ethical Union was founded in 1952, when a gathering of world Humanists met under the leadership of Sir Julian Huxley. The British Humanist Association took that name in 1967, but had developed from the Union of Ethical Societies which had been founded by Stanton Coit in 1896.[15]
Secular humanist organizations are found in all parts of the world. Those who call themselves Humanists are estimated to number between four[16] and five[17] million people worldwide in 31 countries, but there is uncertainty because of the lack of universal definition throughout censuses. Humanism is a non-theistic belief system and, as such, it could be a sub-category of "Religion" only if that term is defined to mean "Religion and (any) belief system". This is the case in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on freedom of religion and beliefs. Many national censuses contentiously define Humanism as a further sub-category of the sub-category "No Religion", which typically includes atheist, rationalist and agnostic thought. In England, Wales[18] and Australia,[19][20] around 15% of the population specifies "No Religion" in the national census. However, in its 2006 and 2011 census Australia used Humanism as an example of "other religions". In the USA, the decennial census does not inquire about religious affiliation or its lack; surveys report the figure at roughly 13%.[21] In the 2001 Canadian census, 16.5% of the populace reported having no religious affiliation.[22] In Scotland, the figure is 28%.[23] One of the largest Humanist organizations in the world (relative to population) is Norway's Human-Etisk Forbund,[24] which had over 70,000 members out of a population of around 4.6 million in 2004 (1.5% of the population).[25] This popularity is partly attributable to a unique set of Church-State relations.
The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) is the worldwide umbrella organization for those adhering to the Humanist life stance. It represents the views of over three million Humanists organized in over 100 national organizations in 30 countries.[26] Originally based in the Netherlands, the IHEU now operates from London. Some regional groups that adhere to variants of the Humanist life stance, such as the humanist subgroup of the Unitarian Universalist Association, do not belong to the IHEU. Although the European Humanist Federation is also separate from the IHEU, the two organisations work together and share an agreed protocol.[27]
Starting in the mid-20th century, religious fundamentalists and the religious right began using the term "secular humanism" in hostile fashion. Francis A. Schaeffer, an American theologian based in Switzerland, seizing upon the exclusion of the divine from most humanist writings, argued that rampant secular humanism would lead to moral relativism and ethical bankruptcy in his book How Should We Then Live: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture (1976). Schaeffer portrayed secular humanism as pernicious and diabolical, and warned it would undermine the moral and spiritual tablet of America. His themes have been very widely repeated in Fundamentalist preaching in North America.[28] Toumey (1993) found that Secular Humanism is typically portrayed as a vast evil conspiracy, deceitful and immoral, responsible for feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality, and New Age spirituality.[29] In certain areas of the world, Humanism finds itself in conflict with religious fundamentalism, especially over the issue of the separation of church and state. Many Humanists see religions as superstitious, repressive and closed-minded, while religious fundamentalists may see Humanists as a threat to the values set out in their sacred texts.[30]
Secular Humanism does not prescribe a specific theory of morality or code of ethics. As stated by the Council for Secular Humanism,
It should be noted that Secular Humanism is not so much a specific morality as it is a method for the explanation and discovery of rational moral principles.
[31]
Secular Humanism affirms that with the present state of scientific knowledge, dogmatic belief in an absolutist moral/ethical system (e.g. Kantian, Islamic, Christian) is unreasonable. However, it affirms that individuals engaging in rational moral/ethical deliberations can discover some universal "objective standards".
We are opposed to absolutist morality, yet we maintain that objective standards emerge, and ethical values and principles may be discovered, in the course of ethical deliberation.
[31]
Some secular humanists believe that universal moral standards are required for the proper functioning of society. However, they believe such necessary universality can and should be achieved by developing a richer notion of morality through reason, experience and scientific inquiry rather than through faith in a supernatural realm or source.
