Calling such differences “sectarian” not only makes the point I was talking about in my essay but also is a touch derogatory.

It is okay for their to be some differences in Humanism. Unless and until we all agree 100% on everything then the different “flavors” are okay as long as one doesn’t try to stomp on the others.

Humanism is a philosophy. Anyway is free to adopt elements of the philosophy or attempt to live their lives by its precepts. Part of the problem I think we have in this movement wide discussion is that a lot of people think of and treat Humanism as if it were a sectarian alternative to religion. It isn’t. It is a philosophy.

I realize some people treat their Humanism as a religion - like the Ethical Culture society does - even though they say it is a non-theistic religion - which is their right. And that is fine, but Humanism itself, is a philosophy. That is why we have so many different types of Humanists (Secular, Jewish, Buddhist, Islamic, Christian, Religious, etc).

We need to try and not confuse the philosophy of Humanism with the various sectarian versions of the way people choose to practice it.

I got lucky and the local Humanist group I joined was secular centered but we do have some people who are religious humanists and attend the local UU church.

Hope you like the midwest in your new job.

Sometimes, like in the dead of winter when it is the 10th or 20th day of below freezing temperatures, I sometimes wish I could move to LA or somewhere warmer.

Two other quick points: the whole discussion about the “new atheism” and that the authors have been too broad in their critique of religion - at first I agreed. But, then I noticed how energizing and galvanizing these works have been. And then I remember the old conflicts in the gay rights community: should we try to “fit in” and not “offend”? Or should we be “in your face” and not care about any offense taken? In the end I’ve realized that the glbt community has needed BOTH to make changes. Both approaches have their merits and demerits, but both are needed. Maybe that needs to be accepted more in the humanist/atheist/agnostic/freethinkers/naturalist/rationalist communities (did I cover everyone with those labels :))?

Also - I don’t think of UU’s being humanist anymore although it is open to religious humanists. I think it’s more theologically pluralistic and more theists (of many stripes) are making important inroads into the organization. OTH, your friends’ experiences can easily vary given how each UU group can be idiosyncratic.