Jun 28, 2012 -- 8:12PM, Aka_me wrote:

Jun 28, 2012 -- 6:59PM, chevy956 wrote:

       Besides- you are a Baha'i'- why does this concern you so much, unless you are trying to continue to lie about Buddhists and atheists?

it doesn't ****ing matter what I am! how ****ing many times does that need to be ****ing repeated?

btw, does bleeping out swear words help you understand better?

my point has been explained to you, by a secular humanist... and you're still don't get it.

Fine. You might as well bugger off then. 

I have no idea what this thread is about.

Jun 28, 2012 -- 8:57PM, mainecaptain wrote:

Jun 28, 2012 -- 8:55PM, Ken wrote:

I have no idea what this thread is about.

Neither do I

I'm buggered if I know, too!

Jun 28, 2012 -- 2:55AM, Aka_me wrote:

...beautifully stated... and exactly what I've been saying.

No, it is not.

"automatic acceptance" aside, would you add that there just isn't any reason or motivation or need to embrace ANY of "those philosophies"?

Just like there is no reason to automatically embrace what some long dead megalomaniac Persian had to say.

I did not accept, automatically or not, or embrace, nor need, nor had any motivation, nor did I study anything, or change any beliefs, to be a Secular Humanist. I read some of their stuff and they agreed with me. Secular Humanism is not something to become, it's what you are.

Jun 28, 2012 -- 2:21PM, Aka_me wrote:

...what I'm talking about is the skeptic secular humanist having desire/need/intention to identify themselves as a member of a group other than Secular Humanism (take your pick: Falun Gong, Confucian, Deist, or Buddhist).

No such "need" exists. I have no "need" to call myself a Secular Humanist.

being skeptic... by definition, overrides any "need to identify" with a philosophical ideology.

Again, no such need exists.