Fundamentalists correctly perceive that universal moral standards are required for the proper functioning of society. But they erroneously believe that God is the only possible source of such standards. Philosophers as diverse as
Plato,
Immanuel Kant,
John Stuart Mill,
George Edward Moore, and
John Rawls have demonstrated that it is possible to have a universal morality without God. Contrary to what the fundamentalists would have us believe, then, what our society really needs is not more religion but a richer notion of the nature of morality.
[32]
Humanism in general is known to adopt principles of the Golden Rule.[citation needed]
Atheists, agnostics, deists, pantheists, and rationalists are those thought to be supporters of Humanism, although they may not always be. However, these beliefs are occupied with metaphysical issues, addressing questions of existence, while Humanism ignores such metaphysical matters and has its focus on ethics. Many Humanists address ethics from the point of view of ethical naturalism, and some support an actual science of morality. Some philosophers like Peter Singer see Humanism as speciesist and lend themselves to more of a Personism.
There are a number of ways in which secular and religious humanism can differ:[33]
- Some religious humanists may seek profound "religious" experiences, such as those that others would associate with the presence of God, despite interpreting these experiences differently. Secular humanists would generally not pursue such experiences solely for their own sake.[33]
- Some varieties of religious humanism may conceive of the word divine as more than metaphoric even in the absence of a belief in a traditional God; they may believe in ideals that transcend physical reality; or they may conceive of some experiences as numinous or uniquely religious. Secular Humanism regards all such terms as being only special cases of more general, not necessarily religious, forms of engagement with the world.[33]
- Religious humanists include worship in their activities along with their work for humanity. Secular humanists don't invest any energy in worship. Instead, they focus their activities on social activism, such as: helping disadvantaged people, working for fair laws and social justice, protecting the environment, improving one's local community, etc.[34]
Some Humanists celebrate officially religious-based public holidays, such as Christmas or Easter, but as secular holidays rather than religious ones.[35] Many Humanists also celebrate the winter and summer solstice, the former of which (in the northern hemisphere) is the root of the celebration of Christmas, and the equinoxes, of which the vernal equinox is associated with Christianity's Easter and indeed with all other springtime festivals of renewal. The Society for Humanistic Judaism celebrates most Jewish holidays in a secular manner.
The IHEU endorses World Humanist Day (21 June), Darwin Day (12 February), Human Rights Day (10 December) and HumanLight (23 December) as official days of Humanist celebration, though none are yet a public holiday.
In many countries, Humanist officiants (or celebrants) perform celebrancy services for weddings, funerals, child namings, coming of age ceremonies, and other rituals.
The issue of whether and in what sense Secular Humanism might be considered a religion, and what the implications of this would be has become the subject of legal maneuvering and political debate in the United States. The first reference to "Secular Humanism" in a US legal context was in 1961, although church-state separation lawyer Leo Pfeffer had referred to it in his 1958 book, Creeds in Competition.
The Education for Economic Security Act of 1984 included a section, Section 20 U.S.C.A. 4059, which initially read: "Grants under this subchapter ['Magnet School Assistance'] may not be used for consultants, for transportation or for any activity which does not augment academic improvement." With no public notice, Senator Orrin Hatch tacked on to the proposed exclusionary subsection the words "or for any course of instruction the substance of which is Secular Humanism." Implementation of this provision ran into practical problems because neither the Senator's staff, nor the Senate's Committee on Labor and Human Resources, nor the Department of Justice could propose a definition of what would constitute a "course of instruction the substance of which is Secular Humanism." So, this determination was left up to local school boards. The provision provoked a storm of controversy which within a year led Senator Hatch to propose, and Congress to pass, an amendment to delete from the statute all reference to Secular Humanism. While this episode did not dissuade fundamentalists from continuing to object to what they regarded as the "teaching of Secular Humanism," it did point out the vagueness of the claim.
[edit] Torcaso v. Watkins
The phrase "Secular Humanism" became prominent after it was used in the United States Supreme Court case Torcaso v. Watkins. In the 1961 decision, Justice Hugo Black commented in a footnote, "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others."
