All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. if i remember the michigan statutes correctly,the only liability involved is on the person hiring the officant.they are responsible for paying the officiant. i don't remember any applications involved,but the prison chaplain had to ok the officiant. as far as anything being a permanent part of their record,there is a notation that so and so was married on such and such a date.to the best of my knowledge,there is no copy of the marriage license kept in the files. but as rev cali said,each state has their own laws.texas is one of the easier states to officiate in,but i would echo his suggestion about contacting a lawyer.
  3. Yesterday
  4. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    I don't normally think of evidence -- which has been exposed as fraud -- as evidence. Think of the incentives that the religious world has to find evidence that the Exodus happened. Nothing. If said evidence existed, the pious would be rubbing our faces in it. Alright. What is the motive to accept the Bible as evidence -- aside from the desire to see the Bible as inerrant? Christians don't accept the Koran as inerrant. Or the Book of Mormon. Or the writings of Sun Myung Moon. Or Science and Health by Mary Baker Eddy. All additional revelations from God which build on the Bible -- if we believe. What is belief? A strongly held opinion. We all have opinions. This is not evidence.
  5. cuchulain

    a common atheist fallacy

    i do mmake it complicated sometimes. but, i did say inadequate for a reason. a written account exists and is evidence. it may be falsified or fraudulent evidence, but it is evidence the same as if joe down the street files a false statement with the police against his neighbor bill. i agree we hanothing objective. the authors were anonymous superstitious middle eastern men whose accounts don't match an might be falsified for an agenda and have been mistranslated and...well, more than i care to put, really the point, being more succinct if i can, is its not my job to disprove anything, but theirs to prove.
  6. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    You probably don't believe that their are green kangaroos on Mars. It is not that the evidence for God is inadequate. There is no evidence at all. None. What objective facts do we have about God? None at all. What then is the foundation for belief? Only assertions, made without evidence -- which can be dismissed without evidence. You make simple things complicated.
  7. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    When the community of organized "skeptics" goes on the attack -- because they know with supernatural certitude when something is bull ** -- I get to be "skeptical" of their "studies".
  8. cuchulain

    a common atheist fallacy

    inadequate evidence seems the best response, but my initial post was basically about not needing to answer why i don't believe something. i see a lot of youtube videos that start with a christian asking the Atheist why they don't believe. i think that since i'm not trying to convince them but they are trying to convince me, it's not about why i don't believe but rather why they do. if i took the time to explain why i don't believe all the things i don't believe, it would take a long time for talking about nothing.
  9. mererdog

    a common atheist fallacy

    So, a point I have been trying to make in this thread is that our emotional reactions can prevent us from being able to engage in fair critical assessment- and that this can happen without us being aware of it. This kind of cognitive bias is very well documented and no one seems to be immune. When our bias against an individual or group can cause us to be biased against evidence presented by that individual or group, our beliefs simply cannot be wholly evidence based. There must be other factors in play that are just as important, if not more so.
  10. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    Yes, thank you.
  11. Last week
  12. Hopefully yall have a good weekend out there  

  13. Greetings to you my sister, This is probably a question you are going to want to ask an attorney licensed in Texas to answer. Either that, or contact the Main Office in Modesto and see if they have any insight about this rule. Since each state has different rules, it's hard for someone like me for example in Wisconsin to know how a rule is interpreted and applied in Texas. In solidarity, Rev. Calli
  14. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    An addendum: That should have been Doloris Krieger. Not Deloris.
  15. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    An emotional response on my part, based on two sets of experience. I have taken workshops with Janet Macray and Deloris Krieger. I actually know something about the subject. Unlike the critics who foam over theory. Yes, foam. I have been harassed out of a few Skeptic groups. They never studied Therapeutic Touch and never had a session -- but they knew. Oh, how they knew. Mean, nasty and vicious hardly covers it. A true fuster cluck. And they always lead off with the Rosa papers -- like a Fundamentalist waving Scripture. Yes, I reacted badly. The slights have been very personal. In the best of all possible worlds, I would respond with equanimity. Alas, I am neither a Buddha nor a saint.
  16. mererdog

