get out of paying them on the grounds that the claimer doesn't believe in the existance of God?
2007-04-03 05:35:52 · 25 answers · asked by Dustbowl Blues 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
for insurance purposes that term has a legal meaning, not a religious one. they will have to pay.
2007-04-03 05:38:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Highly doubt it. If the insurance tried to pull that one, they would be exposing themselves to discriminating by religion. If they tried this, the insurance company would be saying that "Act of God" is a religious expression and that atheists are excluded from taking part of this section of the insurance.
I do believe that the insurance company would end up paying way more money from discrimination lawsuits than they would end up saving from preventing paying whatever was insured.
2007-04-03 12:40:41 · answer #2 · answered by A.Mercer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ah, but then in the first place, how does the claimer prove it was an act of god? Its not as if you can call God up and ask him if he did it...
2007-04-03 12:43:02 · answer #3 · answered by beanie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you buy a policy wit "act of God" in they will pay. They recognize God for you. The question should be--If something happens as an "act of God"--Should an atheist accept the money?ha
2007-04-03 12:43:16 · answer #4 · answered by j.wisdom 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ummm... "act of god" only means "act of nature" and isn't usually covered by insurance companies. And just because its a term, doesn't mean that it actually is religious in nature.
2007-04-03 12:44:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because "Act of God" is a legal term of art for a force majeure (layman's definition: Honking big thing beyond human control, like earthquake, flood, plague of locusts o'er the land, N'Sync reuniting, etc).
2007-04-03 12:41:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. The phrase has a specific legal meaning, and the reference to god is metaphorical.
2007-04-03 12:43:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
My insurance lists "natural disasters" rather than "acts of God." I think that's a rather antiquated legal term, isn't it?
2007-04-03 12:47:29 · answer #8 · answered by N 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
interesting question and i dont blame you for asking it ive asked the same question. how is it that theologians have been trying to prove the existance of the almighty for years yet the insurance agents have him trapsing around peoples properties.
2007-04-03 12:46:59 · answer #9 · answered by kenshiro 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope. 'Acts of God' is a legal term devoid of religious meaning.
Many insurance companies have begun switching to 'natural disasters' to replace 'acts of god', however.
How is it winning the lottery is 'a trick of the devil' but having your house destroyed by a tornado and the remains burned by a raging forest fire an 'act of god' anyways?
2007-04-03 12:39:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
LOL good question! I would prefer to put act of mother earth...and I dont think the insurance companies give a rats **** what faith you are!
2007-04-03 12:39:16 · answer #11 · answered by cornishpiskie1 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