Sheena Sharp
Founding Member, Spokesperson

What is your current status on religion/humanism/atheism?

I am a Humanist, and an atheist, though I have been accused of not being sufficiently doctrinaire. In response, I suggest that the Humanist organisations don’t have a rich view of Humanism. Being against the Christian/Jewish/Muslim view of a monolithic god is not Humanism.

I was brought up in the United Church of Canada, and as I get older, I recognise the parts of that upbringing that have stayed with me: a commitment to community and giving to people in need as I am able. I am thankful for the “church ladies” who reared me. They not only taught me to serve community but to have fun doing it.

A touchstone for me is the relationship between science and creativity. Science tells us what is, not what to do with that information. Worldview is a choice; we don’t create the world, but we create the meaning of the world around us.

One of my inspirations is Corliss Lamont’s Philosophy of Humanism, where he stakes out the territory for Humanists: it’s those who choose to make individual human happiness for all, here and now, the goal of their lives. He then goes on to define happiness not primarily as pleasant sensual experiences but also as eudaimonism, happiness that comes from leading a good life, not by a set of prescribed rules but by satisfaction from contributions to society.

I found very little in Humanism to inspire me on individual conduct except for Bertrand Russel’s The Conquest of Happiness. One tidbit that I pondered a lot: he points out that while many hate their jobs and relax with their hobbies, some garden for a living and some do the same thing as a hobby. Happiness is not a specific activity but the result of many things, like agency. If you are curious to read the book, be forewarned, while many of the ideas hold water, the examples are racist and sexist.

I was curious about Buddhism, which is sometimes referred to as being similar to Humanism. At the start, I was interested in the organisational forms that it took, because I was really disheartened by the Humanist organisations in Canada and wanted inspiration. But what I learned was about the human mind and psychology through their practice of being curious about your own mind, and how people interact.

In the “10 commandments” type of religions there are always a group of bean counters who are figuring out how they can meet the letter of the commandments while totally ignoring any broader purpose. I recognise that there are a lot of great people in churches, they just aren’t always in charge! Religions like Buddhism and Indigenous spirituality remind us instead of qualities that, if cultivated, will help you to lead a good life. Like kindness and courage. This is more appealing and challenging to me.

I have found that Buddhism, as practised by North American converts, is too inwardlooking and self absorbed, just as Humanism is not self aware. But nothing is perfect! Today I would say that I am both a Humanist and a beginner Buddhist.

My Early HAT Involvement
After declining to be “confirmed” in the United Church at 13, I knew what I did not believe, but I did not know what I believed. In the pre-internet days, I bumped into references to Humanism as positive atheism, but no actual people. In 1987 I found a Humanist in Canada magazine on a book stand and joined HAC. Meanwhile, Olga and Johann Van de Ven were trying to found a local group and invited all Toronto HAC members to come and meet in their living room. We started the Humanist Association of Toronto with 8-10 people in the early 90s and it slowly grew. We met in free community spaces. We had 30 people attending every week at one point. We pulled together a constitution, which I helped to write. Bob Hope reminds me that I wanted to create an organisation that ensured members always had the power to rebel. I made many friends. We had fun.

HAT Meetings
I recruited many of the speakers, so I guess it’s not surprising that I found them interesting. We had speakers on Humanist philosophy, Wendy Cukier on gun violence, male circumcision, the Jewish Humanists, the Unitarians, lots of topics. We had an Anglican priest with interesting ideas on how he was going to make his food bank obsolete. He was surprised to be asked to speak to a group of atheists, but I told him his ideas seemed universal, and not to worry, he would not be attacked. He just needed to present the ideas and the audience would debate among themselves. Which is exactly what happened at every meeting. He went on to found ”The Stop,” a progressive, practical, secular anti-food-poverty organisation.