[edit] Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda
The footnote in Torcaso v. Watkins referenced Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda,[36] a 1957 case in which an organization of humanists[37] sought a tax exemption on the ground that they used their property "solely and exclusively for religious worship." Despite the group's non-theistic beliefs, the court determined that the activities of the Fellowship of Humanity, which included weekly Sunday meetings, were analogous to the activities of theistic churches and thus entitled to an exemption. The Fellowship of Humanity case itself referred to Humanism but did not mention the term Secular Humanism. Nonetheless, this case was cited by Justice Black to justify the inclusion of Secular Humanism in the list of religions in his note. Presumably Justice Black added the word secular to emphasize the non-theistic nature of the Fellowship of Humanity and distinguish their brand of humanism from that associated with, for example, Christian humanism.
[edit] Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia
Another case alluded to in the Torcaso v. Watkins footnote, and said by some to have established secular humanism as a religion under the law, is the 1957 tax case of Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia, 249 F.2d 127 (D.C. Cir. 1957). The Washington Ethical Society functions much like a church, but regards itself as a non-theistic religious institution, honoring the importance of ethical living without mandating a belief in a supernatural origin for ethics. The case involved denial of the Society's application for tax exemption as a religious organization. The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the Tax Court's ruling, defined the Society as a religious organization, and granted its tax exemption. The Society terms its practice Ethical Culture. Though Ethical Culture is based on a humanist philosophy, it is regarded by some as a type of religious humanism. Hence, it would seem most accurate to say that this case affirmed that a religion need not be theistic to qualify as a religion under the law, rather than asserting that it established generic secular humanism as a religion.
In the cases of both the Fellowship of Humanity and the Washington Ethical Society, the court decisions turned not so much on the particular beliefs of practitioners as on the function and form of the practice being similar to the function and form of the practices in other religious institutions.
[edit] Peloza v. Capistrano School District
The implication in Justice Black's footnote that Secular Humanism is a religion has been seized upon by religious opponents of the teaching of evolution, who have made the argument that teaching evolution amounts to teaching a religious idea. The claim that Secular Humanism could be considered a religion for legal purposes was examined by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Peloza v. Capistrano School District, 37 F.3d 517 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1173 (1995). In this case, a science teacher argued that, by requiring him to teach evolution, his school district was forcing him to teach the "religion" of Secular Humanism. The Court responded, "We reject this claim because neither the Supreme Court, nor this circuit, has ever held that evolutionism or Secular Humanism are 'religions' for Establishment Clause purposes." The Supreme Court refused to review the case.
The decision in a subsequent case, Kalka v. Hawk et al., offered this commentary:[37]
- The Court's statement in Torcaso does not stand for the proposition that humanism, no matter in what form and no matter how practiced, amounts to a religion under the First Amendment. The Court offered no test for determining what system of beliefs qualified as a "religion" under the First Amendment. The most one may read into the Torcaso footnote is the idea that a particular non-theistic group calling itself the "Fellowship of Humanity" qualified as a religious organization under California law.
Some religious groups argue that Secular Humanism—and, by association, secularism—have a religion-like legal status despite the separation of church and state, that secularism in government and in the schools constitutes state favoritism towards a particular religion (namely, the denial of theism), and a double standard is used in granting protections to these groups. The U.S. courts, however, have consistently rejected this interpretation.
