[Morality Games]

Do I need to drag up the thread dedicated to the meaning of words? How select members stand firm that words are absolute in meaning and do not vary?

No, but your assertion 'the term does not fit well with atheists' is senseless, because the term 'humanist' and 'atheist' are often treated as interchangeable. Don't make functionless statements if you don't want people to criticize you for them.

I have never heard anyone on this forum insist words have an absolute or invariant meaning or sought to prove how, you are just determined to misunderstand their arguments that way. That's your vice, not theirs.

I'm well aware of what humanism means today, hence why it has its own associated religion.

I'm afraid not.

Every read the nice long piece called the humanist manefiesto? I might have spelled it wrong in use but please look it up, you can find it online

Manifesto. Yes, I have read it. Have you read II and III, or the Secular Humanist Declaration?

The negative I would associate stems from articles such as that. A long statement of humanity as nothing more than biological process and the duty of humanist to continue to plumb the depths of science or that road to artificially producing and modifying human biology for the betterment of humanity.

I almost think it should be illegal for people to criticize views that are more sensible (aka, more consistent with the collective knowledge of the speices) than theirs. Almost. However, I am not going to argue aesthetics with you.

Moreover, it is down to you to prove how modifying human biology to make us healthier, happier, and more intelligent is evil -- humanists have already provided their demonstrations for why it is not a bad thing, and in fact a good thing. And I expect substantial proofs that relate to tangible things, not mutterings that relate to nothing appreciable outside your mind. You know, as if were were having a real argument, one where a practical conclusion could be reached.

It's as much a religion as any other group of 5 people of more who claim a religion. I see no reason why a bunch of secularist would desire such so I can only assume their just taking advantage of tax laws for their own ill gain. Some group of people.

The particular group of humanists who filed for tax exemption had a church-style hierarchy and were affiliated with less obviously religious-in-style humanist organizations -- all groups are treated as religious on basis of this connection, even as under the public law they are not considered religions. There are many varieties of humanism, just are there are many varieties of religion, with diverse customs, but they tend to stick closer together than even different denominations of Christianity.