Religion

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)

31. Again, you are mistaken

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 01:27 AM

Apr 2013

None of the clergy invited to attend the interfaith service "represent" the entirety of their faith. A singular priest does not represent the Catholic church entire. Moreover, there is no "Muslim", "Jewish", or "Christian" church of which to speak. The speakers each represent constituent demographics of the affected community, nothing more.

Those who expressed interest in representing Boston's non-believing community were members of local secular or humanist societies, as was clearly indicated in the OP. Whether "most" non-believers belong to these societies isn't relevant. Services such as these are a forum through which communities find solidarity through hardship. They are about coming together to help each other out, regardless of sectarian differences. The exclusion of non-believing speakers from this event is prohibitive to this end.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Nonbelievers Excluded from Interfaith Service, Despite Two Humanist Victims in Monday’s Bombing [View all] cleanhippie Apr 2013 OP

Just curios how would they know someone is a non-believer? still_one Apr 2013 #1

How about we just assume some people are, and make things like this... trotsky Apr 2013 #2

They said the two women were members of a non-theist organization wryter2000 Apr 2013 #3

More discouraging news about our Country. nt ladjf Apr 2013 #4

OK, link doesn't work so who exactly refused to allow participation? sinkingfeeling Apr 2013 #5

Atheists Say Boston Prayer Organizers Snubbed Them struggle4progress Apr 2013 #25

They should have attended anyway. And, if they were physically restrained, it would ladjf Apr 2013 #6

Nonbelievers were not excluded from attending. Jim__ Apr 2013 #10

Link's broken. This one works - pinto Apr 2013 #7

Thanks for that. Jim__ Apr 2013 #9

since their god(s) allowed the explosion they were afraid of truth tellling? nt msongs Apr 2013 #8

Who is they and what gods were you talking about? Nobody I know, Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #23

Who said they were blocked at the door? Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #26

Yet more evidence xfundy Apr 2013 #11

so no one asked them? madrchsod Apr 2013 #12

I find it hard to believe that no phone calls were returned. rug Apr 2013 #13

I don't. Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #14

Why yes, you asserted a belief without evidence. rug Apr 2013 #15

So it is your position they should have provided evidence for the nonexistence of returned calls? Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #18

So, what did they say? rug Apr 2013 #19

To be fair, it was you who suggested the calls were not returned. Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #20

I look forward to the update. rug Apr 2013 #22

Here is a more revealing article Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #32

Could it have something to do... rexcat Apr 2013 #16

so wearingly typical.. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #17

I agree they should have been able to participate. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #21

I have my doubts about this. georges641 Apr 2013 #24

You misunderstand Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #27

Did you get an aswer to your email? rug Apr 2013 #28

As I stated... Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #30

So who represents the non-believing community? georges641 Apr 2013 #29

Again, you are mistaken Act_of_Reparation Apr 2013 #31