Atheists don't grieve or morn apparently

[Andara Bledin]

Unfortunately, with no knowledge of how the non-faith group approached the faith group about joining them for the service, there's really no way to know whether one side missed an opportunity or if something else happened.

[BlaqueKatt]

By apparent, you mean... That they're Muslims and therefore that's why they did it?

not at all, the fact that they were associated with religious based hate groups.

I feel the same way about the terrorist that murdered Dr. George Tiller, he was also associated with religious based hate groups.

[Gravekeeper]

not at all, the fact that they were associated with religious based hate groups.

Every line of that article uses "appears to be", "same name as", "allegedly interested", even the headline starts with "may have". >.>

Not exactly the "fact".

[Panacea]

Again, it's a RELIGIOUS EVENT. If you're going to call atheism your religion, fine. But if you keep insisting that it's not a religion, and how you oppose religion, then don't be surprised that people are considering you not qualified to be at a religious gathering.

Well, yes and no. I can't speak to non-Christian religions, but in Christianity, we are supposed to welcome the stranger. If an atheist came to my church to mourn the passing of a friend, I would welcome that person and mourn with him . . . and I wouldn't be alone doing it.

Now I'm sure there are some Christians who would find that inappropriate, well, they're free to disagree.

So, again, what is the purpose of inviting them in?

It's Biblical to invite in the stranger. See the story of the Good Samaritan to see why: it tells us to see the good in those who hold different points of view.

It would be the same if someone came into our anime club meeting without being a member. We could ask them to leave. Would it be nice? No, but that would be our right.

Sure. You could. But if that person said, "I've heard about this anime stuff and I wanted to get the real scoop on it," you'd probably invite them to stay. Likewise, when I started going to my church I was not Catholic but no one asked me any questions. In fact, I was openly welcomed. Had I been disrespectful of the service, I could have and would have been asked to leave. But by following the rules I was not.

So what's the difference between that and wanting to mourn with faith groups?

[crashhelmet]

Well, yes and no. I can't speak to non-Christian religions, but in Christianity, we are supposed to welcome the stranger. If an atheist came to my church to mourn the passing of a friend, I would welcome that person and mourn with him . . . and I wouldn't be alone doing it.

Now I'm sure there are some Christians who would find that inappropriate, well, they're free to disagree.

It's Biblical to invite in the stranger. See the story of the Good Samaritan to see why: it tells us to see the good in those who hold different points of view.

Sure. You could. But if that person said, "I've heard about this anime stuff and I wanted to get the real scoop on it," you'd probably invite them to stay. Likewise, when I started going to my church I was not Catholic but no one asked me any questions. In fact, I was openly welcomed. Had I been disrespectful of the service, I could have and would have been asked to leave. But by following the rules I was not.

So what's the difference between that and wanting to mourn with faith groups?

The issue here isn't that they were told they could not attend. They were told they could not give a speech/invocation/presentation.

It's not like they're going to be standing outside the door performing a religious census and only allowing in those of the represented faiths.

[Hyena Dandy]

Well, yes and no. I can't speak to non-Christian religions, but in Christianity, we are supposed to welcome the stranger. If an atheist came to my church to mourn the passing of a friend, I would welcome that person and mourn with him . . . and I wouldn't be alone doing it.

Now I'm sure there are some Christians who would find that inappropriate, well, they're free to disagree.

Way to completely strawman my argument.

This is not saying "Atheists can't come." This is saying that atheists aren't giving a presentation.

Honestly, I do consider atheism a religion (for the reasons set forth in Prothero's "God Is Not One," which he explains much better than I do,) and I'd be fine with it. But if atheists are going to say that they're not religious, then I'll respect that, and not have them speak at religious events.

I have a muslim friend. He's a great guy, but I'd think he was being ridiculous if he was upset that his Imam wasn't speaking at my church, and I'm sure he'd think the same about my pastor not giving a presentation at the mosque.

[Gravekeeper]

I have a muslim friend. He's a great guy, but I'd think he was being ridiculous if he was upset that his Imam wasn't speaking at my church, and I'm sure he'd think the same about my pastor not giving a presentation at the mosque.

I feel compelled to point out that this is the exact scenario already occurring at this event. Multiple faiths are speaking at a location normally reserved for one faith. That said, seeing as the mayor, governor and the president are involved in this event, the exclusion seems even worse. The president and governor, if no one else, should be striving for inclusiveness and unity.

[Ree]

[QUOTE=crashhelmet;135934This isn't a regular vigil where people are mourning the victims. It's specifically billed as an "Interfaith" gathering. Atheists, by their very definition, have no place speaking at an event of any religious faith.[/QUOTE]

So is atheism faith or isn't it?

Because faith is literally half of the word 'interfaith.'

I mean, I understand wanting to come together and mourn and such, but if you don't believe in a higher power or prayer, then why would you want to be a part of such a memorial anyway?

But, really, this has nothing to do with mourning; <snip>
The fact is that the event the group tried to join was specifically religious in nature. Why would a group that is specifically non-religious try to become involved in a religious event and then be surprised when they were not accepted?

Those were all the thoughts I had.

In my opinion, the argument in this discussion is not why an interfaith religious service was being held, or why religions had to even enter into it. (It's a good question, but not really the point in this case, as I see it.)
The fact is, it was a religious/faith based service, so why would atheists expect to be included as part of the program, or want to be included?

[Gravekeeper]

The fact is, it was a religious/faith based service, so why would atheists expect to be included as part of the program, or want to be included?

I don't think its a matter of expectation.

