At the Solstice party I had the pleasure of presenting to Roger several awards for his outstanding service to the Society and its humanist goals. The first was from American Atheists, represented by Dave Kong who spoke at our May meeting, for his success in having the cross in Manning Park removed. The second was a plaque from HSSB with the inscription that read:

Both commendations were highly appropriate and eminently deserved for the untold hours that Roger has devoted to the society and to furthering its objectives.

Having worked with Roger during the past year on the society's outreach radio and print projects, and having discussed ways in which we might expand our influence in the community through the media, I was aware that at times he had been frustrated by not being able to involve more of our members in this process. Thus, I consider my first priority as chairman of HSSB to learn in some detail WHO we are and specifically WHY we are here.

I assume that all of us agree with the statements in our brochure and on the front of our newsletter that "Secular Humanism is a philosophy of life guided by reason and science, free from religious dogma .. seeking goals of human happiness, personal freedom and growth .. on this earth, in this life, at this time". If that is the case, is it something that we can only do on an individual basis, or would a mutual endeavor have a better chance for success in achieving these goals? 'Reason' would seem to suggest the latter.

At this 'time' we are confronted by a radical Christian coalition that would like to impose its religious 'faith' on the country by removing all elements of our historic separation of church and state. If they are successful, and they have been several times in the past, we would find ourselves living in a theocracy. 'Faith based' initiatives would multiply and other restrictions of our constitutional freedoms would follow. Compounding the problem these folks have started a war against another religion, the Crusades Part II, and the radical Muslims don't like any of us.

As most religions, if not all, have had their origins as an emotional answer to the fear of the unknown reason is seldom an effective way of calming and changing the perspective of believers who have been convinced they know THE truth. So, what to do? If rational discussion is not possible and abandoning the field is to invite almost sure disaster, how can these subversive attacks be countered? One thing this highly vocal minority has in common beside their beliefs, THEY VOTE! Thus, the best alternative would seem to be convincing as many thinking people as possible to exercise that tool our democratic form of government provides for expressing an opinion. With a fifty percent turn out at the polls in recent elections these religious radicals are, at most, one quarter of the total electorate. So, THE RACE IS ON! The question now is, in the next year, can they convert more people to their faith than we can convince non-voters to vote. In this contest we have a big advantage. People don't have to agree with our philosophy, just be rational enough to understand the gravity of the situation and appreciate the consequences of not participating.

Like it or not, we live at a time in a place where Humanism can no longer be considered a SPECTATOR activity, or just an interesting intellectual exercise. There is much vitally important work ahead. By sharing the load we can make an important contribution not only to our own well being, but to the larger society in which we live.