A god being sued





  •  Well, I heard Satan wants to get in on the next presidental campain.



  • @MiffTheFox said:

    Well, I heard Satan wants to get in on the next presidental campain.
    talking about religion and politics together.  This has absolutely no chance of starting a flame war.  I'll fan the flames.

    I thought Satan was all over every Presidential campaign.  He is the Lord of Lies, after all.



  •  @MiffTheFox said:

     Well, I heard Satan wants to get in on the next presidental campain.

     

    Unconstitutional, we all know noone is allowed more than 2 terms as president, and he's just coming off his second term now...



  • I doubt if Satan can really claim to be a natural-born citizen of the United States. If Satan existed, surely he'd be much older than the United States.



  • @Someone You Know said:

    I doubt if Satan can really claim to be a natural-born citizen of the United States. If Satan existed, surely he'd be much older than the United States.

     He can get new identity or make himself younger



  • @Someone You Know said:

    If Satan existed, surely he'd be much older than the United States.
    So if anything, Satan is a Native American, and therefore should be allowed to open his own casino.



  • @Someone You Know said:

    I doubt if Satan can really claim to be a natural-born citizen of the United States. If Satan existed, surely he'd be much older than the United States.

    He is not the first one with this problem, what about the first few presidents?



  • @strcmp said:

    @Someone You Know said:
    I doubt if Satan can really claim to be a natural-born citizen of the United States. If Satan existed, surely he'd be much older than the United States.

    He is not the first one with this problem, what about the first few presidents?

     

     Exactly.  George Washington was not eligible to be president since he was an English citizen.  Therefore, he was an illegitimate dictator who ruled with an iron fist, killing everyone who got in his way.  He also established his authoritarian rule by putting his likeness on the dollar bill. 



  • @belgariontheking said:

    He is the Lord of Lies, after all.

    Prince of Lies.

    Logically, the son of the King of Lies.

    So, uh... who was Satan's father?

    Bonus troll: since woman was not invented yet, Satan clearly had no mother, so was this a case of masturbation or homosexuality? Or both?

    Pity-explanation for the faithful: God can travel in time. He went forward to some indeterminate point after woman was invented, impregnated one, then absconded with the child sometime after it was born.

    "I'm having too much fun" troll: isn't it generally agreed that God only has one son?

    Satan Christ!



  • @AccessGuru said:

    @strcmp said:

    @Someone You Know said:
    I doubt if Satan can really claim to be a natural-born citizen of the United States. If Satan existed, surely he'd be much older than the United States.

    He is not the first one with this problem, what about the first few presidents?

     

     Exactly.  George Washington was not eligible to be president since he was an English citizen.  Therefore, he was an illegitimate dictator who ruled with an iron fist, killing everyone who got in his way.  He also established his authoritarian rule by putting his likeness on the dollar bill. 

     RTFM please.

     "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United
    States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution
    , shall be
    eligible to the office of President;"

     



  • @AccessGuru said:

    Exactly.  George Washington was not eligible to be president since he was an English citizen.  Therefore, he was an illegitimate dictator who ruled with an iron fist, killing everyone who got in his way.  He also established his authoritarian rule by putting his likeness on the dollar bill. 
     

     

    RTFM please.

     "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United
    States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution
    , shall be
    eligible to the office of President;"



  • @Someone You Know said:

    I doubt if Satan can really claim to
    be a natural-born citizen of the United States. If Satan existed,
    surely he'd be much older than the United States.

     



  •  Thread hijack:

    if "cartoonists" don't bother to actually, say, draw their cartoons, then why bother with the multi-panel format? Or even a graphical format at all?

     



  • @bsaksida said:

    a god being sued
    Got a problem there, because there are no lawyers in Heaven.



  • @Zecc said:

    there are no lawyers in Heaven.
     

    Except Ally McBeal.



  •  There was a similar case in Romania some time ago: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,494225,00.html

    I like the charges of "Breach of contract" and "abuse of a position of authority" much better than some vague "death, destruction and terrorisation". 



  • @mxx said:

     There was a similar case in Romania some time ago: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,494225,00.html

    I like the charges of "Breach of contract" and "abuse of a position of authority" much better than some vague "death, destruction and terrorisation". 

     

    Agreed. Also, the Romanian seems to have a more useful reason for wanting to sue a god; the American probably just wanted to attract attention just before an election.



  • @mxx said:

    I like the charges of "Breach of contract"
     

    What would that contract be? The bible? The commandments? Because I think humanity is guilty of breaching those, thus invalidating the contractual responsibilities of god.

    Also, who signed that contract? Only person I think of that thinks he's the representative of all humanity is the American President, and I'm not letting him sign things for me!



