Prisoner sues God

[vidcc]

There are people of faith, people of extreme faith, Ideological zealots and then this man



Prisoner sues God

A Romanian prisoner is suing God for failing to save him from the Devil.

The inmate, named as Pavel M in media reports, accused God of "cheating, abuse and traffic of influence".

His complaint reads: "I, the undersigned Pavel M, currently jailed at Timisoara Penitentiary serving a 20 years sentence for murder, request legal action against God, resident in Heaven, and represented here by the Romanian Orthodox Church, for committing the following crimes: cheating, concealment, abuse against people's interest, taking bribe and traffic of influence."

The inmate argued that his baptism was a contract between him and God who was supposed to keep the Devil away and keep him out of trouble.

He added: "God even claimed and received from me various goods and prayers in exchange for forgiveness and the promise that I would be rid of problems and have a better life.

"But on the contrary I was left in Devil's hands."

The complaint was sent to the Timisoara Court of Justice and forwarded to the prosecutor's office.

But prosecutors said it would probably be dropped and they were unable to subpoena God to court.
source (http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1576068.html)

Do you think he has a case?

[Yoga]

predestination

[GepperRankins]

that rawks

[Everose]

No, but he is one.:)

[Busyman]

There are people of faith, people of extreme faith, Ideological zealots and then this man



Prisoner sues God

A Romanian prisoner is suing God for failing to save him from the Devil.

The inmate, named as Pavel M in media reports, accused God of "cheating, abuse and traffic of influence".

His complaint reads: "I, the undersigned Pavel M, currently jailed at Timisoara Penitentiary serving a 20 years sentence for murder, request legal action against God, resident in Heaven, and represented here by the Romanian Orthodox Church, for committing the following crimes: cheating, concealment, abuse against people's interest, taking bribe and traffic of influence."

The inmate argued that his baptism was a contract between him and God who was supposed to keep the Devil away and keep him out of trouble.

He added: "God even claimed and received from me various goods and prayers in exchange for forgiveness and the promise that I would be rid of problems and have a better life.

"But on the contrary I was left in Devil's hands."

The complaint was sent to the Timisoara Court of Justice and forwarded to the prosecutor's office.

But prosecutors said it would probably be dropped and they were unable to subpoena God to court.
source (http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1576068.html)

Do you think he has a case?
He's fucking stupid, or at best, mentally unstable and fucking stupid.

This is Lounge material.

[Busyman]

No, but he is one.:)
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Hilarious!!!

[GepperRankins]

There are people of faith, people of extreme faith, Ideological zealots and then this man



source (http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1576068.html)

Do you think he has a case?
He's fucking stupid, or at best, mentally unstable and fucking stupid.

This is Lounge material.
screw you busyman. this case rawks. more people should question god :01:

[vidcc]

Well silly as it is it raises a question.

surely if one believes god exists then one should think that even if God is "above question" he is actually someone or some thing that can be targeted. If it is not irrational to believe in God then it is not irrational to think that God abandoned that person. So is this man "irrational"?.....After all every day people declare "God saved me" "God made me" "God this or that"
It does rank along the lines of eating too much and then trying to deflect from personal accountability by suing Mcdonalds for your obesity.

[Busyman]

Well silly as it is it raises a question.

surely if one believes god exists then one should think that even if God is "above question" he is actually someone or some thing that can be targeted. If it is not irrational to believe in God then it is not irrational to think that God abandoned that person. So is this man "irrational"?.....After all every day people declare "God saved me" "God made me" "God this or that"
It does rank along the lines of eating too much and then trying to deflect from personal accountability by suing Mcdonalds for your obesity.
Actually it raises no question except whether those that entertain what this idiot says are idiots themselves.

You said it best.....personal accountability.

[GepperRankins]

Well silly as it is it raises a question.

surely if one believes god exists then one should think that even if God is "above question" he is actually someone or some thing that can be targeted. If it is not irrational to believe in God then it is not irrational to think that God abandoned that person. So is this man "irrational"?.....After all every day people declare "God saved me" "God made me" "God this or that"
It does rank along the lines of eating too much and then trying to deflect from personal accountability by suing Mcdonalds for your obesity.
Actually it raises no question except whether those that entertain what this idiot says are idiots themselves.

