R
Rich
Guest
There'll be a queue outside the courthouse of those claiming to be oneI'm sure if he can't make it he'll send a doppelganger in his place.
Are Americans really like this?
- Thread starter ColinEssex
- Start date
MrsGorilla
Rat Race Participant
- Local time
- Today, 17:49
- Joined
- May 6, 2003
- Messages
- 1,745
There'll be a queue outside the courthouse of those claiming to be one
I had a similar thought.
- Local time
- Today, 17:49
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,495
This is actually a ploy from a movie, darned if I remember which one. No, not "Oh, God" with John Denver and George Burns. Though it almost went that far.
Basically, this has happened before. Some yahoo overhears that publicist's line that says, "As long as you don't break the law, there is no bad publicity." So they attract publicity. This sounds a bit short-sighted, however, since the guy will almost surely tick off the religious vote, which in Nebraska is not inconsequential.
The trick is that if a canny judge hears the case, he will ask if the defendant is in court and someone will point out that due to USA separation of church and state, God is not allowed in the courtroom. Therefore the entire case will be moot.
Trick #2 is to try God in absentia. A canny judge will point out to the senator that it is entirely possible for the defendant to call the plaintiff to a different court of His own choosing, and is plaintiff ready to appear in THAT particular court? (Usually, all but the flat-out stupidest doinks will decline.)
Trick #3 is to advise plaintiff that his lawsuit was deficient in failing to provide an address at which God could be served with a subpoena. The really canny judge would point out that God's kingdom is not of this world (see Jesus in His reply to Pontius Pilate) and therefore the court seriously doubts it has jurisdiction.
As to whether ALL of the USA citizens (or all North Americans) are like this? Naw, most of us know better. You don't want to sue God. You might win your judgement - and lose another judgement later, one for which (we are told) there is no appeal.
Now the one thing that probably would NOT happen would be for the judge to deny the existence of the defendant. (Judges get elected, too.) This senator's joy ride down the tubes would prompt the judge to not make rulings that would send him/her down the same tube a few minutes later. Religious-Right voters tend to be nasty.
Basically, this has happened before. Some yahoo overhears that publicist's line that says, "As long as you don't break the law, there is no bad publicity." So they attract publicity. This sounds a bit short-sighted, however, since the guy will almost surely tick off the religious vote, which in Nebraska is not inconsequential.
The trick is that if a canny judge hears the case, he will ask if the defendant is in court and someone will point out that due to USA separation of church and state, God is not allowed in the courtroom. Therefore the entire case will be moot.
Trick #2 is to try God in absentia. A canny judge will point out to the senator that it is entirely possible for the defendant to call the plaintiff to a different court of His own choosing, and is plaintiff ready to appear in THAT particular court? (Usually, all but the flat-out stupidest doinks will decline.)
Trick #3 is to advise plaintiff that his lawsuit was deficient in failing to provide an address at which God could be served with a subpoena. The really canny judge would point out that God's kingdom is not of this world (see Jesus in His reply to Pontius Pilate) and therefore the court seriously doubts it has jurisdiction.
As to whether ALL of the USA citizens (or all North Americans) are like this? Naw, most of us know better. You don't want to sue God. You might win your judgement - and lose another judgement later, one for which (we are told) there is no appeal.
Now the one thing that probably would NOT happen would be for the judge to deny the existence of the defendant. (Judges get elected, too.) This senator's joy ride down the tubes would prompt the judge to not make rulings that would send him/her down the same tube a few minutes later. Religious-Right voters tend to be nasty.
But, surely, God is omnipresent and exists in all of us? Therefore, as lon as somebody is in court, so is God. Couldn't he, instead, be treated as present but refusing to answer questions on the grounds that he might incriminate himself?
ColinEssex
Old registered user
- Local time
- Today, 23:49
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2002
- Messages
- 9,451
Well, someone had to dicate that book they get people to put their hand on and swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me the defendant.
Len Boorman
Back in gainfull employme
- Local time
- Today, 23:49
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2000
- Messages
- 1,930
Or how can you prove that he does not exist.... Just because he has not visited you does not mean he does not exist
Abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscence
Haven't seen him myself lately though
L
- Local time
- Today, 17:49
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2001
- Messages
- 30,495
This is primarily a reply to Colin - and also to Len.
