I have read it for a third time.  Hanne seems to be claiming that individuals need a voice in their own right, not as part of a group.  But with 60m people in the UK that is pretty much impossible.  We all need to join groups in order to have our voice heard.  There is no reason (in theory at least) why a Muslim woman cannot have her voice heard as a woman by joining a women's group.  Similarly, Humanists need to be part of a 'bloc' in order to get their voice heard.  There is no problem with multiculturism as long as, as Hanne says, people's multiple identities are also respected.  It's not a question of either/or.  We are unique individuals but we also have group loyalties as well.
Sorry I was rude about your Thought but it does wade into very muddy territory about human identity.

I listened to Hanne Stinson's podcast and didn't really understand what she was going on about.  I then read the transcript and was still none the wiser.  Soporific stuff.  
Sorry Hanne - I love you really but this was disappointing.

Another great batch of thoughts this year.  Well done to all the speakers, and to the Humanist Society of Scotland for such a great idea!  I'm looking forward to the 2009 batch (or even some more during 2008?).

James

Short but sweet .... not hard to understand ...



The poor souls who doubt what has been said ...
not their opion so they will not believe what has been said.

The power of a brainwashed mind ...

Thankfully not ours ... perhaps one day others
may see the true freedom of the mind ...
free from the chains and twisted beliefs.

    How many more scandals etc etc
     
will be happen .. behind the face of religion.

Please keep up the work of a good life.  Podcasting is allowing the voice of reason to encircle the world, and inter-leaven the debate about what it means to be human with something other than blind belief.

Christopher Brookmyre's thought is hilarious.
great idea - "DITCH THE BITCH"

Really enjoying these - great idea!

thanks for a chuckle here -gosh today teacher would have ben arrested

I've just found this through iTunes.
It's a great idea.
I'm looking forward to Iain McWhirter's. He always writes such sense.

Great off the wall thought from Arthur Smith.
Diane must have a sense of humour-ectomy

A poor start to 2008 Darwin week, unless the aim was to make humanists look strange, in which case you've succeeded. Since when has Arthur Smith been considered a great secular thinker?

No doubt the press will take the mickey - if any of them are interested enough.

I agree with the British Humanist on most position's however I am also a supporter of the BBC. I thought that a secular thought of the day would be interesting but I also agree with the BBC that many secular perspectives and various religious perspectives can be heard on the BBC. This week I watched a documentary on the History of Disbelief produced by the BBC and broadcast on public television here in the United States.This is just one of many example's of this type of programming offered by the BBC. I usually listen to the BBC world service on the internet or on the radio. Their programs on world religions are usually neutral or in the case of the "Reporting on Religion" program the BBC journalist take's a hard skeptical view of all the world's theology's. Each week the BBC journalist ask religious leaders tough question about their belief.

 Here in the United States a so-called modern free country, all to often secular perspectives are kept out of public discourse. Even different religious perspectives are ignored by mainstream media. So I say the British Humanist Association is important in a democracy and so is the British Broadcasting Corporation so all views can be heard in the public sphere.

Thank You,

KN

I would like to propose Bernard Crick as a suitable contributor to any future podcast.

thanks very cheery -what we need -well done

The podcasts were great while they lasted. But why haven't there been any more?

Grayling is argued that atheist, humanists, etc. are not "FAITH", so if this program wants to focus on FAITH GROUPS, your group is not part of this category.   You can't have it both ways. Either your group exhibits "faith" or not.

Yes, Darwinism and darwin came to challenge the establishment and god, but the telelogical arguement and the design argument surely point towards a god as surely someone has to get the ball rolling, after all would u expect such amazing things just to happen with no design, surely you wouldn't expect democracy or architectural wonders to appear through trial and error.

My class at my school has just started looking at Humansim, on this topic we all did a simple test to see if we were Christian, had no faith or a Humanist. I discovered I was more likely a Humanist, of which i wasn't that surprised. But discovering that Humanists can't broadcast on 'Thought Of The Day' makes me question the people who make that show and say what people can say or whether they should be silenced. Eveyones thoughts should be heard religious or not, as everyone is equal there thoughts must be equal as well.

Is the link to iTunes podcast broken?
I did not receive anything since 10-02
brgds

Anthony Grayling writes in the comments, 'It is wrong that "Thought for the Day" refuses to have any but religious voices on it.' For other reasons, too. It comes right bank in the middle of a news programme, for goodness' sake, and here we are with three minutes of <i>totally unchallenged</i> material. I can just see John Humphrys biting his tongue as this bilge clogs the airwaves, dying to jump in with a yes-but. OK, some of them can be interesting and even entertaining, and I always shut up when Lionel Blue comes on. But it's the principle. Unchallenged comment right in the middle of hard news? No. It's dishonest, too, capturing hard-news listeners who are hardly going to go and switch the radio off for three minutes while the Reverend Dimwit pontificates.

Thouroughly enjoyed the various podcasts - hopefully they will be back soon. It was great to the different views of humanists from all walks of life.

Many thanks

Graeme Anderson
Monifieth, Angus

My beloved wife had a very very good Humanist funeral service,we my sons and myself decided this.After the service and over the weeks after the service I felt as if a great service had been done for my wife,s memory,in so much as I felt that I had gained freedom yes freedom from the steel like grasp of religion.Strange thing to say you might think.
I feel more part of life and closer to living than I ever have done.
Long live free thinkers like ourselves.

