[  WSJ article on Peter Singer, his philosophy, and his new book The Life You Can Save]

In his latest book, “The Life You Can Save,” Mr. Singer argues that failing to donate money to help the roughly 1 billion people suffering from poverty and preventable diseases is a moral offense equivalent to standing by as a child drowns because you don’t want to ruin a nice pair of shoes.

He spoke about his own ethical shortcomings and how genetic screening could allow wealthy parents to breed super children.

All good ideas, but I prefer those of Pete Seeger. He did it all by example and shared songs.

Singer just interviewed with Diane Rehm at 11:00 am, Thur. March 12, 2009
about that book.  He did very well talking about choosing
where to put your money, to help people.  Making your money
go further in the most poor places in the world, where some
resources are cheap.  But not cheap to deliver them to the
rural regions.  He made the point that people put money into
churches, some of that going to build and expand churches,
and some going to the poor, but he did not say that expanding
churches is a waste.  He mentioned some organizations that are
effective and might have been secular.  So it got me wondering
if he is secular humanistic or not.

jump_in_the_pit - 12 March 2009 10:40 PM

Singer just interviewed with Diane Rehm at 11:00 am, Thur. March 12, 2009
about that book.  He did very well talking about choosing
where to put your money, to help people.  Making your money
go further in the most poor places in the world, where some
resources are cheap.  But not cheap to deliver them to the
rural regions.  He made the point that people put money into
churches, some of that going to build and expand churches,
and some going to the poor, but he did not say that expanding
churches is a waste.  He mentioned some organizations that are
effective and might have been secular.  So it got me wondering
if he is secular humanistic or not.

The IHEU suggests dropping adjectives before the term “Humanism” and I agree. Your religious faith, if any, is secondary to your respect for your fellow Humans and certainly your actions in that regard are the main criterion.

The idea that Humanists are just atheists does a great disservice to Humanism - if someone wishes to advocate atheism they should not be social climbing and term themselves Humanists because of that narrow agenda.