HAT Spokesperson
For many years I was the official Spokesperson for HAT. We were on radio and TV debating whether there is a god or not. I was on Michael Coren’s show several times, on Ralph Benmergui’s show, on Man Alive. I remember one interview with Leslie Scrivener, religion columnist for the Toronto Star. She was incensed that the Sally Ann’s were no longer allowed to give away bibles at Canadian Citizenship ceremonies. We reviewed the Canadian constitution together, particularly the part where we had freedom of, and freedom from, religion. I agreed that absolutely people were allowed to practise their religion but this was not a religious ceremony. It should be solemn and should reflect religious freedom for all, not be an opportunity to proselytize. These kinds of exchanges helped me to clarify my own understanding.

The Essay Contest
For several years I ran a high school essay contest for HAC. The topics did not have to be Humanist, they had to be about a relevant social or philosophical topic and they had to seek to persuade. In pre-internet days, we bought a mailing list and sent letter mail to every high school in Canada. Over pizza and wine, a group of us stuffed and stamped 2,000 envelopes. We got 100-150 essays and we had another group organized as a judging tree so that each judge had to read only about 50 essays. Each essay was read by 3 different judges. The best rose to the top and all judges read the final 20. We had monetary prizes. We had fun.

The HAT Court Challenge for Charitable Status
This was the most controversial thing that I did. A group of us felt that an organisation such as ours and such as religions provide a public good in that they provide comradery and a non-partisan space to explore what it means to have a good society. Under the “freedom from religion” section of the constitution, and the fact that it goes on to say that no one group should be given a benefit not offered to all, we proposed, and HAT agreed, to apply for charitable status. The response was that we had to be a religion, “a mere philosophy of life does not qualify.” With that response I managed to raise money from Humanists across the country! We hired Ken Swan, a lawyer recommended by CCLA (Canadian Civil Liberties Association). He prepared my affidavit and the crown chose to cross examine me. The examination took place in a small room in downtown Toronto. It started with the clerk asking me to swear on a bible that I would tell the truth. I asked if I could affirm (which of course I was entitled to do). I think that is when it dawned on them that we might have substance to the case. The crown offered a settlement that did not acknowledge the equality of a philosophy of life to a religion and we refused to back down, even though we did not have enough money to continue, but they did not know that. In the end they conceded that we were equivalent to a religion for tax purposes.

Leaving HAT
When Tanya contacted me for this piece, I gingerly asked if HAT still had charitable status. She said of course and was surprised I would ask. Because in the end, clouds were brewing. The HAC president made personal attacks, claiming I was a Christian plant trying to make HAT into a religion. It was about power and uppity women. It got nasty, but I learned how to fight! Then the Centre for Inquiry was making what I viewed as a hostile take-over of the atheist community in Toronto. They did not reach out to HAT to work collaboratively, they just showed up one day with an organisational structure and started recruiting our members. I took a very dim view of the Centre. It was a time when we still had secretaries. They had one woman in a junior program and an all-women secretarial pool. You can’t believe in equality and not recognise more women as being able to represent atheism or more men who can type. At the time, around 2004, I was starting a small business and had to give up some of my volunteer duties. I felt like the Humanist organisations were increasingly influenced by a narrow-minded group of men. I did not have the energy to fight and I bowed out of volunteering for HAT.

What are you doing now?

I did attend two or three HAT meetings but I am not interested in a philosophical debating society to the exclusion of practical action. I attend Buddhist groups but again have not found the right balance of philosophy and action there either. Most of my volunteer effort goes to The Toronto 2030 District, an energy/architecture think tank, where I can use my knowledge of buildings to work on climate issues. I will be running for the Greens in the 2022 provincial election because, while they are less likely to gain power, they are very effective at speaking truth to those who do have power and that is the best thing on offer right now. At minimum I will use the candidate platform to challenge the other parties. If you want to support me, go to www.gpo.ca/candidate/sheena-sharp. I haven't left you guys and have many, many fond memories of my fellow Humanists. I'm just doing other things where I can have a positive effect, and if you would just send renewal notices on a regular basis, I will continue to be a member!