    a common atheist fallacy

    Yes. And your response is not that far off from what I got. You insulted the study and its sources, but provided no objective reason to think the study is actually flawed. As if you were responding to a personal slight, rather than a scientific paper
  17. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    Oh. Those studies. Pure gotcha, from Holy warriors defending medical orthodoxy. The worst kind of "skeptic". I didn't respond to your link. You must be thinking of someone else. Are you sure you posted to this board? It's something I would have remembered. As to my opinion of the studies in question …………… They were a touch lacking in objectivity. They are well known.
  18. mererdog

    a common atheist fallacy

    I linked to information about Emily Rosa's Therapeutic Touch studies. It was met with a lot of hostility and ad hominem. I dont remember whether that was from you, specifically, so that's not a personal accusation. Its just why I remember it. It seemed like the reaction was way out of proportion to just a link to a set of research papers.
  19. mererdog

    a common atheist fallacy

    I follow the logic. I disagree with the premise "all fact is determined by evidence." If You don't want me to reply to you, I won't. Provided, of course, that you stop talking about me.
  20. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    If I understand meredog correctly -- always a big "if" : He is saying that the evidence itself is objective. Interpretation of that evidence is subjective. It's a fine point. It could have been expressed better -- but I don't see bad intentions.
  21. Jonathan H. B. Lobl

    a common atheist fallacy

    I don't remember any evidence. What am I over looking?
  22. cuchulain

    a common atheist fallacy

    if all evidence is subjective, and all fact is determined by evidence...do you not follow? or is this more mind games? i have a hard time believing you don't follow this logic. fact...a thing that is known or proved to be true. proof...evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement. for example, the speed of light has been factually established in comparison to other objects(see relative speed). it was established using objective evidence...relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independant existence. having reality independant of the mind. honestly, my observations of you indicate a person who deliberately stands upstream peeing in the water while others are drinking downstream. i would prefer, since you are immune to the ignore feature, that you no longer respond to my comments. i will do likewise. it's a simple request that of course you will or not acede to.
  23. mererdog

    a common atheist fallacy

    Hey now. I have never said things like "There is no good reason to think that Reiki works." I have simply expressed my personal opinion and presented the evidence that led me to my conclusions. And I have been careful to note that it is simply an opinion, and that the evidence can be explained differently. This is my idea of being fair. Not intellectual purity. Fairness.
  24. mererdog

    a common atheist fallacy

    If you look back, you will find that I said that facts are objective, but that using facts as evidence requires putting them through a subjective process. Evidence is the word we use for the things that cause us to form opinions. This is how we can look at the same fact and consider it evidence for different things. The facts are objective. The evidence cannot be. This does not mean that we cannot learn. It means that learning is a subjective process. It means that we can have all the facts and still come to wrong conclusion. It means that there is no real way to know the answer to the question "Why dont you believe" because it is too subjective a subject.
  25. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice Administrative Directive Number AD-03.42 (rev. 1); Date: July 28/2015; Page 1 of 10: Supersedes: AD-03.42 January 13, 2015 Subject: Offender Marriages; Authority: Tex. Fam. Code §§ 2.001-2.012, 2.202; Tex. Gov't code §§ 493.001, 493.006, 494.002; ED-02.04, "Texas Department of Criminal Justice Fundraising,: AD-03.72, "Offender Property;" TDCJ Visitation Plan; American Correctional Association Standards 4-4293 and 4-4498; Applicability: Texas Dept of Criminal Justice (TDCJ); Policy: Under Procedures: Section II; A Officiant ...shall complete the Application of Person Requesting to Perform Marriage (Attachment A) and submit it to the Access to Courts headquarters at least one week prior to the schedule marriage date. What information is available regarding the subject matter? What are the liability issues for "signing this agreement" for state facility and how does this document relate to "seperation of church and state"? Is the Officiates signature an agreement with the facility a part of the prisoners permanet file? Before, during and after ... what are the liabilty issues (pros and cons) for the officant and how does it effect the permanent record for the individual that is officiating? It has been observed by some individuals (names shall remain unknown) when a person has been incarcerated it is a part of their permanent record and if criminal activity does arise an offender is a suspect then the associates not excluding ministers. What kind of practical measures can be taken for risk management for the church, ministers, volunteers and members when relating to paroles and individuals that have been incarcerated?
  26. Please explain what you mean by "register". With whom, and by what process? As I understand the law, the only relevant purpose would be to secure recognition from the Inland Revenue that you were acting as a charity. There is no list of approved churches in the UK.
  27. I'm sending you a big WELCOME.
  1. Load more activity