You said it best.....personal accountability.


this dude prayed everyday and got christened. the church told him he would be protected by god and asked to be protected from evil every day. therefore, the church and/or god ripped him off, because he was not protected from evil. if you believe in god - you have the right to sue your church if you either do something evil or evil is done onto you. this was definately a verbal and probably written agreement. for the church to deny this would make them guilty of fraud

[JPaul]

Methinks this is a part of his "hat-stand defence" strategy.

[vidcc]

]
Actually it raises no question except whether those that entertain what this idiot says are idiots themselves.

You said it best.....personal accountability.


So what should be entertained about peoples beliefs?.

We don't accept the defence "God told me to do it" when someone does something bad yet we accept "God told me to do it" without question if someone does an act of good. Are people that suggest they are doing "Gods will" all idiots or just some?

I am raising this as debate. Obviously as an atheist I think this guy is a weirdo but certainly an entertaining one

[GepperRankins]

nah, this guy is an athiest too.

as we can see, theists don't question god.

[Everose]

Vid, I would have to see this 'Baptismal Contract' he speaks of to see if it would hold up in court.

Am feeling pretty ripped off right now. :P All I have is a little 'Certificate of Baptism'.

He must have misunderstood the term 'The Lord Helps Those Who Help Themselves.' I don't think that means taking things that are not yours to take.

On the otherhand, the man tends to pull only that from his religion that suits his needs at the time. That, in itself, isn't that rare, is it.

[Busyman]

]
Actually it raises no question except whether those that entertain what this idiot says are idiots themselves.

You said it best.....personal accountability.


So what should be entertained about peoples beliefs?.

We don't accept the defence "God told me to do it" when someone does something bad yet we accept "God told me to do it" without question if someone does an act of good. Are people that suggest they are doing "Gods will" all idiots or just some?
The point is that none of that matters. He broke the law. :ermm:

[Busyman]

Vid, I would have to see this 'Baptismal Contract' he speaks of to see if it would hold up in court.

Am feeling pretty ripped off right now. :P All I have is a little 'Certificate of Baptism'.

He must have misunderstood the term 'The Lord Helps Those Who Help Themselves.' I don't think that means taking things that are not yours to take.

On the otherhand, the man tends to pull only that from his religion that suits his needs at the time. That, in itself, isn't that rare, is it.
:happy:

[JPaul]

So what should be entertained about peoples beliefs?.

We don't accept the defence "God told me to do it" when someone does something bad yet we accept "God told me to do it" without question if someone does an act of good. Are people that suggest they are doing "Gods will" all idiots or just some?
The point is that none of that matters. He broke the law. :ermm:
Indeed.

[vidcc]

He must have misunderstood the term 'The Lord Helps Those Who Help Themselves.' I don't think that means taking things that are not yours to take.

Not a bible quote that is it.?

[vidcc]

]
The point is that none of that matters. He broke the law. :ermm:
Oh i agree he has no gripes... do the crime do the time... perhaps they should look into a coercion charge for god ;)

[Busyman]

]
The point is that none of that matters. He broke the law. :ermm:
Oh i agree he has no gripes... do the crime do the time... perhaps they should look into a coercion charge for god ;)
This is as dumb as the McDonald's lawsuits.

Sorry vid this is stupid and cut and dry.

[vidcc]

Oh i agree he has no gripes... do the crime do the time... perhaps they should look into a coercion charge for god ;)
This is as dumb as the McDonald's lawsuits.
post #8
Sorry vid this is stupid and cut and dry.

Well then feel free to not participate :rolleyes:

I don't think he has a case because God does not exist. I am happy for a believer to say he has no case but would like to know why.

I would point out that the man is not trying to say he didn't commit his crimes nor does it seem he is trying to avoid his punishment. Also it seems he is suing the Romanian Orthodox Church as they are "gods representatives" and they are the ones that led him to believe God would "protect him from evil"

[Busyman]

This is as dumb as the McDonald's lawsuits.
post #8
Sorry vid this is stupid and cut and dry.

