Senator's lawsuit against God could be dropped

[danarhea]

A lawsuit filed against God is about to be dropped. Despite assurances from Pat Robertson and other televangelists that God does exist, process servers have thus far been unable to subpoena him, as they have been unable to find a location which to serve the papers. So does God exist? If he does, is he homeless, meaning that there is no heaven?

In other news, some people would also like to sue Bigfoot, accusing him of scaring the bejesus out of everybody, especially drunks. However, there is a problem there too. Despite reports that his feet are really, really big, nobody has been able to find any tracks to follow, thus locating him and serving papers. LOL.

Article is here.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

AWSOME use of tax dollars. :roll:

 

[Binary_Digit]

At first, I couldn't imagine on what level of insanity or just plain stupidity a person's melon would have to be in order to bring a lawsuit against God. So I read a little bit about it:

[Chambers] said he hopes the lawsuit brings to light his stance that no lawsuit is frivolous until the court decides. [He] said state senators periodically have offered bills prohibiting the filing of certain types of suits. He said his main objective is that the constitution requires that the doors to the courthouse be open to all. (snip) Chambers said he began this lawsuit, which has gained national and international attention, because if he would have stood up in the legislature and said everyone needs access to the courts, people would have yawned.

Sen. Chambers Hopes Lawsuit Against God Carries Real Lesson - Omaha News Story - KETV Omaha

Okay, so he's not completely "toys in the attic" looney, and now I think it's even debatable whether this is a waste of time/money.

I agree with where he's coming from, that everyone should have access to the courts. For one, I don't think it will ever be possible to label all lawsuits in a certain category as "frivolous" and be correct every time. For two, I'm already not comfortable with the legal immunity the government is allowed to give itself and its co-conspirators, and I'm very skeptical of any and all legislation that would further disallows bona-fide victims from bringing lawsuits against those responsible. Yes, there are stupid people who will bring stupid lawsuits, but freedom does come with a price. Besides, I thought that's what the "loser pays" concept was for.

Not only do I agree with his goal, but I find myself agreeing with his implementation too. Too many good arguments just disappear into the void of the rank and file jackasses in Congress. A stunt like this should bring the issue closer to the public, where the People can make better-informed decisions about what their Congressmen are trying to do to the Constitution and whether they deserve to be reelected. Hopefully.

 

[Kandahar]

Okay, so he's not completely "toys in the attic" looney, and now I think it's even debatable whether this is a waste of time/money.

Yes. Yes it is.

I agree with where he's coming from, that everyone should have access to the courts. For one, I don't think it will ever be possible to label all lawsuits in a certain category as "frivolous" and be correct every time.

I'm pretty sure that any lawsuit where God is listed as the plaintiff, defendant, or a witness will be frivolous every time.

For two, I'm already not comfortable with the legal immunity the government is allowed to give itself and its co-conspirators,

How do you propose to remedy this? By definition, the government writes and enforces the law. Just about any act of Congress provides someone with legal immunity for something.

and I'm very skeptical of any and all legislation that would further disallows bona-fide victims from bringing lawsuits against those responsible. Yes, there are stupid people who will bring stupid lawsuits, but freedom does come with a price. Besides, I thought that's what the "loser pays" concept was for.

Paying the court costs is simply not enough. Let's say that I'm a trial lawyer who makes big bucks by suing corporations or wealthy people. If I stand to gain $1 million by winning a lawsuit, and it costs me $10,000 in court costs every time I lose, I only need to win 1% of my cases to break even.

If someone files a frivolous or knowingly false lawsuit, not only should they pay the court costs, they should also be fined for filing the lawsuit in the first place.

Not only do I agree with his goal, but I find myself agreeing with his implementation too. Too many good arguments just disappear into the void of the rank and file jackasses in Congress. A stunt like this should bring the issue closer to the public, where the People can make better-informed decisions about what their Congressmen are trying to do to the Constitution and whether they deserve to be reelected. Hopefully.

We have judges for a reason. To judge. I have enough confidence in our legal system to be able to judge the frivolous/false lawsuits from the cases where the law is simply not on someone's side.

 

[Cold Highway]

Wait, wait, wait, someone actually tried to sue God?

 

[rivrrat]

Wait, wait, wait, someone actually tried to sue God?

Duh. Half of the Katrina victims are suing Poseidon, the other half are suing Neptune. Wouldn't you?

 

[Hatuey]

Duh. Half of the Katrina victims are suing Poseidon, the other half are suing Neptune. Wouldn't you?

If my house gets hit by lightning can I sue Zeus?

 

[DarkWizard12]

If my house gets hit by lightning can I sue Zeus?

You could but, don't be surprised if he ends the case by striking you with lighting

 

[Binary_Digit]

We have judges for a reason. To judge. I have enough confidence in our legal system to be able to judge the frivolous/false lawsuits from the cases where the law is simply not on someone's side.

That's the whole point. This is about Congress (or some members of Congress) deciding that certain lawsuits should never even make it to a judge to be considered if it's frivolous or not. How can any judge decide if a lawsuit is frivolous if Congress won't let people bring the lawsuit in the first place, simply because it fits into some arbitrary category that they defined?

How do you propose to remedy this? By definition, the government writes and enforces the law. Just about any act of Congress provides someone with legal immunity for something.

I don't understand how you reason the part in bold, but I propose that the government shouldn't be allowed to give legal immunity to itself and its co-conspirators after they break the law. Although that doesn't exactly parallel the topic, the common aspect is that they both close the doors of the justice system to people who may have been legitimately wronged, and I think that's wrong in every case.

Paying the court costs is simply not enough. Let's say that I'm a trial lawyer who makes big bucks by suing corporations or wealthy people. If I stand to gain $1 million by winning a lawsuit, and it costs me $10,000 in court costs every time I lose, I only need to win 1% of my cases to break even.

If someone files a frivolous or knowingly false lawsuit, not only should they pay the court costs, they should also be fined for filing the lawsuit in the first place.

That I totally agree with. But they should be allowed to file the suit. Congress shouldn't categorically disallow it, simply because they think every lawsuit in category X is automatically frivolous. Let them all go to a judge to decide.