Note for Readers: Brights, with their naturalistic outlook, are set apart in a broad sense from supers (persons whose worldviews embrace supernatural and mystical elements). Nonetheless, the views expressed by any one BloggingBrights contributor are not necessarily shared by Brights in general. There is great variety across the constituency, so it is possible that a position taken by one blogger is quite at odds with what other Brights would happens to value/say/believe. In fact, the number one principle of the Brights movement concerns this very point.
On the whole, Brights tend to be contented with pursuing their one life without giving credence to supernatural agency. They aren’t smug about “living on the bright side of life,” just gratified. A great many Brights consider themselves atheists or agnostics, but such a label is far from adequately descriptive (as an identity tag, it merely points to a conclusion regarding a deity, or deities.) Although such a deduction may have its origins in an overall supernatural-free worldview (or not!), so many facets of a naturalistic worldview simply are not grounded in cultural relations to religion(s). And, since the overall naturalistic worldview is all too seldom talked about, perhaps posts on this blog will be able to illuminate some aspects other than those related to religion.
Contributors here will delve into issues with a clear-eyed and thoughtful perspective and favor employing a civics-oriented and secular vocabulary. BloggingBrights will strive to surmount the “beliefs” morass that so prevails among freethinkers’ writings. Without purposeful effort to resist it, the religion/nonreligion realm tends to infuse and overwhelm writings by brights. After all, religion and the cultural battles in that realm can be so intrusive onto citizenship and societal acceptance. Still, a naturalistic outlook can be expressed in the more human-rights/civil rights/science knowledge-oriented realm without a writer taking on a burdensome “nonbeliever” status.
The BloggingBrights writers will show their concerns for social acceptance and equitable treatment for people who have a naturalistic worldview from the grounds of humanity, equality, democracy, etc. Rather than miring their material in the familiar terminology of religion vs. nonreligion, they will make their content informative and educational for both sides of that believer/nonbeliever coin.
After all, both types of citizens can be amenable to and supportive of social and civic parity for their fellow citizens.