Invariably, "proofs" of God's existence must fail. Didn't Jesus warn Satan (in the desert) that one could not test God? Didn't Jesus tell us that only through FAITH (not proof) would we come to him - and to God through him?
I use this argument on "Intelligent Design Creationists" - drives 'em nuts.
Using the documentable statements as indicated above, it is clear that we can never prove God's existence - for that would violate the "only through faith" statement. We will not find proof on Earth, either. Jesus told Pontius Pilate his kingdom was not of this world. There will be no proof here.
Therefore any god whose existence you COULD prove is a false god. So if you worship the god whose existence you just proved, you put that (little-g) god before (big-G) God - violating one of the commandments.
Hmmmm - whom can you name that has a vested interest in getting you to violate commandments? I've got it - the entire notion of "Proof of God's Existence" is a ploy by SATAN! The whole Intelligent Design concept is BLASPHEMY!
Anyway... if you tried to sue God, a good judge would simply deny jurisdiction. A dumb sh|t judge would actually start the trial.
Invariably, "proofs" of God's existence must fail. Didn't Jesus warn Satan (in the desert) that one could not test God? Didn't Jesus tell us that only through FAITH (not proof) would we come to him - and to God through him?
I use this argument on "Intelligent Design Creationists" - drives 'em nuts.
Using the documentable statements as indicated above, it is clear that we can never prove God's existence - for that would violate the "only through faith" statement. We will not find proof on Earth, either. Jesus told Pontius Pilate his kingdom was not of this world. There will be no proof here.
Therefore any god whose existence you COULD prove is a false god. So if you worship the god whose existence you just proved, you put that (little-g) god before (big-G) God - violating one of the commandments.
Hmmmm - whom can you name that has a vested interest in getting you to violate commandments? I've got it - the entire notion of "Proof of God's Existence" is a ploy by SATAN! The whole Intelligent Design concept is BLASPHEMY!
Anyway... if you tried to sue God, a good judge would simply deny jurisdiction. A dumb sh|t judge would actually start the trial.
Anybody remembers "Miracle on 34th Street"?
If trial was for real, I'd bet you that some snarky lawyer will find a way to prove God's existence, like the protaganist did using mails to Post Office to prove Santa Claus's existence.
If trial was for real, I'd bet you that some snarky lawyer will find a way to prove God's existence, like the protaganist did using mails to Post Office to prove Santa Claus's existence.
R
Rich
Guest
How do you know this for a fact, were you there at the time?
Is it just a conviction like that of there being wmd's in Iraq?
R
Rich
Guest
Yes Americans faith was so strong your government had to put a reminder on banknotes to prevent you from forgetting it......
scott-atkinson
I'm with the Witch.......
- Local time
- Today, 23:49
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,621
What!!! God does not exist......surely there is an opening there for Jose Mourihno!
Len Boorman
Back in gainfull employme
- Local time
- Today, 23:49
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2000
- Messages
- 1,930
Doc Man
Read your post Hmmm interesting
If Abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscence then does not the lack of evidence therefore indicate that there is a possibility at least of presence.
Therefore if the possibility exists then that possibility cannot be ignored.
Maybe not proof of presence but possibility exists.
People have been tried for murder where these is no body ?
L
Read your post Hmmm interesting
If Abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscence then does not the lack of evidence therefore indicate that there is a possibility at least of presence.
Therefore if the possibility exists then that possibility cannot be ignored.
Maybe not proof of presence but possibility exists.
People have been tried for murder where these is no body ?
L
R
Rich
Guest
and wars have been fought over evidence that subsequently didn't exist in the first place
oddly enough it was claimed that God ordained it
and wars have been fought over evidence that subsequently didn't exist in the first place
oddly enough it was claimed that God ordained it
And haven't many people over the years carried out irrational (at best) and violent crimes, claiming later that God told them to do it?
Surely there's a chance for an extra charge against his omnipotent-ness of incitement to cause violence?
scott-atkinson
I'm with the Witch.......
- Local time
- Today, 23:49
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,621
R
Rich
Guest
How do you deport one who is omnipresent
Or even remove him from the Whitehouse?
They could change the sentence to a fine, based on personal wealth. For someone whose kingdom includes everything, that should amount to a tidy penny.One, problem, the incitement charge is normally followed by deportation.
How do you deport one who is omnipresent
Although, if someone who's eternal asks for time to pay, that could drag things out a bit ($50 a week, for eternity?).
