Lets say that you were in an insurance claim battle for damages to your house caused by lightening (An "act of god" according to some insurance companies)
The insurance company, insists it is not liable as the "god" they talk of, was responsible for the act. The judge call "god" to the dock. But now god stands in the dock... the insurance comapny is asked to show evidence of "god" they present a 2000 year old book full of jumbled non-sense...
Upon presenting the bible as evidence of "god"... how quickly in do you think they would be lauged out of court... (approximately in nano seconds)
Will it really take a court case to prove this "god" is a non-enity ??
What do you think ?
2006-09-28 01:57:38 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
for benidict... man, you get het up too easyily, chill ... i only wrote god instead of GOD ... god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god god !
2006-09-28 02:31:27 · update #1
Angk - thanks yes, this is funny http://principiadiscordia.com/book/13.php
2006-09-28 02:32:48 · update #2
I understand the point you're trying to make, however in a legal sense, the term "Act of God" is used to describe certain natural occurences which are unpredictable.
When it comes to indemnification, the phrase "Act of God" is often misused and misunderstood. The term has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with Christianity, (or any religion, for that matter) or defining any God as a living entitiy.
"Act of God" is acceptable legal defense in many parts of the world- it's the closed minded western culture which believes it refers to Jesus Christ. Again, it's a phrase used to describe the unpredictable, not to prove the existence of any God.
t's not a way to ESCAPE liability by placing blame on some unproven diety, it's a way to define phenomena which are beyond human control, and ESTABLISH the rules for liability.
Any contract which states certain events as Acts of God is simply meant to state what the parties creating the contract are not willing to indemnify.
Most cases which are fought in court over "Acts of God" are cases where the prosecution is trying to prove negligence.
Let's say you were contracted to fill an above ground swimming pool with water, and you fullfill that contract. The next day, it rains. It rains so heavily that the pool bursts. The owner of the pool decides not to pay you and blame you for destroying his pool.
In court, your defense would be that the pool was destroyed by an "act of god"- the rainstorm. You had no idea it would rain the next day, and were not responsible for covering the pool or ensuring the excess water drained out. You were not negligent in your contractual obligation.
The insurance company isn't being negligent when lightning strikes your house and burns to the ground. They would have no reason to defend themselves for not paying out, especially since your insurance contract will clearly state what is and what isn't covered.
As for insurance companies having double standards- I submit that before you sign any insurance policy, you should read and completely understand what is and what is not covered.
Who is the bigger jack@$$- the insurance company for refusing to pay, or the person who signed a contract without understanding it?
(By the way, I DO NOT work for any insurance company)
As for taking "god" to court- that, my friend, is something which the religious zealots would never allow to happen. They're most likely to say, "MY ONLY JUDGE IS GOD, AND NO JURY CAN TRY HIM" or some other nonsense like that.
Uh.... Pontius Pilot, anyone?
2006-09-28 01:59:42 · answer #1 · answered by the_dude 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The insurance companies lives a double standard they have found a way to get out of paying for damages to omes by the "act of God" clause Instead of trying to demean God why not tell your insurance company to pay the damages and go after the responsible party. Most policies have a clause to go after the party responisble for the damages.. As for trying to prove that God does not exist why don't you try to prove that you came from an ameba in the sea. You can try to disprove God many have and failed just as you will. Good Luck
2006-09-28 02:09:51 · answer #2 · answered by wolfy1 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First - I am not a lawyer, so what follows is just my uneducated opinion. That means it's not worth the electrons it was written on, so don't use it for legal advice!
While god may be a fictional character, an "Act of God" is a real concept in legal terms, I believe. To me, that means that it has been used as a dodge for insurance companies for years, and has been tested in courts, and stood up repeatedly. It has been established as a precedent, and doesn't need further proof or substantiation.
Nice try, though.
Oh, and Benedict - the old song is true. "You will know they are christians by their love".
2006-09-28 02:03:49 · answer #3 · answered by Ralfcoder 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You really think a court case proves anything?
Your faith in the court system is even more laughable than my faith in God.
2006-09-28 02:00:13 · answer #4 · answered by kingstubborn 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think you would highly enjoy this--first thing I thought of when I saw the subject:
http://principiadiscordia.com/book/13.php
2006-09-28 02:01:00 · answer #5 · answered by angk 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is no case. Unless everyone involved is anti-God, a case may probably prosper.
2006-09-28 02:03:19 · answer #6 · answered by DAX 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The bible is evidence of "God" not "god"
Case dismissed!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-09-28 02:21:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
u are insulting God...
His name is God, not god... bastard...
2006-09-28 02:00:36 · answer #8 · answered by Benedict 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