I was going to write a post about a US Senator who is suing god. To prove a point about frivolous lawsuits, he’s seeking a permanent injunction ordering god to cease harmful activities, citing “fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects, and the like.”
It accuses god “of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent… [as well as] calamitous catastrophes resulting in the wide-spread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth’s inhabitants including innocent babes, infants, children, the aged and infirm without mercy or distinction.”
The lawsuit even goes so far as to say that god goes by many aliases, and because god is “omnipresent” it is safe to assume that after reasonable attempts to contact the plaintiff, that god will know of the lawsuit, even though he was unreachable.
I find it pretty ridiculous. Personally I hold all religion in the same contempt, but this? I don’t think it proves his point. Well… maybe a little, but it saddens me that a Senator would make such a mockery of our legal system. Is it also sad that I had a dream last night in which I finally got a copy of the US Constitution small enough to fit in my pocket? I was so happy when I got it.
And… wait a minute! It looks like I wrote the post I’d previously agreed not to write. Very well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
It's pointless to sue god, especially if you say that god is omnipotent, since God will already have known about the lawsuit -- and the outcome -- before existence was even created. But yeah, I think there are better ways to make a point about the legal system.
If god loses, which he'd already know (being omnipotent), I say he pays up in unicorns.
Post a Comment