No, the burden of proof is on those making the positive assertion - and I paraphrase, - "There should have been a benediction." Formulated in that way, I say prove it. Until the proposition is proven, I say it is just that, an unproven proposition.
In logic, you can't prove the negative, so I won't try to prove that "There shouldn't be a benediction". I don't have to prove that. If you want to reformulate your position and say "I wish there was a benediction", well, I won't argue because that was your wish or opinion, which you are justified in holding and about which you are an expert, but I'll just say "I'm glad there wasn't."
This will never be resolved to everyone's satisfaction on that basis, so non-action is the most conservative thing to do. Have no benediction because its benefits are not tangible and as a true conservative, we shouldn't do things we can't prove make things better. |
