Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Truth Is Stranger #57: Politician Sues God

LINCOLN, Neb. - The defendant in a state senator's lawsuit is accused of causing untold death and horror and threatening to cause more still. He can be sued in Douglas County, the legislator claims, because He's everywhere.

State Sen. Ernie Chambers sued God last week. Angered by another lawsuit he considers frivolous, Chambers says he's trying to make the point that anybody can file a lawsuit against anybody.

Chambers says in his lawsuit that God has made terroristic threats against the senator and his constituents, inspired fear and caused "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants."

The Omaha senator, who skips morning prayers during the legislative session and often criticizes Christians, also says God has caused "fearsome floods ... horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes."

He's seeking a permanent injunction against the Almighty....

Well, as mildly amusing as this is, I wish he were seeking a Theology 101 course instead. And a politician accusing God of bringing forth evil?...people in glass houses, my friend. Geez.

More here.


angelmeg said...

I have tagged you with the BRA Meme. It really is a lot more prestigious than it sounds. Thanks for being an inspiration to me.

Catholic Audio said...

Unless it's a federal court, I'm guessing it will get dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Even if our courts were found to have jurisdiction over heaven and heavenly bodies (difficult, since our government has a strict no-ambassadorial relations policy), I'm guessing your local statie will have some difficulty serving process. Should any particular clergyman (the higher ranking the better) be deemed a representative of God (again, problematic for the State considering our no-endorsement and non-recognition policies), the State could consider process served. Alternately, general notice could be served through newspapers/ radio/ TV (e.g., "Are you God? If so, you have been served!"). The general notice might be deemed sufficient, provided a compelling case is not made rejecting this approach because God, as pure spirit, does not occupy time or space. Since judges are largely unfamiliar with Aristotelian thought, it's likely that a general notice would suffice.

Without addressing the problematic task of compelling an omnipotent being to do something against his will, God's methods of appearance have thus-far been other than satisfactory for our legal system. Incarnation through virgin birth is (1) excessively time consuming for the present purposes and (2) growing ever-more difficult in our western culture (what with raw materials rapidly growing sparse). Alternately, a burning bush would not be allowed inside the courtroom because it would result in a rather serious fire code violation.

All things considered, I'm guessing this won't be a successful suit.

Ray from MN said...

Rather than just dismissing the suit, the judge should assess costs against Chambers for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

But since judges these days seem to make frivolous decisions based on international law and European law and what they feel to be right, irrespective of U.S. Law, there is little chance of that.

If a man is charged with "rape" what perverted thinking would forbid the use of that word in the trial? How could he be convicted of something that was not made known to him?

Is that what punishment has come to these days?

Gregory said...

I'm really glad I heard about this.

I swear if I don't get that new XBox 360 for Christmas, I'm suing Santa back to the stone age.

You better watch out, fat man.

ignorant redneck said...

In other coverage, our good plaitiff said the motive was to show and ridicule frivoulous lawsuits.

angelmeg said...

What really irritates me is the guy is a professed atheist.

God's lawyer should countersue for slander, libel and alienation of affection.