  • @dhromed said:

     Thread hijack:

    if "cartoonists" don't bother to actually, say, draw their cartoons, then why bother with the multi-panel format? Or even a graphical format at all?

     

     Because then it would just be a bad BOFH replica



  •  @dtech said:

    What would that contract be?

    Well, read the article: "He claimed that he had concluded a contract with God at baptism but God had not kept his side of the bargain."



  • @dtech said:

    What would that contract be? The bible? The commandments? Because I think humanity is guilty of breaching those, thus invalidating the contractual responsibilities of god.
    Some of those were covenants, not contracts.  The difference is that in a covenant, if one side breaks it, the other side still has to uphold their end.  I don't know why anyone would ever make a covenant with someone, as there is no actual incentive for the other side to hold up their end of the deal, unless that person is God.



  • @bsaksida said:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7673591.stm

    Seriosly, what next

     

    <sarasm>Hey - they should make a film about that... </sarcasm>



  • @CDarklock said:

    God can travel in time. He went forward to some indeterminate point after woman was invented, impregnated one, ....

     

    ... at which point she exclaimed "OMFG!" ...

     



  • @boh said:

    @CDarklock said:

    God can travel in time. He went forward to some indeterminate point after woman was invented, impregnated one, ....

     

    ... at which point she exclaimed "OMFG!" ...

    Thread over. CDarklock, you win one internet.



  • @CDarklock said:

    "I'm having too much fun" troll: isn't it generally agreed that God only has one son?

    Actually, the phrase was "only begotten son", meaning that God had created other sons (e.g. Adam), but only had one in the usual manner.

    That having been said, there's no indication how many daughters God has, begotten or otherwise. Also, last I checked, significant parts of the world were predominantly Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, or other non-jewish/christian/muslim - as such, it *isn't* generally agreed that God only has one begotten son.

    All that having been said, you weren't supposed to figure out that bit about Prince-of-Lies indicating something about Prince-of-Lies' parent.



  • @CDarklock said:

    So, uh... who was Satan's father?

    Bonus troll: since woman was not invented yet, Satan clearly had no mother, so was this a case of masturbation or homosexuality? Or both?

    Satan is a mammal?

    The general theological position is that Satan is an angel, not a human being.



  • @Zecc said:

    @bsaksida said:
    a god being sued
    Got a problem there, because there are no lawyers in Heaven.
     

    It was thrown out of court since god has no known address with which to be served but the man claims since god is omnipotent he is aware he is served.

    Same reason, god is omnipotent therefore he knows all law. He may chose to elect himself or a legal representative.

    God, if you wish for us to continue with this, give me absolutely no sign!

    ...

    ...

    ...

    Thanks God, we shal continue!



  • @tgape said:

    but only had one in the usual manner.
    Which one would that be then?



  • @CDarklock said:

    @belgariontheking said:

    He is the Lord of Lies, after all.

    Prince of Lies.

    Logically, the son of the King of Lies.

    So, uh... who was Satan's father?

     

    http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prince

    –noun

    1.a nonreigning male member of a royal family.


  • Since the Pope is supposedly God's representative (the rock on which God built the church), shouldn't they be suing him?

    Or should that be the Archbishop of Canterbury?

     



  • @havokk said:

    Since the Pope is supposedly God's representative (the rock on which God built the church), shouldn't they be suing him?
    Well, the Pope didn't do any of the things that God is accused of doing, so you can't sue the Pope for them, only Him. However, the Pope is His representative, yes, which means he's an agent authorised to make decisions on His behalf; in essence, the Pope would be God's lawyer in this case.@havokk said:
    Or should that be the Archbishop of Canterbury?
    Well that shows that the position of "authorised legal agent" is disputed, which would require an administrative hearing before either would be allowed to represent God's interests in court, a hearing at which God Himself would have to testify. Since He isn't exactly in the habit of showing up places in person to communicate (about 2010 years ago was the last time, I think), neither would be able to claim the title, and it would fall upon the courts to appoint such an agent, be it the Pope, some other patriarch, or anyone else. Of course, then there would be ecumenical fallout brought about by the losing party, such as interdiction, violent extremism, or even a countersuit or appeal.



  • @TwelveBaud said:

    Since He isn't exactly in the habit of showing up places in person to communicate (about 2010 years ago was the last time, I think),

     I blieve that incarnating as a fire hazard would quickly hold Him in contempt of court.

    @BBC article said:

    Mr Chambers, a state senator for 38 years, said he filed the suit to make the point that "anyone can sue anyone else, even God".

    <!-- E BO -->

    I think this point has been made successfully, as the case was thrown out on legal technicality, rather than plain ridiculousness.



