’God’ responds to lawsuit |
by Gina Dalfonzo |
As you'd expect, the response to Sen. Chambers's lawsuit "miraculously appeared."
Note: No one at The Point, BreakPoint Online, or Prison Fellowship is responsible for the content of any of the blogs listed above, except where noted. A blog’s presence does not necessarily imply endorsement. |
« Support the Troops: Buy Chocolate | Main | The Point Radio: Donor Dads Don’t Cut It »
’God’ responds to lawsuit |
by Gina Dalfonzo |
As you'd expect, the response to Sen. Chambers's lawsuit "miraculously appeared."
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c635553ef00e54ef8b4898834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ’God’ responds to lawsuit:
The comments to this entry are closed.
I'd say that the point about God being outside the Jurisdiction of the American court system is valid.
Posted by: Sy Hoekstra | September 21, 2007 at 04:53 PM
I had to laugh...twice. Check out the picture - looks like he has a halo!
Posted by: Beth | September 21, 2007 at 04:57 PM
You noticed that too, huh, Beth? At first glance I thought the picture was supposed to be an artist's rendering of God! :-)
Posted by: Gina Dalfonzo | September 21, 2007 at 05:00 PM
I thought it was Morgan Freeman just glancing at it...
Great comeback!
Posted by: Samantha | September 21, 2007 at 05:52 PM
I wonder if Senator Chambers has himself authored any legislation, and how he would feel about someone claiming "Senator, your legislation doesn't mean what you think."
I'll bet he'd be highly offended.
But I'll also bet he wouldn't see the inconsistency/hypocrisy.
Interestingly, how can an agnostic sue a plaintiff that he's not certain exists? Has Senator Chambers unwittingly established the legal existence of the Almighty? If so, someone should notify Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens ( http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=6841 ). And the Senator himself, of course.
Meanwhile, we can pray that the Great Lawgiver and Judge of the World would become an activist and take up this issue - in Chambers. ;-)
Posted by: Lee | September 21, 2007 at 06:03 PM
Lee brings up an interesting point. Does a defendant in a trial necessarily need to exist. It would seem that Sen. Chambers doesn't think so. More importantly now, could one extract oneself from any dificult legal situation by claiming the non-existence of one's prosicuters? If so, then the epistemological problem of whether or not we can actually know that others exist must be solved before the legal system can continue acting in its current forrm . If it is determined that one cannot truely know that others exist, then, by virtue of our intellectual consistancy, we must descend immediately into anarchy.
Posted by: Sy Hoekstra | September 22, 2007 at 01:07 AM
I just came on this without reading much of it. But, if God is being sued (ouch!) shouldn't the phrase over the judge's bench be "Tin God, We Rust"?
Posted by: herman greenstein | September 22, 2007 at 07:36 PM
God in the Dock. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_the_Dock
I'm sure Sen. Chambers just considers it a cute publicity stunt. Doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
Posted by: Susannah | September 23, 2007 at 08:03 PM
Moses petitioned God for the people of Israel and God spared them. Is Chambers seeking a cease and desist order or punitive damages. God will defeat him because is omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent. Give it up Chambers he may not have mercy on us. His punitive damages could be even worse.
Posted by: Patricia | September 24, 2007 at 12:39 PM
As a Nebraskan, let me just say, face in my hands, "How embarassing!"
Posted by: Dan Rowlison | September 25, 2007 at 08:37 PM
Nice picture though, kind of reminds you of Charlton Heston, doesn't it?
Posted by: Dan Rowlison | September 25, 2007 at 08:41 PM