If the transcripts are just text, why are they put online as pdf files? A text file or even an html page would suffice and be quicker to load and view!

Great idea, this podcast.
But changing the URL after 3 days without a warning message in iTunes was not. It is like shooting your own initiative in the foot.
brgds
Karl

Re Nick's idea that "if more folk [send letters to the RT etc] they might be persuaded to print one of them" -- he might be interesting in my little project, "Doing It By The Letter", which aims to do just that: to get a reasonable number of people writing to publications on key ideas, articles, etc. It's at http://www.brightsonline.net/bytheletter

I'd also like to echo a big thanks to the SHA and the BHA for putting this Humanist TFtD together. I'm enjoying them all so far.

I enjoyed Lee's, Warburton's and Baggini's pieces, but I also note that all three were to a greater or lesser extent about religion, or the non-religious approach to religion in Lee's case. It's all good stuff, but I think we have to be careful about what proportion of Thoughts are about religion; otherwise there's a risk of turning Humanist TFtD into Anti-Religion TFtD. That would be sad. There's a lot of positive social, moral, artistic, philosophical ground out there to cover. I'm not saying there shouldn't be anything at all on religion, but there's a balance to get right.

Thank you again

Good idea Nick, I have emailed radio.times@bbc.co.uk with a letter for publication. Let's hope others will do the same.

Oh I see - you simply click the "Previous Days" button. Silly me!
Re the publicity comment (George Shilling) I sent an email to Radio Times readers letters and if more folk do that they might be persuaded to print one of them.
I'm really impressed by what I've heard so far.

I missed yesterdays podcast - Kate Hudson. Isa there any way I can get to hear it?

Thoroughly enjoying these. I hope someone is onto organizing some media coverage - a spot on Channel 5 News or BBC Breakfast would be good! Surely an emailing and pestering campaign could be started to target some news programmes...?

Concratulations to all for bringing this project to fruition. It is the BBC's loss that they refuse to benefit from the wit and wisdom of some of their countries greatest philosophers.

That they base this discrimination on the fact that these 'freethinkers' reject one more faith than those they invite onto Thought for the Day is both outrageous and pathetic. How can this be legal?

We owe it to the listening public to circumvent the censorial attitude of the BBC and to continue working to have it ultimately rejected.

The first "Thought for the Day" on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme was by Richard Dawkins on 14th August 2002 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/eng … 193321.stm

A humanist scientist has become the first atheist to deliver a Thought for the Day on the BBC's Radio 4 Today programme.

In his two-and-a-half minute slot, Professor Richard Dawkins from Oxford University, argued science gave a better explanation of life than religion.

Radio 4's policy of not including non-religious contributors has been heavily criticised - leading to more than 100 public figures demanding the "ban" be lifted.

However, Prof Dawkins's broadcast did not replace the regular daily slot but ran an hour afterwards as an unofficial "Thought".

It's a shame you thought that Jeremy. I thought it was lovely piece about Love. Sure she talks about the CND, I would imagine it means a lot to her: if only more people felt as passionately about what they believed in.

Have you listened to the last two archived podcasts? They are also really interesting and thought provoking.

Humanism is a 'broad church' and we will never all agree but at least kate's podcast made you think enough to comment.

The BBC's refusal to allow non-religious voices on Thought for the Day infuriates me, so I was delighted to hear about the Humanist TFTD and have just listened to Kate Hudson.

A big disappointment.

I get indigestion when Anne Atkins uses the slot to force-feed us with her religious views. Kate Hudson did exactly the same with her peace movement views, and I suffered exactly the same reaction.

Surely the idea of the slot is to provide a stimulating thought, often with a link to a topic in the news, not to propagandise.

Although Art for me is very important i recognise the importance of knowing oneself also physically, biologicvally. Now, in those schools where the children are bombarded by teachings of the bible and hope in God, it is not much place left to developpe the consiousness of absolute necessity to keep healthy because there is no spirit without body. Food and drink habits and exercise as way of life will be replaced by use of drugs, although to that drives as well the other extreme, that of trying to be absolutely dry-thinking and exclude the playful poesy of the myth. While makes sense to project ideals as role models and role actions, as visions for our future, a certain philosophy  that conencts with religious thinking systems conduct to the negect of basical material conditions of life, being that our body as well as our home and our environment. Also there is in religion that psychological method of absolute and unquestioning obedience that can not promote a natural and beautiful evolution. While being without god should not meen being without visions, without perspectives, without self respect and respect of the other. It should indeed meen a magior development of consiousness and responsibility.

I think that often between those who say they believe in God and those that they do not, are ways of seeing things and expressing themselves. In my thinking and feeling system ther is no place for belief or faith, about things that we dio not, know do not see and do not sense. But, There are wholistic, environmental options, talking about which, there is a parallel expression to so many theological lines. I think, that in Myth there is truth and, some how various meanings are transmitted in a more pleasant and digestive way rather than if they are presented in a dry and free of decorations expression. To say what people need is a better life, includes also a large space of imagination that is filled with artworks of other people and by ourselves.

Interesting quote from Che - new to me