"A Progressive Society Being Good Without gods" and Other Nonsense...

The American Humanist Association is giving a coveted (really?) humanist award to 16-year-old Jessica Ahlquist this year at the 71st Annual AMA Conference.

Ahlquist is the young woman leading a charge to have a prayer mural removed in her high school as well as advocating the removal World War I and II memorial crosses. Wow....um, what an achievement.

Not to be outdone though are other award recipients such as Gloria Steinem who will receive a "Humanist of the Year" award and another teenaged young man who will receive a "Freedom From Religion" award.

Now, I could be wrong here, but it seems to me that the humanist movement wears a convenient cover of people being nice to other people without the "interference" of God. Apparently the idea of "inevitable progress" is something they firmly grasp onto.

But if we can look a bit more closely, we see that this is an empty facade. For example, the "Humanist of the Year" Steinem, published a picture of her smiling self wearing a t-shirt that reads, "I had an abortion" and she is shaping her hands into a triangle-- commonly manifested as a masonic gesture. This, of course, would make sense because free-masons believe in the "triumph" of the human person without God. (as if there is such a thing)

Looking at Steinem's T-shirt, which she seems to proudly wear, we see that she is proclaiming her deed of murder and seems to have no qualms about it. Interesting. I thought humanists were promoting the triumph of the human person? Well maybe just not little people....or inconvenient people....or people that reveal the call of eternal beatitude...hmm. What kind of "triumph" is that?

But this is nothing new. This "progressive" idea has been around for quite some time. No one is on the cutting edge of new thought or new actions here. The rejection of God has been around since Lucifer waged a losing battle. Been there, done that. 

The human heart is difficult to understand and navigate. Within all of us, we bear light and darkness, goodness and sin. Many times we do not understand why we do what we do and we often think we are pursuing a good that actually turns out to be poison.

Humanism and religious fanaticism are both untrue but at opposite ends of the spectrum. Neither the removal of God nor the self-righteous adherence to rules will save us or bring peace. It's only when we encounter the living God-- Jesus, the Word made Flesh, that we receive life and light. Jesus is not figment of our imagination- we cannot make Him into our likeness. He is not a pacifistic, permissive persona nor is he a condemning, fear-mongering deity. Jesus is who He is and we must come to know Him- in the words He speaks, in the way He lives and what He has passed on to us throughout the centuries of time.

Denying God is not living on the edge or courageous. In the end, it's just a waste of time...


Billy Jack said…
You know sister, its nice when people are nice. As a former humanist myself I used to applaud myself for my firmly held belief that humans were innately good and should be treated compassionately (I liked to distinguish myself from other secularists who are basically cynical about human nature or worse, those who see as lacking any nature...that people are basically elaborate machines). Today, I think faith as a kind of grace, at least it was so received in my case. So maybe some of these humanists are grace opportunites in waiting. And I am glad when some of them devote themselves sincerely to the charity of others. But unfortunately, if my own experience can be any guide, the humanists moral systems are superficial at best, and often quite contradictory. Look at Ms. Steinham who has been a symbol for so admirable a cause as women's rights, yet celebrates her role in the death of her child and the denigration of the special gift of fertility which has been the highest source feminine power since the beginning of time. And look at this young girl, who recieved the award. She won an award by rendering the faith and hopes of others as invisible. This was probably not her intention. She probably thought she was ensuring that all faiths and ideaologies are respected in the public sphere, that none could crowd the other out, but in doing so she had to eliminate all outward signs of faith. This reflects the morality of immature mind. She may want to, but can't embrace people whose beliefs she what it doesn't understand, so she decides to obliterate them. Its an unpleasant thing, but typical of the nastiness of a teenager, and should be taken with a grain of salt and understanding. But it is truly sad that there are adults in this Humanist organization, who find this type of youthful narcissism worthy of praise.

The problem with the morality of humanists is that when they try to set out to do what's right they end up inverting it and turning an evil into a virtue. That's because they put man's thought's and ideas before God's will. They have no faith in a power greater than themselves, therefore they lack the humilty necessary to discern right action. They are confused by this topsy turvey world of their own invention, treating humilty as a weakness, and self involement as an ideal condition. Thus sincerely held religious beliefs get attacked in the public square and the murder of the unborn are celebrated as symbols of liberty and humanism.
Anonymous said…
umm, not all humanists are pro-abortion. generalizing much?

Popular posts from this blog

Fr. Santan Pinto, SOLT 1948-2011

Pilgrimage To Poland