  • Note: The Mormons believe that god is actually an alien who lives on some planet (they have the details). Which means that they DO know god's address, which means that the Mormon god can be sued, and the Mormon church being the legal representative can pay any fines associated.

    Once again since god is omnipotent there is no problem serving him as simply bringing it to court makes him aware of it.

     

    However once that goes though, we can use Descartes' arguments to legally prove that all references to god actually point to the same god. Then all other churches are open battlegrounds. Since Descartes' arguments are pretty sound except for "existence is a perfection" unless some beliefs such as god is non-deceiving are false. If that is false then... well, we'll just have to see.

     

    EDIT: I just realized, churches claim to be the "house of god" duh, thats where god lives. Start serving you fools!



  • @operagost said:

    1. a nonreigning male member

    Satan is a dick?



  • @dhromed said:

    @BBC article said:

    Mr Chambers, a state senator for 38 years, said he filed the suit to make the point that "anyone can sue anyone else, even God".

    I think this point has been made successfully, as the case was thrown out on legal technicality, rather than plain ridiculousness.

    Ridiculousness can be appealed. Failure to serve notice can't.



  • Summary:

    1)  All religions are equally stupid, especially yours.

    2)  Suing a fictional creature is the least harmful way a politician can spend his time, seriously.

    3)  None of you are cute, clever or funny.  Obviously your looks aren't going to save you and your personalities can't be fixed.  The way I see it you have 2 choices: plastic surgery or GTFO. 



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Summary:

    1)  All religions are equally stupid, especially yours.

    2)  Suing a fictional creature is the least harmful way a politician can spend his time, seriously.

    3)  None of you are cute, clever or funny.  Obviously your looks aren't going to save you and your personalities can't be fixed.  The way I see it you have 2 choices: plastic surgery or GTFO. 

     

    Lots of religion for morb to talk about today, he must be happy!



  • @amischiefr said:

    Lots of religion for morb to talk about today, he must be cranky!
    FTFY



  • @Carnildo said:

    @dhromed said:

    @BBC article said:

    Mr Chambers, a state senator for 38 years, said he filed the suit to make the point that "anyone can sue anyone else, even God".

    I think this point has been made successfully, as the case was thrown out on legal technicality, rather than plain ridiculousness.

    Ridiculousness can be appealed. Failure to serve notice can't.

     

    Hmm does that mean that by this precidence god can no longer be sued since he has already been sued on all crap and had it thrown out? Doh



  • @astonerbum said:

    @Carnildo said:

    @dhromed said:

    @BBC article said:

    Mr Chambers, a state senator for 38 years, said he filed the suit to make the point that "anyone can sue anyone else, even God".

    I think this point has been made successfully, as the case was thrown out on legal technicality, rather than plain ridiculousness.

    Ridiculousness can be appealed. Failure to serve notice can't.

     

    Hmm does that mean that by this precidence god can no longer be sued since he has already been sued on all crap and had it thrown out? Doh

    The only way to re-file a case that's been thrown out for failure to serve notice is to provide proof that notice has been served -- and the burden of effort is on the person wishing to file the suit. On the other hand, if a case is summarily dismissed for "being ridiculous", it can continue clogging up the system for a while as it works its way through appeals. Guess which method overworked judges prefer to use?



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Summary:

    1. All religions are equally stupid, especially yours.
    Correct.@morbiuswilters said:
    1. Suing a fictional creature is the least harmful way a politician can spend his time, seriously.
    I disagree, based on the possibility to form a grass-roots campaign by the incompetents who worship that fictional creature, who then proceed to file amicus briefs, stage press conferences, and evangelise and misinform the community, disrupting the mechanations of dealing with Actual, Real Issues.@morbiuswilters said:
    1. None of you are cute, clever or funny.  Obviously your looks aren't going to save you and your personalities can't be fixed.  The way I see it you have 2 choices: plastic surgery or GTFO.
    Correct on all five points, but you forgot the third choice: rohypnol.



  • @TwelveBaud said:

    I disagree, based on the possibility to form a grass-roots campaign by the incompetents who worship that fictional creature, who then proceed to file amicus briefs, stage press conferences, and evangelise and misinform the community, disrupting the mechanations of dealing with Actual, Real Issues.

    No, see, no..  It's the "Real Issues" we need to keep the politicians away from.  That's how they fuck stuff up.  Arguing about suing God?  You can't fuck anything up by doing that... 



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @TwelveBaud said:

    I disagree, based on the possibility to form a grass-roots campaign by the incompetents who worship that fictional creature, who then proceed to file amicus briefs, stage press conferences, and evangelise and misinform the community, disrupting the mechanations of dealing with Actual, Real Issues.

