Most of you that know me will know that my religious persuasion lies about as far into atheist as you can get. I find the concept of a god absurd, I see the need for one as unnecessary, I find religion oppressive and damaging and see faith in higher beings as merely an evolutionary throwback.
So I’m an atheist, but many avoid the term atheist for reasons that I quite determine. Atheist apparently has negative connotations or other preconceptions that means people prefer the term ‘humanist.’
I however, do not.
There are two main reasons why I generally oppose the term humanist. The first reason is that I have a general opposition to organised religion, and humanist the term has no association to a group, all the major groups refer to themselves as the ‘[Insert Country] Humanist Association.’
And why do I oppose the groups? Because they tie views to all its members which may not be shared by others. I’ll get to the points in a second, but I do not wish to have the views of every other atheist automatically expected to be the same as mine.
The second is the almost militant approach of these humanist societies. I obviously expect not to be discriminated against because of my religious views but I don’t ever notice any real discrimination. I know there is an issue with an awkward sub-part of the marriage licenses that seem to give some ‘higher’ ranking to marriages certified in a civil way. This is stupid, and I will bring it up in debates to educate the point, but beyond that I know of no other discrimination.
The organisation also trains people to offer ‘humanist’ naming ceremonies, marriages and funerals. In my opinion this is just profiteering and not at all my style.
I’ll stop ranting for I become completely incoherent but I hope this has explained my view on the humanist movement.