But they are part of the community too, especially in Boston which has a rather large community of them. If this were some interfaith assembly NOT pertaining to a tragedy I would agree. But this is obviously an attempt at unity within the community by bringing together multiple faiths for the purpose of comforting people. Its also given official legitimacy because of the mayor, governor and president being in attendance. When viewed in that light, their exclusion seems like a missed opportunity to practice what you preach so to speak and poor form.

We're not talking about militant atheists here. Humanism is almost a sort of distilled version of Buddhism without the really hard to pronounce words. It's doubly ironic in this case as Humanism is big on happiness and equality through unity and communities.

[Andara Bledin]

Except that it really is about expectations and perceptions, and from both sides.

Part of the problem is that, when speaking of religious matters, atheists can range anywhere from vaguely spiritual and tolerant to downright anti-religious. And, of course, the ones that most people are aware of are the raging douchebags who hate on anything that even alludes to religion.

This is as much am image issue as the other side only being remembered as fundamentalist fucktards who can't imagine that anyone who doesn't think precisely like them isn't some satan spawn out to corrupt all of humanity.

Ultimately, this was a faith-based event (the appropriateness of that is another discussion entirely). Atheists are specifically those who identify as being without faith, and as such, one has to wonder what faith-based message they might have to pass on.

However, as I noted in my last comment, without knowing what, precisely, was said by both sides, there's zero way to know whether the faith group were being bigots, the atheist group were being entitled to cause trouble, or if it was simply a matter of an irresolvable cultural clash founded in the fact that each group represents the polar opposite of the other.

[Panacea]

The issue here isn't that they were told they could not attend. They were told they could not give a speech/invocation/presentation.

Ah, yes. I did miss this point. Still, it really doesn't change my thought that an opportunity was missed. All anyone had to do was ask for an advance copy of what would be said to screen for anything overtly offensive (ie Dawkins like rant), which I highly doubt would have been present.

Way to completely strawman my argument.

This is not saying "Atheists can't come." This is saying that atheists aren't giving a presentation.

I didn't strawman the argument. I did make a mistake. However, even by making a mistake I still didn't strawman the argument. Mourning is not a one sided affair, and nothing I originally said implies that it is.

Honestly, I do consider atheism a religion (for the reasons set forth in Prothero's "God Is Not One," which he explains much better than I do,) and I'd be fine with it. But if atheists are going to say that they're not religious, then I'll respect that, and not have them speak at religious events

Honestly, I don't consider atheism a religion. A-theist, meaning without God. You have to have a deity to be a religion. While humanism has worthwhile ideas that can be adopted and used by just about anybody (depending on the type), without the belief in a deity, it is not religion it is philosophy. Good philosophy, but philosophy none the less.

Since I haven't read Prothero, a discussion of what he actually said would have been helpful. I read a review of his book, and his introduction. He seems to be talking about the paths that lead us to God, and how they differ. How does non-belief lead one to God? If he explains it, I'd love to hear it; but you don't leave me with enough information to make a convincing argument that Prothero does say what you believe he does.

I feel compelled to point out that this is the exact scenario already occurring at this event. Multiple faiths are speaking at a location normally reserved for one faith. That said, seeing as the mayor, governor and the president are involved in this event, the exclusion seems even worse. The president and governor, if no one else, should be striving for inclusiveness and unity.

I don't think its a matter of expectation.

But they are part of the community too, especially in Boston which has a rather large community of them. If this were some interfaith assembly NOT pertaining to a tragedy I would agree. But this is obviously an attempt at unity within the community by bringing together multiple faiths for the purpose of comforting people. Its also given official legitimacy because of the mayor, governor and president being in attendance. When viewed in that light, their exclusion seems like a missed opportunity to practice what you preach so to speak and poor form.

We're not talking about militant atheists here. Humanism is almost a sort of distilled version of Buddhism without the really hard to pronounce words. It's doubly ironic in this case as Humanism is big on happiness and equality through unity and communities.

Except that it really is about expectations and perceptions, and from both sides.

Part of the problem is that, when speaking of religious matters, atheists can range anywhere from vaguely spiritual and tolerant to downright anti-religious. And, of course, the ones that most people are aware of are the raging douchebags who hate on anything that even alludes to religion.

This is as much am image issue as the other side only being remembered as fundamentalist fucktards who can't imagine that anyone who doesn't think precisely like them isn't some satan spawn out to corrupt all of humanity.

Ultimately, this was a faith-based event (the appropriateness of that is another discussion entirely). Atheists are specifically those who identify as being without faith, and as such, one has to wonder what faith-based message they might have to pass on.

However, as I noted in my last comment, without knowing what, precisely, was said by both sides, there's zero way to know whether the faith group were being bigots, the atheist group were being entitled to cause trouble, or if it was simply a matter of an irresolvable cultural clash founded in the fact that each group represents the polar opposite of the other.

[Andara Bledin]

Honestly, I don't consider atheism a religion. A-theist, meaning without God. You have to have a deity to be a religion. While humanism has worthwhile ideas that can be adopted and used by just about anybody (depending on the type), without the belief in a deity, it is not religion it is philosophy. Good philosophy, but philosophy none the less.

This is not actually true. Being religious has no requirement for a deity, despite being a-religious being referred to as being an Atheist. It's really a misnomer, and leads to a lot of confusion in debates.

Religion does require belief, but that belief can be in spirits or souls, in addition to a god or gods. Humanism, thus, can be either secular or religious, dependent upon whether the practitioner believes in anything beyond the observable.

Needless to say, I don't believe Atheism (as the lack of religious designation and not just general godlessness) to be a religion so much as a rejection of the same.

Which brings me back to thinking that a declared Atheist group would be out of place making a presentation at a specifically religious gathering.