Decisions about tax status have been based on whether an organization functions like a church. On the other hand, Establishment Clause cases turn on whether the ideas or symbols involved are inherently religious. An organization can function like a church while advocating beliefs that are not necessarily inherently religious. Author Marci Hamilton has pointed out: "Moreover, the debate is not between secularists and the religious. The debate is believers and non-believers on the one side debating believers and non-believers on the other side. You've got citizens who are...of faith who believe in the separation of church and state and you have a set of believers who do not believe in the separation of church and state."[38]
In a mockery of an Alabama judge's reference to Secular Humanism as a religion, the musician Frank Zappa, who was also a free speech advocate, established the "Church of American Secular Humanism." The fact that the initials of the organization formed the acronym "CASH" was part of the joke. In 1981, the humorous columnist Art Buchwald wrote a piece entitled, "Secular Humanists: Threat or Menace?" In it, he poked fun at alarm about Secular Humanism.[39]
There are numerous Humanist Manifestos and Declarations, including the following:
- ^ See "Unemployed at service: church and the world", The Guardian, 25 May 1935, p.18: citing the comments of Rev. W.G. Peck, rector of St. John the Baptist, Hulme Manchester, concerning "The modern age of secular humanism". Guardian and Observer Digital Archive
- ^ "Free Church ministers in Anglican pulpits. Dr Temple's call: the South India Scheme." The Guardian, 26 May 1943, p.6 Guardian and Observer Digital Archive
- ^ See Mouat, Kit (1972) An Introduction to Secular Humanism. Haywards Heath: Charles Clarke Ltd. Also, The Freethinker began to use the phrase "secular humanist monthly" on its front page masthead.
- ^ a b "What Is Secular Humanism?". Council for Secular Humanism. http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=what.
- ^ Humanism Unmodified By Edd Doerr. Published in the Humanist (November/December 2002)
- ^ "IHEU's Bylaws". International Humanist and Ethical Union. http://www.iheu.org/bylaws. Retrieved 2008-07-05.
- ^ "The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles". Secular Humanism . org. The Council for Secular Humanism. http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?page=affirmations§ion=main. Retrieved 2012-05-28.
- ^ the Council for Secular Humanism (1980). "A Secular Humanist Declaration". the Council for Secular Humanism. http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration. Retrieved 27 November 2008.
- ^ "– HUMANISM AND ITS ASPIRATIONS- Humanist Manifesto III, a successor to the Humanist Manifesto of 1933*". Americanhumanist.org. http://www.americanhumanist.org/3/HumandItsAspirations.php. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ Holyoake, G.J. (1896). The Origin and Nature of Secularism. London: Watts & Co., p.50.
- ^ "Secularism 101: Defining Secularism: Origins with George Jacob Holyoake". Atheism.about.com. 2 September 2011. http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_sec_def.htm. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "Islamic political philosophy: Al-Farabi, Avicenna, Averroes". Fordham.edu. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/arab-y67s11.html. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ Walter, Nicolas (1997). Humanism: what's in the word? London: RPA/BHA/Secular Society Ltd, p.43.
- ^ "Text of Humanist Manifesto I". Americanhumanist.org. http://www.americanhumanist.org/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_I. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "British Humanist Association: History". Humanism.org.uk. http://www.humanism.org.uk/about/history. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "American humanist association – Publications – Chapter eight: The Development of Organization". Americanhumanist.org. http://www.americanhumanist.org/what_we_do/publications/Humanism_as_the_Next_Step/Chapter_8:_The_Development_of_Organization. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "India humanist". India.humanists.net. 25 June 1997. http://india.humanists.net. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "Census 2001 – Ethnicity and religion in England and Wales". Statistics.gov.uk. 27 March 2011. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/profiles/commentaries/ethnicity.asp#religion. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION Australian Bureau of Statistics
- ^ RELP Religious Affiliation – 1st Release Australian Bureau of Statistics
- ^ "Top Twenty Religions in the United States, 2001 (self-identification, ARIS)". Adherents.com. http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "Statistics Canada – Population by religion, by province and territory (2001 Census)". 0.statcan.ca. 25 January 2005. http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo30a.htm. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "General Register Office for Scotland – Analysis of Religion in the 2001 Census". Gro-scotland.gov.uk. 28 February 2005. http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/press/news2005/analysis-of-religion-in-the-2001-census.html. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ Human-Etisk Forbund – The Norwegian Humanist Association[dead link]
- ^ Statistics Norway – Members of religious1 and philosophical2 communities outside the Church of Norway. 1990–2004. Numbers and per cent[dead link]
- ^ American humanist association[dead link]
- ^ International Humanist and Ethical Union. "''IHEU and EHF agree revised protocol'', 24 February 2009". Iheu.org. http://www.iheu.org/iheu-and-ehf-agree-revised-protocol. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ Randall Balmer, Encyclopedia of Evangelicalism 2002 p. 516
- ^ Christopher P. Toumey, "Evolution and secular humanism," Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Summer 1993, Vol. 61 Issue 2, pp 275–301
- ^ "IslamWay Radio". English.islamway.com. http://english.islamway.com/bindex.php?section=lessons&lesson_id=399&scholar_id=38. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ a b "A Secular Humanist Declaration". Secularhumanism.org. 29 July 2005. http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration#morals. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ "Morality Requires God ... or Does It? by Theodore Schick, Jr". Secularhumanism.org. 29 July 2005. http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=schick_17_3. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- ^ a b c Council for Secular Humanism – "Religious and Secular Humanism: What's the difference?"
