I must say as an ex member of the Humanists UK I find this startling to say the least. I couldn't find any response from the Humanist Twitter feed on the Cass Review (I may have missed it). I would have hoped that at the very least there would be some acknowledgement of it?
The embarrassment at getting the whole gender thing wrong must be severe indeed, if appearing ignorant of major current issues feels less embarrassing.
Things have come to such a pass that a humanist organization trying to wheedle itself out of a debate which falls right within its proper concerns is a relief. At least it isn’t going full hog into pseudoscience.
In the James Rieger edition (1974/1982) of Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein (1818), Rieger’s introduction says this about Shelley’s father William Godwin:
Of all the tracts published by the Johnson circle, none had so great or enduring an impact as Godwin’s Enquiry considering Political Justice (1793).
Godwin argued that once the mind has been cleansed of superstition, emotionalism, and respect for custom, the free and rational man will necessarily perform virtuous actions, which will be socially useful and, at the same time, personally pleasurable.
Legislatures, courts of law, monarchy, marriage, and all other forms of “positive institution” with wither away, and the wise world will enter upon an era of benevolent, self-sustaining anarchy.
This passage is my bar for humanism. For humanism to be “Good Without a God” it should be self-aware of such naïveté, and do better than things like this.
The embarrassment at getting the whole gender thing wrong must be severe indeed, if appearing ignorant of major current issues feels less embarrassing.
Gorski is claiming the Cass Report is Wrong. I assume he’s using the phony talking points being spread by its TRA deniers.
The embarrassment at getting the whole gender thing wrong must be severe indeed, if appearing ignorant of major current issues feels less embarrassing.
Things have come to such a pass that a humanist organization trying to wheedle itself out of a debate which falls right within its proper concerns is a relief. At least it isn’t going full hog into pseudoscience.
In the James Rieger edition (1974/1982) of Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein (1818), Rieger’s introduction says this about Shelley’s father William Godwin:
This passage is my bar for humanism. For humanism to be “Good Without a God” it should be self-aware of such naïveté, and do better than things like this.
[…] a comment by Dave Ricks on Looking fixedly in the other […]
tigger
Gorski is claiming the Cass Report is Wrong. I assume he’s using the phony talking points being spread by its TRA deniers.