The reason religion is so powerful

[Neo-Scholastic]

I am not convinced that appealing to a shared humanity works considering that a fair number of AF members do not recognize the humanity of the unborn enough to afford them any rights.

I take it that you weren't actually unaware of the fact that human dignity isn't a religious concept, then? You knew that the sources and explanations you asked about existed, and were too many to count, you just don't think they "work"?

I'm guessing that's going to be a genuinely novel use of the term. Even people who pursue abortions possess a shared humanity, and.... if you asked.....you might find that they too hold to some idea of human dignity. They're not exactly werewolves, eh?

Not exactly, I just don't debate against links. But you aren't wrong. Saying that human dignity is religious was overbroad when what I meant was that notions like dignity and human rights are normative and not empirical. So technically, yes, they can be considered to be broadly philosophical without being strictly associated with theism and, yes, I think those attempts fail in the same way that many athiests say there isnt any evidence then quibble about what does and doesnt count as evidence. I will just leave it at that.

The main issue is whether religious ideas are uniquely dangerous in political discourse and ought not be used to justify public policies. My issue is that most political discourse is not entirely based on empirical determinations. There are normative considerations based on metaphysical conceptions of human nature and it is the pretense of "humanism" that it is devoid of metaphysical assumptions.