- ^ Bloch, Jon P. (2006). The Everything Health Guide To Adult Bipolar Disorder: Reassuring Advice to Help You Cope (Google eBook). Everything Series. Avon, MA: Adams Media of F+W Publications. p. 165. ISBN 1-59337-585-9. http://books.google.ca/books?id=mbYD87izKHYC&pg=PA165&dq=%22secular+humanism%22,+%22justice+for+all%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pXjDT7nsJseg6QGK_dzbCg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22secular%20humanism%22%2C%20%22justice%20for%20all%22&f=false.
- ^ "A humanist discussion of… RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS AND CEREMONIES"[dead link]
- ^ Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal.App.2d 673, 315 P.2d 394 (1957).
- ^ a b Ben Kalka v Kathleen Hawk, et al. (US D.C. Appeals No. 98-5485, 2000)
- ^ Point of Inquiry podcast (17:44), 3 February 2006.
- ^ "Secular Humanists: threat or menace, reprinted in ''Williamette Freethinker'', May 1998" (PDF). http://corvallissecular.org/newsletter/1998/wf1998_05.pdf. Retrieved 13 November 2011.
- Bullock, Alan. The Humanist Tradition in the West (1985), by a leading historian.
- Friess, Horace L. Felix Adler and Ethical Culture (1981).
- Pfeffer, Leo. "The 'Religion' of Secular Humanism," Journal of Church and State, Summer 1987, Vol. 29 Issue 3, pp 495–507
- Radest, Howard B. The Devil and Secular Humanism: The Children of the Enlightenment (1990) online edition a favorable account
- Toumey, Christopher P. "Evolution and secular humanism," Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Summer 1993, Vol. 61 Issue 2, pp 275–301, focused on fundamentalist attacks
- Adler, Felix. An Ethical Philosophy of Life (1918).
- Ericson, Edward L. The Humanist Way 1988.
- Frankel, Charles. The Case for Modern Man (1956).
- Hook, Sidney. Out of Step: An Unquiet Life in the 20th century (1987).
- Huxley, Julian. Essay of a Humanist (1964).
- Russell, Bertrand. Why I Am Not a Christian (1957).
- ThinkHumanism
- SecularSites
- "Secular Humanism" from Project Worldview
- The Humanist Chaplaincy at Harvard
- Humanism With A Capital H by Harvey Lebrun of the American Humanist Association
- Humanism is Eight Letters, No More Endorsed by Harold Blackham, Levi Fragell, Corliss Lamont, Harry Stopes-Roe and Rob Tielman of the IHEU
- Human Rights Brief No. 3 Assessment of international law pertaining to freedom of religion and belief from Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.
- International Humanist and Ethical Youth Organisation
- Romanian Association Solidarity for Freedom of Conscience – Romanian/ English
- HUMANISM: Why, What, and What For, In 882 Words (1996)
- 10 Points of Humanism: A Definition from The Philosophy of Humanism by Corliss Lamont
- The History and Philosophy of Humanism – Speech given by Steven D. Schafersman in Oxford, Ohio (24 September 1995)
- Australian Bureau of Statistics 1996 Census Dictionary – Religion category
- Religion, 2001 census, Canada
-Zanaq.png){kind=small}
