Washington Ethical Society V. District of Columbia - Significance

Significance

Along with Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, this was one of the earliest cases establishing the right in the U.S. of nontheistic institutions that function like churches to be treated similarly to theistic religious institutions under the law.

This case is sometimes cited as establishing Secular Humanism as a religion under the law. That characterization of the case is disputed by others, for a number of reasons:

• Different groups use the term secular humanism differently. According to some definitions, the Society does not practice secular humanism. The Society practices Ethical Culture, the philosophy of a movement founded in 1876, predating the modern Humanist movement. While Ethical Culture is, broadly speaking, a humanist philosophy, it has its own distinct character. As practiced by the Washington Ethical Society, it is in many respects more aligned with religious humanism than with secular humanism.

• The court decision did not address the question of whether the ideas of Ethical Culture were inherently religious; it merely determined that the Washington Ethical Society functioned like a church and so was entitled to similar protections.

• In the obiter dictum note in the case Torcaso v. Watkins in which Justice Hugo Black apparently coined the term Secular Humanism, this case was referenced but the term Secular Humanism apparently referred to the case Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda.