Religious Tolerance and Coexistance: A short Humanist Manifesto of sorts

(I wrote this for an assignment in one of my new classes, spirituality and medicine. I thought it would make a great blog post as well, since this is at the core of my beliefs. Hope you enjoy.)


It is my belief that for human beings of different religions to peacefully live and work together, there must be a collective human recognition of the individual right to self-determination. This would require a letting go of doctrines of absolute truth, and negate the existence of a religious code of morality which asserts the concept of moral duality, right versus wrong belief. We need to be rid of doctrines which harm the human dignity of anyone, or attempt to enforce the beliefs of one group on another.
Though my own spiritual beliefs are pagan in nature, I always say I am a humanist first and foremost, particularly when it comes to the social relationships between human beings. Ultimately belief requires individual action, and this leads me to believe that spiritual matters should be relegated to the individual in terms of social policy. The ability to believe falls under the individual’s free will, and tolerance is not possible if we do not respect the ability of others to act freely and exercise their own minds to guide the course of their existence. If one believes in basic human dignity, it stands to reason that tolerance is the only path if we are to afford as much value to the free will of others as to ourselves.
It is detrimental to both the religion and humanity when conversion or belief is required for a person to be viewed as an equal to others. When people are forced to convert or live by a system of morality they don’t believe in, the religion itself is muddied by insincerity and abuse. In the same vein, society is harmed as equality is impossible when one’s free will is considered superior to those of another. In both cases, the opportunity and justification for mistreatment is increased exponentially. Non-believers in essence become non humans, marginalized by religion and set apart as outcasts and treated as such.
On the other hand, if we see free will and self-determination as the hallmark of humanity, then it becomes obvious that everyone is equally deserving of respect. We can approach others as equals, and our understanding of human suffering expands to include others in a more compassionate paradigm, even in the face of conflicting beliefs. Religion finds value in the ways that it brings us together and supports human beings, rather than in its ability to divide us. If we value humanist ideals, there is no reason or justification for abusing others for the sake of arbitrary dualisms like right or wrong.
On a side note, I would also have to mention here a division I see between humanism and secular morality, though they are often interchanged. I have seen many in the atheist movement who seem to conflate secular morality with anti-theism, and call this humanism. I believe that anti-theism is a very negative movement; and one that is as dangerous as fundamentalism in that it denies validity to spiritual thought and requires one support Classical ideals of logic and reason as a sort of dogma. In short, it demeans our humanity by denying the value of those who believe in non-scientifically proven phenomena such as the existence of the divine or sacred. Such a limited view of validity could easily be used in a similar fashion to religious dogma as a means of justifying oppression. To be a humanist requires we accept that opposing views are not only possible, but as valid as our own at the individual level.