FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

Here you will find all of the most common questions that we get asked.

Some questions believers might ask

1. Humanists are often asked. But how do you tell good from bad if you don't believe In God? How do you bring up children to know right from wrong?”

All societies, even in the animal world, rely on cooperation with others. The individual who acts against the interests of his fellows may gain a temporary advantage, but when others discover the wrong doing they are likely to react against the individual or at the very least deny him the benefits of further cooperation.
Humanists base their own moral decisions on facts, reason, compassion and consequences for people. If we behave in an honest way - tolerant, loving, responsibly, and generous - Humanists believe this will make more people happier and more secure, therefore it is "good”. If people are mean, hurtful, greedy, or inconsiderate, then this is “bad” because it makes people unhappy.

2. Do you believe in the Ten Commandments?

The Ten Commandments include rules about respect for property and family relationships, concern for honesty and the well-being of others. Humanists share these concerns.
However the Ten Commandments are not an efficient solution for coping with disrespect and dishonesty in a modern Western society without traditions of religious indoctrination. They were formulated more than 2500 years ago, and Humanists regard them as folk wisdom reflecting the history of the tribal society in which they originated.
Humanists do respect legal authorities (though not the "authority" of the Churches, since we think this is based on false claims) and encourage behavior deferential to them. On the personal, behavioral level, Humanists choose their own rules based on a thoughtful amalgam of self-interest and concern for others.

3. Do Humanists withdraw their children from religious lessons?

Some do, but most feel their children will feel isolated if they are withdrawn from lessons. Humanists are happy to have their children learn about a variety of religions. However, they object to the teaching of one particular religion as being the only true way,or as being factual the same way as science and geography. They object strongly to children being expected to worship a god they may not believe in. Humanists want humanistic ethics to be included in the school syllabus.

Children need understanding of moral issues and should not be left to think that religion is the only source of moral guidance.

4. Is sex education important?

Indeed it is. Children's questions should be answered
honestly all the time, and particularly those about sex, since it can be a very wonderful part of our lives.
Nowadays biased ideas about sex are directed at school leavers from many sources -but decisions involving sex should be made (as should decisions not involving sex) from a standpoint of factual knowledge, and not in the darkness of ignorance.

Therefore Humanists think we should learn about our own bodies and about sex, love, pregnancy, contraception, abortion, venereal disease and psychology. Sex education should be part of a more general Human Relations course.

5. How do Humanists feel about homosexuals and lesbians?

Love, security, happiness, are important things to be respected. Humanists accept a relationship in which two people of the same sex behave toward each other in a loving and considerate way.

6. If you don't think sex before marriage is wrong, what about illegitimate babies?

Happiness and love and security for babies is important, because babies will grow into unique, valuable, individual people. Efficient methods of contraception have made it possible for people to explore life deeply with another person without necessarily parenting children. Babies should only be planned when you are sure you can give them a loving and secure upbringing.

7. What is the purpose of life and the point of living?

Humanists see the religious idea of “life having a purpose” as nonsensical - it begs the question of what gives that purpose.
We choose our own "purposes" in life; we choose our own activities. For some people, creating a happy family life may be more important than anything else. For others it may be music, study for increased knowledge, playing sport or racing pigeons, writing or painting, or swimming, or climbing.
Humanists hope for fairer societies throughout the world, so that more people may choose satisfying ways of life. At present, political oppression and lack of basic necessities mean that many people in the world have little freedom of choice.

8. If you don't believe in God, what stops you from committing crimes?
Basically, identification with other people and life-forms. Humanists feels strongly that they are one with the whole human race. Humanist self-respect depends on a clear conception of our place in the Universe. We take pride in the beauty and complexity of life because we are part of it.

We are guided also by practicality and common sense. Humanists want to live in a community where they have as much freedom as possible: not in fear of constant danger. So they agree to follow certain rules about respect for life and property. In fact they follow the Silver Rule as expressed by the great philosophers.
Morality, for Humanists, has a social basis - not a supernatural one.

9. When you hear music which moves you deeply, or read great poetry, don't you feel there is some spiritual power which Is more than human?

No, not more than human. Music, poetry, and art -the beauty of nature, too- can arouse intense emotions of great significance to us. But these special experiences, however rare and valuable they may be, are as human as any other experience.

10. How does Humanism help you to cope with the death of someone you love? Do you believe in life after death?

Humanists believe death is inevitable and final, and should be as painless and dignified as possible. When someone we love dies, it is natural, a part of being human, to grieve over their death.

Humanists take comfort from the sympathy and fellowship of their friends. They do not hope for Heaven, but think it important to talk about and remember events in the dead person's lifetime to keep his/her memory alive.

11. Do you really think that a rational scientific approach Is sufficient to solve the problems of mankind?

Not alone, but it offers the best approach for making wise decisions, It is self-correcting: we learn from our mistakes, from experience.
We also need to cultivate the social bonding that comes from being a self-directed part of a just and loving community.
Good behaviour is motivated by feelings of responsibility and caring.

12. Do Humanists support choice for voluntary euthanasia?

Humanists believe that people have the right to end their own lives when they wish. They believe that death is final and inevitable, but nevertheless can be dignified, peaceful and painless with the aid of modern drugs.
Humanists hope that their own deaths will not be unduly prolonged and painful, causing needless distress to those who care for them. Some go to the trouble to discuss this with doctors, friends and relatives.
Some Voluntary Euthanasia Societies have forms that can be signed which leave no doubt whatever of the person's wishes about his or her last days. The NSW Voluntary Euthanasia Society, for example, has the "Advance Health Care Directive".

