21st Century Network - redefining humanism

reposted from: http://crosscultural.meetup.com/18/about/
Chris Street comments are in bright green;

highlights in yellow blockquotes.

Based online and in London this group attempts to redefine humanism. Seems to have a similar ethos to the 'O' Project.

Today we are living in uncertain times as war, natural disasters, famine, poverty and disease resource depletion, global warming, pollution, the effects of rampant globalisation and the fear of weapons of mass destruction all take their toll on our imagination and lives.

In such a world intolerance and chaos grows as religious fundamentalism on one hand and the excesses of globalisation on the other threaten basic human values.

21st Century Network is a movement set up to pursue the following ideas.

• To help redefine humanism so that people of all faiths and none can engage in dialogue around basic humanist principles that embrace the values of tolerance, global compassion, personal self-discovery, shared development, planetary concern and a love of community.
  
• To help understand that human values can only be pursued when we do not elevate human kind to a plane above all else in the universe but accept that we are part of a greater whole and that it is a respect for that greater whole that will ensure human survival and mutual understanding.
  
• To create a global network of people who share these views so that a world wide civic culture can develop based upon respect for tolerance as well as planetary and human diversity.
  

The activities of 21st Century Network will develop as the group grows and other groups form but some activities could be focussed on...

• Discussion between members both online and in actual meetings providing a forum for different cultures and faiths to form a common bond of understanding and tolerance.
  
• To act as a counter point to religious and secular fundamentalists who wish to impose a one-dimensional dogma on society.
  
• To develop activities and programmes that reflects the humanistic perspective of the group in relation to global survival, poverty reduction, community development and civic culture.
  
• To influence decision makers so that they champion both our principles and ideas and therefore help them become policy realities.
  
• To work with others who share our values and engage in joint discussion and activities.
  

So this is a chance to form alliances across the religious and political divide by those who believe in valuing diversity and tolerance and helping to build a global culture that is based on that.

Is Sam Harris right to reject labels like "Atheist" and "Humanist"?

reposted from: http://blog.newhumanist.org.uk/2007/10/new-humanist-poll-is-sam-harris-right.html
Chris Street comments are in bright green; highlights in blockquotes (yellow).

New Humanist poll: Is Sam Harris right to reject labels like "Atheist" and "Humanist"?

Following Sam Harris's speech to last week's Atheist Alliance International Conference in Virginia, our new opinion poll asks whether he was right to suggest that non-believers should discard the word "atheist", along with other labels such as "humanist", "secular humanist", "rationalist", "naturalist", "sceptic" and so on.

Harris argued that there is no need for the godless to define themselves by something they don't believe in, saying: "atheist is a term we do not need, in the same way that we don't need a word for someone who rejects astrology". He even goes so far as to say that using the term "atheist" could be counter-productive, running the risk of "squander[ing] the trust of people who would otherwise agree with us on specific issues." Instead of forming organised groups under these labels, Harris suggests non-believers "should not call ourselves anything. . . We should go under the radar - for the rest of our lives. And while there, we should be decent, responsible people who destroy bad ideas wherever we find them."

This stands in stark contrast to the approach taken by Richard Dawkins, particularly his US-based "Out Campaign", which encourages non-believers to "come out" and express their lack of faith by wearing t-shirts emblazoned with a giant letter "A" for "Atheist".

Let us know what you think by voting in the poll in the top right corner of this page? Do you agree with Harris in his rejection of these labels, or is it essential that atheists unite under a common label in order to take on the might of organised religion?

Once you've voted, please feel free to expand on your views by commenting on this post. If you're new to our site and blog, stay and have a browse around the main New Humanist site. There's articles from the past 8 years, and you can also sign up for a FREE trial copy.