    No, see, no..  It's the "Real Issues" we need to keep the politicians away from.  That's how they fuck stuff up.  Arguing about suing God?  You can't fuck anything up by doing that... 

    "Real Issues" like what ? Bushy's reign of error ? Unconstitutional Infringement of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution ? Saying GTFO in about every fourth post ?

     



  • @cklam said:

    "Real Issues" like what ? Bushy's reign of error ? Unconstitutional Infringement of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution ? Saying GTFO in about every fourth post ?
    Ted Stevens called the Internet, the lifeblood of TDWTF, "a series of tubes." He was concerned that they were being "clogged" by the use of content delivery systems such as BitTorrent and the proliferation of sites like Veoh, Hulu, Snotr, and YouTube, and blamed his not receiving "an internet" in a timely manner because of it. The "internet" in question never hit his ISP; it was an internal e-mail. And yet he's the head of the committee that legislates over the internet.

    Technically, if my 16-year-old second cousin in Richmond decided to tell me how he felt about his girlfriend and instant messaged me with the number eight, a few equals signs, a capital D and a tilde, then I have committed a "Class B felony sex crime" by "engaging in behavior suggestive to a minor to send data capable of conversion into a visual image transmitted by any means depicting an obscene visual representation" and be subject to additional sentence enhancements because he's a relative and because it's an IM, which the FBI would be required by law to prosecute me for. Or at least I will be if Bush signs a piece of legislation that's on his desk right now. For comparison, under current Virginia legislation I might be subject to a fine of up to $500, at a magistrate's discression.

    One recent issue debated in the Senate was the activation of the Selective Service System, informally known as the Draft. While it would be immensely unpopular, it would mitigate the decline in existing troop morale by allowing them to be replaced with new "volunteers" rather than keeping them on ever-extended tours of duty. Even though I am over 200lbs and haven't run a five-minute mile since middle school, I would still be considered one of the prime candidates, probably as a Predator pilot. However, I would still have to go through the initial training procedures, probably multiple times, with little to no regard for my safety or well-being.

    Frankly, I'd rather have them be squabbling about whether or not God can be sued than squabbling over whether I should be locked up for life because my cousin thinks his girlfriend is hot or whether I should die in Boot Camp.



  • @TwelveBaud said:

    @cklam said:

    "Real Issues" like what ? Bushy's reign of error ? Unconstitutional Infringement of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution ? Saying GTFO in about every fourth post ?
    Ted Stevens called the Internet, the lifeblood of TDWTF, "a series of tubes." He was concerned that they were being "clogged" by the use of content delivery systems such as BitTorrent and the proliferation of sites like Veoh, Hulu, Snotr, and YouTube, and blamed his not receiving "an internet" in a timely manner because of it. The "internet" in question never hit his ISP; it was an internal e-mail. And yet he's the head of the committee that legislates over the internet.

    Technically, if my 16-year-old second cousin in Richmond decided to tell me how he felt about his girlfriend and instant messaged me with the number eight, a few equals signs, a capital D and a tilde, then I have committed a "Class B felony sex crime" by "engaging in behavior suggestive to a minor to send data capable of conversion into a visual image transmitted by any means depicting an obscene visual representation" and be subject to additional sentence enhancements because he's a relative and because it's an IM, which the FBI would be required by law to prosecute me for. Or at least I will be if Bush signs a piece of legislation that's on his desk right now. For comparison, under current Virginia legislation I might be subject to a fine of up to $500, at a magistrate's discression.

    One recent issue debated in the Senate was the activation of the Selective Service System, informally known as the Draft. While it would be immensely unpopular, it would mitigate the decline in existing troop morale by allowing them to be replaced with new "volunteers" rather than keeping them on ever-extended tours of duty. Even though I am over 200lbs and haven't run a five-minute mile since middle school, I would still be considered one of the prime candidates, probably as a Predator pilot. However, I would still have to go through the initial training procedures, probably multiple times, with little to no regard for my safety or well-being.

    Frankly, I'd rather have them be squabbling about whether or not God can be sued than squabbling over whether I should be locked up for life because my cousin thinks his girlfriend is hot or whether I should die in Boot Camp.

     

    There you have it: Bushy reign of error at work !!! Ok, I concede that's an over-simplification. I am wel aware of the intricacies of legislative, judicative and legislative branches of the US Fedral Government.

    As to the draft: I got drafted into the German Army back in '86 and did my 15-month vacation with Y-tours. At the time back then I would preferred to have the politicians in (then) West Germany suing God. On the other hand looking back from today's perspective it is better that they didn't sue since Russian is way harder to learn in comparison to English.

    As to the minor thing referred above: that is the right idea taken way beyond too far into insanity. You have way too many active house-wive associations over there in the States.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.