13. Do Humanists support choice for abortion?

Yes, but we do consider it as something which is necessary - not something to be encouraged.
We note that more than half of abortions performed in Australia are the result of a failed attempt at contraception, and that however risky abortions are, childbirth itself is still more risky. There will probably always be a certain number of unplanned pregnancies.
The women concerned should have an informed choice of either early abortion, adoption, or keeping the baby, and abortion services should be available if that is their choice.

14. Do Humanists believe in sleeping around?

Humanists do not advocate sleeping around, as casual sexual relationships all too often show lack of concern and lead to people getting hurt.
Humanists believe that love is something we share with one another, sometimes with passion but always with responsibility and caring.
Love for one another and respect for one another go together.

It is possible for casual sexual relationships to have an element of concern, and we do endorse everyone's right to decide for themselves; but we do not suggest it for everyone.

15. Isn't it rather hard work always having to make up your own mind?

Yes, it is hard to think out the answers to your own problems, instead of just obeying a set of rules or commandments. But we believe in a world which is changing fast, and any set of hard-and-fast rules may soon get out of date, it is a good idea to get into the habit of making our own decisions.

Humanist societies assist members in discussing how to solve their own problems by talking to people who believe in operating without the crutch of religious ideas.

In fact, making up your own mind can be rewarding and satisfying in its own way – like steering a ship, being aware of the weather, and knowing that you are doing the steering in response to the situation around you.

16. But I still don't see the point in Humanism: what's the end product?

Freer, happier people. A more rational, secure and understandable world. Humanism is a flexible philosophy, always evolving to meet new challenges. It's a method of living, a way of using reason and concern to ensure a better life.

17. Crime and punishment:

The Humanist endeavour is to reduce crime through helping create a just society where there is full employment, no poverty, adequate housing and good, caring education. Punishment is only valid as a means of deterring unwanted behaviour.

The focus in treatment of criminals should be rehabilitation. The obligation of criminals to make restitution for harm caused should, where practicable, be part of this rehabilitation.

10. Questions from Agnostics and non-believers

1. Is progress such a worthwhile thing ? Haven't we had enough problems through technology ?

Technology is frequently put to use in a way which is not controlled through the democratic process. The misuse of technology is a problem with the way in which our democracy works, rather than a lack of input from Christian values.

Technology offers the best approach for making wise decisions. Not by itself. However, it is self-correcting: we learn from our mistakes, from experience. We also need to cultivate the social bonding that comes from being a self-directed part of a just and loving community. Good behaviour is motivated by feelings of responsibility and caring.

Technology can be abused in different ways. Keeping someone alive who will never recover, against the wishes of all loved ones is the result of the blind application of so-called “religious values”.

Adhering to religious dogma and fantasy prevents a rational approach to problems and causes more suffering and anguish.

Yes, technology must be controlled, through effective secular ethical input. Properly harnessed, however, technology is a force for good which can improve our lives.

2. Even if we are not believers, are not religious schools a good way of instilling positive values into children ?

Goverments can take advantage of this ambiguity about "values" in order to both criticise public schools and shore up their support base – but nobody seems to know exactly what those values are.

Rather than calling them values, things such as discipline, self-restraint and respect for the law should be considered as skills. And there is no reason why they cannot be taught at public, secular schools.

It is worth noting that for all the journalistic sensationalism, bullying has been in decline in public schools, and on the ascendancy in private schools, perhaps because parents are concerned the private schools will sue them if they make their complaints public. Rather than embracing “values”, this increase in bullying in private schools has turned some parents of private schools students towards home schooling.

3. What about animals ? Humanism seems human-centric.

Humanism's origin was to endorse the freedom and autonomy of individual humans as against needing any oversight from supposed Gods. Humanism does in fact endorse the positive aspects of sentient beings – it is not intended to license any superiority over animals.

Peter Singer and other philosophers operating from a humanist viewpoint emphasise what we have in common with animals, and ask that we do not distinguish ourselves from animals through vacuous and arbitrary distinctions which have no philosophical grounding.

4. Weren't Stalin's and Hitler's Regimes Atheist ?

It is important to recognise that Hitler did profess faith at times, and had a concordant with the Vatican. Further, Hitler claimed that non-scientific racist ideas were scientific, something that could not happen in an open society with open debate.

Stalin marginalised Nikolai Vavilov and embraced the anti-evolutionary ideas of Trofim Lysenko, resulting in famine and starvation (some also note the impact of forced collectivisation of farms). The rest of the world was embracing Darwin's evolutionary theory, and if we had a tolerant open society in Russia, Darwin's ideas would have been embraced.

Stalin and Hitler's regimes did not rely on atheism as their driving force – their own ideology was not humanistic at all. In fact, Stalin drew inspiration from the power and ceremony of the Russian Orthodox Church which is unsurprising since he was originally trained in in the priesthood.

Any set of ideas can be abused by demagogic politicians.

Believers trying to claim a connection between non-belief and totalitarian regimes like to ignore the fact that for many centuries people lived in fear of the Catholic Church's Inquisition. They ignore the burning of heretics which was commonplace in many parts of Europe.
They also ignore the terrible wars between Christianity and Islam.

The suffering and deaths involved in these were directly due to religious reasons.

Referring to more recent times they like to ignore the horrors of Fascism under Francisco Franco in Spain and the murderous regime of Augusto Pinochet in Chile.
Both of these men were darlings of the Catholic Church.
Both took communion throughout their lives.
Both were anointed by priests with "holy oils" when they were on their deathbeds.

There have not been any such regimes which incorporated a secular society with an atheist majority and the free expression of ideas, while we are aware of several based on religious or other dogma.
Equally, there have been relatively progressive governments which have looked to religion for inspiration, though they have not embraced it as a dogma.

Dogma, rather than traditional religion, is the real concern. Hitlerism, Stalinism and Maoism are often considered State religions.