Humanist Association of Toronto
Home | Events | Contact | Constitution | Membership| Letter Writing
Message Board | Newsletter | Members | Library | Ceremonies | Links
Message Board | Newsletter | Members | Library | Ceremonies | Links
|
|
|
Humanist Association of Toronto |
Home | Events | Contact | Constitution | Membership| Letter Writing Message Board | Newsletter | Members | Library | Ceremonies | Links |
|
| Imagine there's no heaven |
| Michael Schulman |
| National Post Thursday, April 07, 2005 |
| The enormous media attention surrounding the death of Pope John Paul II caps a period during which religious discourse has peaked in our society. Same-sex marriage, stem-cell research, legalization of marijuana, assisted suicide: Increasingly, it seems, courts and legislatures in Canada and the United States are being asked to render judgment on "moral" or "ethical" issues. The agonizing case of Terri Schiavo in the U.S. is only the latest to make the headlines. And, as in the past with such issues as Sunday shopping, access to contraception and abortion, many of those representing "traditional values" -- particularly the Christian right -- have equated their notion of what is good with that endorsed by the Bible or other religious sources. From the perspective of Canada's growing secular humanist community, those voices ring hollow. Opponents of same-sex marriage often quote a passage from Leviticus to prove that homosexuality is evil in the eyes of God. Yet they never quote scripture when it comes to God authorizing the mass murder of innocents (Joshua 10:40), slavery (Leviticus 25:44-46), subjugation of women (I Peter 3:1) or the death penalty for such people as witches (Exodus 22:18), those who curse their parents (Exodus 21:17), utter words of blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16) or break the Sabbath (Exodus 31:14). Despite their inconsistency in applying the dictates of scripture, religious believers are convinced the rules of moral behaviour are God-given, and that atheists and agnostics must, by definition, lack moral grounding. "If you don't believe in God, you don't believe in anything," the saying goes. Or, as Dostoyevsky wrote, "If there is no God, then everything is permitted." We secular humanists are used to being confronted by such accusations. In response, Dr. Robert Buckman, president of the Humanist Association of Canada, has written a book (to which I contributed) titled Can We Be Good Without God? Our answer to that question is, of course, "Yes." We also sometimes ask, only partly in jest, "Can you be good with God?" -- because, for all the good intentions behind religious faiths, no human construct has proved more divisive. From the ancient crusades to today's suicide bombings in Iraq and Israel, the pages of history books and today's newspapers are stained with the blood of innumerable atrocities committed in the name of one god or another, often with the expressed approval of the highest religious authorities. Unlike religious believers, convinced that theirs is the exclusive version of truth, we humanists do not base our concept of good conduct on divine authority or scriptural passages, selectively applied or ignored. Rather, we recognize that rules of human behaviour are the result of millions of years of evolutionary hard-wiring in the brains of animals and ourselves -- instincts for co-operation and affection, as well as selfishness and aggression. Zoologists have documented evidence of kindness, honesty and compassion in other mammals, along with acts of violence and hostility. Our impulses to be both "good" and "bad" are the result of natural selection, passed on from generation to generation, from species to species. Acts of violence and destruction may have short-term benefits to a given individual or group, but violence is often reciprocated and therefore a threat to long-term survival. "Good" behaviours have proven much more likely to guarantee one's own survival, the survival of one's family, friends and community and the human species as a whole. It is not surprising, then, that every human culture has a similar basic rule for goodness -- what is referred to as reciprocal altruism or, more commonly, "the golden rule." (There are two versions: "Treat others as you wish to be treated" and "Don't treat others in ways you don't wish to be treated.") We humanists heartily endorse this principle, but see no need to invoke a higher power to prove its truth. In rejecting religious dogmas, humanists reject easy answers to ethical dilemmas. We are, however, deeply concerned with the welfare of individuals and the human condition as a whole. The Declaration of Principles of the Humanist Association of Toronto states that "ethical decisions should be made in the context of real people, real situations, real human needs and aspirations and the consideration of real consequences. Humanism affirms the dignity of every person and the right of the individual to the greatest possible freedom compatible with the rights of others." It is no accident, I think, that with increasing public education, knowledge of science and awareness of the variety of contradictory religious beliefs, the proportion of those reporting "no religion" in the Canadian census has grown from 7% in 1981 and 12% in 1991 to over 16% in 2001, making the "non-religious" the second-largest belief community in Canada after Christians, with more non-religious people than all the Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists in Canada combined. Many of us, moreover, have been on the forefront in the fight for social justice in Canada. Our growing ranks are living proof that you can be good without God. Michael Schulman is spokesperson of the Humanist Association of Toronto, an independent, non-profit charitable organization that promotes secular humanism and the separation of church and state. |
|
