I think spiritual or religious have no real differentiation when it comes to comparing to
secular humanist way of living.
Not exact matches
Evolution is on the
way out, and intense religionists (
secular humanists) such as Bill have no tenable hold on the realities of our existence.
As the first
Humanist Chaplain at USC, he is committed to developing a community that offers regular inspiration, pastoral care, supportive fellowship and service opportunities to students, faculty, staff members and local families and individuals exploring or actively pursuing
secular goodness as a
way of life.
In his first encyclical, issued while the Council was still finding its
way, Paul VI called for a Church in dialogue with other churches, with other religions, and with
secular humanists, but called attention to the virtual impossibility of dialogue with atheistic communism.
Rett, you are missing a key point about those you appear to be railing against: many of them are
secular (because they have no religion to follow) and
humanist (because everyone is human and should be treated that
way).
Interestingly enough, every time I corner a fanatic with scientific facts which they can not argue or disprove, they either dismiss me as «anti-God» and a «
secular humanist» or they start spouting reams of misapplied and irrelevant «scripture» at me, like good little sheeple and like that will in any
way, shape or form prove anything... Which just proves to me that common sense and actual reason doesn't come into it.
And the
secular humanist stuff is good (like the different versions of the «manifesto» Matt over-relied on), but it isn't perfect, and it isn't fully developed or the «only»
way.