Humanist Groups and the BHA Strategy -
The position of local Humanists Groups should I think be a matter of interest to positive (anti-religious) atheists (some of whom are also humanists and secularists) because these groups are the only local manifestation and potential publicists of secular humanist organisation in Britain. Theoretically they are independent and open to all shades of secular-humanist opinion, and many affiliate to one or more of the National organisations. For historical and publicity reasons most are called Humanist Groups, a few include ‘Secular’ in the title or sub-title, and though the NSS did make an attempt this year to encourage more groups to do this, few do so.
This gives the BHA a significant advantage over other groups and individuals in asserting the promotion of the BHA version of small ‘h’ humanism that seeks to exclude the criticism of and opposition to supernatural beliefs and the malign effects of religion, and relevant political issues. Allowing only muted criticism of preaching, teaching religion in schools, and political/public practice of religion & religious privilege. It hides behind its charity status, although this is based at least in part on its supposed ‘educational role’.
This year I went from my local group, to a Humanist Groups conference. Theoretically it is organised by a loose ‘independent’ group, but most, if not all, happen to be BHA members. There is a Humanist Groups Yahoo forum and the BHA officially encourages groups to get group members to sign up with the BHA. It also supports the ‘annual’ Humanist Groups conference (if held) by publicising the event in their newsletter and helps (subsidise) them e.g. in providing refreshments and the venue, while avoiding being accused of running it, as was the case in the past. As part of the service to affiliated groups they send out copies of their large format newssheet, in which they promote humanist group’s activities and they list Humanist groups on their website.
I am no longer a member of the BHA, because through its ‘education’ policy of ‘accommodations’ that successfully reverses the only progress of the last 40 years, on religion in school – it has opened the door to supposedly ‘voluntary’ RI in schools. Not RE to any agreed syllabus, but Religious Instruction on school premises, by invited clerics - imams, priests and pastors, in the vain hope that it will encourage the religions to give up their ‘faith schools’.
From my position as an atheist secularist and secular-humanist I have seen little or no secularist or atheist input or output other than on an individual level. And it is evident (as it was, this year at the Humanist Groups event) that many humanists in the BHA are hostile and sneering towards atheism and the NSS, and any attempt to promote the essential role of positive atheism as an essential component and underpinning of humanism and secularism, is frequently called ‘extreme’ ‘aggressive’ and ‘strident’.
I think this is clearly part of a strategy to drive wedge between the NSS and anti-religious secularists and atheists that was seen a few years ago when there was an attempt to prevent the NSS from any specific commitment to a non-religious – secular – society as part of its remit. (One of the two definitions of secularism). There are also many BHA members who would like the organisations to unite – under the humanist banner – a situation that would further isolate positive atheist opinion.
BHA policy on secularism has noticeably changed recently and in 2008 they published a humanist philosophers booklet on secularism. So although many of them are still vociferously anti-NSS and anti-positive atheist, they have come round to a realisation that secularism in its narrowest sense is an important part of humanism and consistent with its recently declared policy of opposing religious privilege and state religion. However I think this strategy needs to be recognised as part of a way to influence the membership of the NSS to prevent its endorsement of the aim of a secular society opposed to political, public religion and its practices.
There has recently been an influx of keen humanists into the BHA from whom there is a lot of talk about the promotion of humanism, but few who seem willing to question the nature of the humanism that is being promoted. For the largest organisation that claims to be for non-believers not to embrace the role of positive atheism and a commitment to a secular society is, IMO a matter of considerable concern.