God Sued in America

Remove all ads!

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070919/tod-us-justice-religion-offbeat-f62056d_1.html

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A court in Nebraska is being asked to cast judgement on the ultimate judge -- God.

State lawmaker Ernie Chambers filed a lawsuit Friday against the Almighty -- acknowledging he/she goes by numerous aliases -- for causing "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues" and other alliterative catastrophes.

The suit, Chambers vs God, asks the court for a "permanent injunction ordering defendant (God) to cease certain harmful activities and the making of terrorist threats" which affect innumerable persons, including Chambers's constituents.

It asserts that God is "the admitted perpetrator" of such acts and said that God's omnipresence gives the local Douglas County District Court jurisdiction in the suit, adding that God's omniscience eliminates the need to issue a formal notice of the lawsuit.

Chambers told local media he filed the suit to make a point about frivolous lawsuits frequently seen in US courts, citing a recent one against a judge.

He asked the court to award him an unspecified summary judgment against God, or, in the alternative, issue a permanent injunction against God engaging in the damaging acts cited in the filing.

Neither God nor his/her spokespersons could be contacted for comment

 

The fact that this type of lawsuit made it past the court clerks only proves one thing: Just how stupid and asinine our court system has gotten. Taking this suit seriously will only cause people to lose respect for the court system.

However, if someone will pay my expenses I will gladly appear as a spokesperson for God. I do have some qualification. I can also think of a couple of other people on this board that should appear at least as amici deus.

 

As a practical matter; how did the plaintiff conduct service of process with the big G? I sure hope his public defender filed a motion to dismiss due to improper service....

 

When the court system is used as a shield against taking responsibility for one's actions, or as a mechanism for revenge that ends up costing the "winner" of the case her livelihood anyway, then you know it's seriously broken and in desperate need of reform. Unfortunately, I doubt this case will generate more than a few laughs for Jay Leno, et al.

Yet another example of the truth behind the saying, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." Maybe God will skip the motions and respond with a cataclysm or two - that should shake things up (no pun intended!) a bit!

 

But wouldn't that be an admission of guilt?

Anyway, that seems more than a bit absurd. Even from a legal procedure, under what law do you sue God? Local, federal, international... or do we treat Him as an "enemy deity?"

 

I don't think the defendant will be making an appearance.

But Seriously, there are a lot more stupid lawsuits out there. If a guy committing a Break and enter trips, falls and gets hurt and can sue the victim for every penny he has, there's a problem...

 

Interesting, I expected a "speak to my lawyer" note. Unfortunately, finding the right lawyer might be a bit of a problem - there are all too many pretenders for the position.

 

Pfff.

These celebrities all think they are above the law.

Just because you are the subject of a very old book...

 

Here's my question: God is entitled to an unbiased jury of His peers, right?

 

Bloody finally.

Hope they give the bastard the death penalty.

 

Certainly. But Jack Nicholson can usually get out of jury duty.

 

The legal system over there is just priceless.

 

Too late - Nietzsche already passed that sentence, but died before it could be carried out.

 

So if they are suing God, he must exist. What if some of these other things us religious people are telling you is true? Further, are they suing the Father, the Som or the Holy Ghost? The first commandment, thou shalt have no other gods before me, implies that there may infact be other gods, but what if the other gods you get as a jury are real jerks? What if their first question to the defendant is to ask why he hasn't destroyed the world regularly? They could likely rule in favour of the defendant...

 

This depends on whether you cling to the Aristotelian point of view or not. Using Boolean reasoning, when making an argument about "X", "X" need not actually exist.

 

So that's where all those purple moon monkey arguements came from...