As secular humanists, we live in this world here and now, not in an imaginary world beyond our lives. This is our place, and it can only be better if we take responsibility for it. The Council for Secular Humanism and the Center for Inquiry are committed to a set of humanist ethical values, many of which can be fulfilled only by social and political action for which we need to take responsibility.
These take many forms, both private and public. Private responsibility includes acting with compassion and consideration in family and professional life. Public responsibility is found in many forms and at many levels. The basic public responsibility is voting, which involves not only going to the polls but also knowing about the intentions of candidates, their values, and background. Other public responsibilities include service on juries when called and attendance at meetings when important issues are discussed.
One public responsibility that, so far, secular humanists have not taken up in sufficient numbers is running for public office. American democracy is built on a hierarchy of public offices, from membership in neighborhood commissions through school boards, councils, county commissions, state legislatures, and elected judicial positions to national office in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and, yes, the presidency itself. All these and more are open to qualified people. But very few are occupied by self-proclaimed secular humanists.
This may produce a horrified response: are secular humanists going to ally themselves with the Democrats or Republicans or the Libertarian, Independent, or Green parties? By no means. Secular humanists may be Left or Right, conservative or liberal, libertarians or social democrats: our secular worldviews do not ally us with a single party. What distinguishes secular humanists is our positive celebration of life in this world, our spirit of inquiry that values most the exercise of reason on scientifically defensible evidence. If secular humanists using their reason find that the facts about a certain social situation lead to the conclusion that the Republican solution is most congenial, then they should embrace that solution; they should act similarly in the case of a Democratic platform.
What is important is that we acknowledge our secular humanism as a strength and should not feel compelled to assume a belief we do not subscribe to. It has been said that no one could be elected president as an atheist. Atheism is a negative term, almost aggressive, and it is interpreted as an attack on belief in God, which etymologically it is. While secular humanism implies nontheism, it is nonetheless a profoundly positive term, affirming human reason and intelligence. We don’t know whether a secular humanist could be elected president, but we could begin to find out by supporting secular humanist candidates for school boards and local councils.
Now is the right time to introduce secular humanism into the political arena, because major religions are losing membership to what a recent survey calls “the unaffiliated.” The Pew Forum of Religion and Public Life says that 16.1 percent of Americans are religiously unaffiliated—double the percentage who report being unaffiliated with a religion as children. Even more important, the unaffiliated are young: 31 percent are under thirty years of age and 71 percent are under fifty years of age. The country is moving away from religion, and many of the 16.1 percent could be persuaded that secular humanism is a viable alternative.
But many of them do not know what secular humanism is and are often unaware that their neighbor or coworker may be a secular humanist. They would know if their neighbor or coworker ran for local office as a secular humanist on a platform that met their needs. Running for office—any office, from a seat on the school board to Congress—requires meeting people, shaking their hands, exchanging views. Constituents would soon discover that secular humanists subscribe to the same moral code as everyone else. A secular humanist running for office embodies what secular humanism means. Just talking to potential voters would significantly reduce the fear of those who believe that morality must be supported by religion and increase the understanding that secular humanism does not threaten American values—in fact, it strengthens them.
That’s one argument for getting involved in public life as an office seeker. Another is the fact that more than 16 percent of the population is quite sufficient to influence political decisions. We haven’t explored its potential as a political group, able to not only support secular humanist values but also to spread news of them to others susceptible to our message. For example, we advocate making public policy decisions on the basis of reason and scientific evidence. We do not object to anyone’s religious beliefs but insist that legislators should not base political decisions on faith. A school-board member may believe in the literal truth of the biblical story of human origins but has no right to impose that belief on the choice of biology textbooks, because it is not supported by scientific evidence. The confusion of private belief and public policy is rife in our government at all levels: we need to combat the confusion by appealing to the unaffiliated 16.1 percent through blogs, Web sites, editorials, letters to the editor, and explicit support for all office holders and seekers who will speak out against it.
Secular humanists must step out of our comfortable existence. Our humanism must be more than an intellectual haven for freethinkers; more of us should become involved in political life. We need to organize campaigns for any office that is open at any level. We will be defeated over and over again, but our voice will be heard, and eventually we will win. The future of humankind depends on the application of science, reason, and humanist values to the huge problems—perhaps even our annihilation as a species—facing us. We cannot retreat from the challenge. So step up and run for public office. And call on others to help you run your campaign. Together we will create a seat at the table and a voice that is heeded, and so fulfill our public responsibility.
We wish to make it absolutely clear that by these statements we are not supporting any specific candidate; we’re merely stating that Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Jews run for office and are eventually identified as such. We simply suggest that secular humanists likewise enter into the political arena, whatever party they may align with, and identify themselves as secular humanists. To say this does not compromise any organization’s 501(c)(3) tax exemption, for we are not endorsing specific political candidates, only suggesting that the voices of secularists and humanists be heard.
Paul Kurtz is professor emeritus of philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo, the chair of the Center for Inquiry and the Council for Secular Humanism, and editor in chief of Free Inquiry. Tom Flynn is editor of Free Inquiry. Toni Van Pelt is executive director of the Center for Inquiry/Washington, D.C., Office of Public Policy. Ruth Mitchell, PhD, is on the staff of the Center’s Office of Public Policy.
CFI SUMMIT
OCTOBER 24-27 2013
TACOMA, WASHINGTON
Joint Conference of the Council for Secular Humanism, Center for Inquiry, and Committee for Skeptical Inquiry
The transnational secular humanist magazine
Renew your FREE INQUIRY subscription