State Senator Sues God

[Baron von Turkeypants]

You won't have eyes tonight. You won't have ears or a tongue; you will wander the underworld blind, deaf and dumb...

http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2007/09/18/senator-ernie-chambers-sues-god/

He's doing it as a statement against a law that would prevent people from filing "frivolous lawsuits." Still, I like the guy.

Quote:

Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers has filed a lawsuit against God for, among other things, causing "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects and the like." The plaintiff assumes God will have actual knowledge of the action, due to His being omniscient.

Chambers, who is not a religious man, said he filed the suit not because he actually expects an injunction against God (see, he's not crazy, even if the AP photographer made it look like he had a halo around his head in this picture), but because he wants to call attention to "frivolous" lawsuits.

An example of a controversial lawsuit Chambers wanted to protest: the one against a judge who banned an alleged rape victim from using words like "rape" or "sexual assault" during her testimony under penalty of sanctions. (It seems pretty un-frivolous to us, especially compared to, say, the wacky guy who sued his dry cleaner for $54 million. Details on the rape -- sorry, bad thing -- case are available in a sidebar video report here and via the A.P.)

So, two questions: (1) should the courts indeed be open to any and all lawsuits? and (2) against God, does Chambers have a case?

...and all the dead will know: this is Hector, fool who thought he killed Achilles.

 

[reverie0312]

That's my ******** senator! From my ******** city! I'm so ******** excited! smile  

[CaprinaePsi]

1) Unfortunately, although I greatly dislike people who sue companies, people, etc for the stupidest reasons, I think the court should be open to all lawsuits. When you think about it, it's not the law that is on the person who is sueing's side, but the lawyer, and with a good enough lawyer, you can sue a little kid's family because the kid accidentally hit the baseball into your yard.

2) No, he does not. If God is indeed omniscient, he knows that a good lawyer can do anything for you.  

[Cirosan]

You can file suit against a fictional character?  

[ProjectOmicron88]

There's only one man who can successfully win against God in court: Clarence Darrow. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure he's dead. Oh well. Back to the Chewbacca Defense.  

[Meirelle]

OMG awesome! My Mum told me about this today! I'm so excited! *bounces* 4laugh  

[AnonymouZ]

Jesus ******** christ on a stick.... he's gonna be eaten alive!

(note it's hick nebraska... and yes, i do live here in omaha nebraska... so i know how bad "the situation" is)  

[Zambimaru]

I can't wait to see how this turns out. "God" better have a pretty good excuse for not defending the United States.  

[Rohkaze]

It will be interesting to see how the courts handle this case. If they reject on the grounds that god is not real . . . wow, can you imagine the precedent?!?

eek  

[Dom is Dom]

To repeat what was said elsewhere:

God doesn't have a chance. All the good lawyers are in hell.  

[Sanguvixen]

Wow, this is kind of funny.

I really think that there is a line between what makes an acceptable lawsuit and what is on the edge of frivious, rediculous, and insane. People cross that line way too often.

People are just too sue happy. I think closing off the courts to certain kinds of frivious lawsuits might alleviate that. I mean, when the whole "That fast food resturant made me fat" came about, it should have been thrown out of the court due to the stupidity of the person who got fat eating unhealthy food.

It'll interesting to see how that lawsuit against god turns out. If anything it might be a really good laugh. Who'se going to defend God? Is he going to be held incontempt for not showing up?

 

[Napoleon_Danneskjold]

I think the courts should be open to any lawsuit, but to have standing to sue you should have paid your annual "legal insurance" fee. No taxes must go to nonsense, the court should be funded entirely by those who intend to use it. Indeed if one requires a small percentage of each contract to be paid before it can be considered legally enforceable, you could fund an entire government with no taxes at all!  

[Baron von Turkeypants]

Sanguvixen

Wow, this is kind of funny.
I really think that there is a line between what makes an acceptable lawsuit and what is on the edge of frivious, rediculous, and insane. People cross that line way too often.
People are just too sue happy. I think closing off the courts to certain kinds of frivious lawsuits might alleviate that. I mean, when the whole "That fast food resturant made me fat" came about, it should have been thrown out of the court due to the stupidity of the person who got fat eating unhealthy food.
It'll interesting to see how that lawsuit against god turns out. If anything it might be a really good laugh. Who'se going to defend God? Is he going to be held incontempt for not showing up?

You won't have eyes tonight. You won't have ears or a tongue; you will wander the underworld blind, deaf and dumb...

The point of the lawsuit is to challenge a proposed law that would make it illegal to file "frivolous" lawsuits.

...and all the dead will know: this is Hector, fool who thought he killed Achilles.

 

[Theophrastus]

Sanguvixen

Wow, this is kind of funny.

I really think that there is a line between what makes an acceptable lawsuit and what is on the edge of frivious, rediculous, and insane. People cross that line way too often.

People are just too sue happy. I think closing off the courts to certain kinds of frivious lawsuits might alleviate that. I mean, when the whole "That fast food resturant made me fat" came about, it should have been thrown out of the court due to the stupidity of the person who got fat eating unhealthy food.

It'll interesting to see how that lawsuit against god turns out. If anything it might be a really good laugh. Who'se going to defend God? Is he going to be held incontempt for not showing up?

That's the whole thing about law, though - nothing is established in broad strokes but instead every case becomes a precedent.

You know, if the case goes forward, God will lose by default because he won't show up. XD  

[Sanguvixen]

Baron von Turkeypants

Sanguvixen

Wow, this is kind of funny.
I really think that there is a line between what makes an acceptable lawsuit and what is on the edge of frivious, rediculous, and insane. People cross that line way too often.
People are just too sue happy. I think closing off the courts to certain kinds of frivious lawsuits might alleviate that. I mean, when the whole "That fast food resturant made me fat" came about, it should have been thrown out of the court due to the stupidity of the person who got fat eating unhealthy food.
It'll interesting to see how that lawsuit against god turns out. If anything it might be a really good laugh. Who'se going to defend God? Is he going to be held incontempt for not showing up?

You won't have eyes tonight. You won't have ears or a tongue; you will wander the underworld blind, deaf and dumb...

The point of the lawsuit is to challenge a proposed law that would make it illegal to file "frivolous" lawsuits.

...and all the dead will know: this is Hector, fool who thought he killed Achilles.

Stop, you are confusing me!

When you stop to think, how do you define "Frivolous Lawsuit" though? I mean...it's one of those things that is up to interphretation.