Well then feel free to not participate :rolleyes:

I don't think he has a case because God does not exist. I am happy for a believer to say he has no case but would like to know why.

I would point out that the man is not trying to say he didn't commit his crimes nor does it seem he is trying to avoid his punishment.
Then that's pretty much the end of it then.:wacko:

[lynx]

I think he's probably got a pretty good case.

All he has to do now is produce his witness. Representatives don't count.

[Busyman]

I think he's probably got a pretty good case.

All he has to do now is produce his witness. Representatives don't count.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

[vidcc]

All he has to do now is produce his witness. Representatives don't count.

Doesn't it basically say that last line of the story :unsure:


But prosecutors said it would probably be dropped and they were unable to subpoena God to court.

[Busyman]

Doesn't it basically say that last line of the story :unsure:


But prosecutors said it would probably be dropped and they were unable to subpoena God to court.
That is why.

It is cut and dry.

[GepperRankins]

wouldn't it be great if god turned up

[Gripper]

"Free will" That is where his case fails.
"God" gave man free will,so he dosn't take the blame for all the shit we get up to,how many killings have been done in the Lords name.
The Bible is an interesting collection of short stories, nothing more!

[lynx]

Doesn't it basically say that last line of the story :unsure:


But prosecutors said it would probably be dropped and they were unable to subpoena God to court.So it does, but it was such crap I couldn't be bothered to read it all. :P

[Barbarossa]

"Free will" That is where his case fails.
"God" gave man free will,so he dosn't take the blame for all the shit we get up to,how many killings have been done in the Lords name.

Yeah, that was Grokster's defence and look what happened to them! :lol:

[vidcc]

Doesn't it basically say that last line of the story :unsure:
So it does, but it was such crap I couldn't be bothered to read it all. :P


http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/402/ooo8bg.jpg :lol:

[thewizeard]

Well..if there is a God, I do believe he is responsible for his creation...

[Busyman]

Well..if there is a God, I do believe he is responsible for his creation...not in a court of law.:ermm:

[vidcc]

not in a court of law.:ermm:

But doesn't the religious right say that our laws derive from the ten commandments, gods actual rules. Isn't that why they are demanding the ten commandments monuments be displayed in courts ?

I know someone will say that he is the almighty and we are not worthy to question him...but come on...enough already.... show up or shut up :lol:

[Busyman]

not in a court of law.:ermm:

But doesn't the religious right say that our laws derive from the ten commandments, gods actual rules. Isn't that why they are demanding the ten commandments monuments be displayed in courts ?

I know someone will say that he is the almighty and we are not worthy to question him...but come on...enough already.... show up or shut up :lol:
Are you trying to keep this thread going in order to take a jab at religion and God?:huh:

Our laws may have derived from the 10 Commandements but you aren't making sense as to how this relates to the case presented.:wacko:

[vidcc]

Are you trying to keep this thread going in order to take a jab at religion and God?:huh:

Yet YOU keep posting :rolleyes:

[Rat Faced]

Again, i havent read the thread, however something strikes me...

Insurance companies often refuse a claim as an "Act of God".

If he acted then he should be capable of suing; if he didnt they should pay up.

Seems that these claims should be fought in court between the Insurance Companies and Gods representatives on Earth.. ie the various churches etc, unless they can point to one in particular?

[Busyman]

Again, i havent read the thread, however something strikes me...

Insurance companies often refuse a claim as an "Act of God".

If he acted then he should be capable of suing; if he didnt they should pay up.

Seems that these claims should be fought in court between the Insurance Companies and Gods representatives on Earth.. ie the various churches etc, unless they can point to one in particular?
:dry:

I'll help you along....

In insurance cases God = nature.

Sue nature.:ermm:

Gotta love atheists.

[Rat Faced]

Ah, but the churches claim to be its representatives on earth..

ergo: Sue the churches

[Busyman]

Are you trying to keep this thread going in order to take a jab at religion and God?:huh:

Yet YOU keep posting :rolleyes:
When the thread is at the top, yes. I do enjoy how foolish you make yourself.

[Busyman]

Ah, but the churches claim to be its representatives on earth..

ergo: Sue the churches
Are you serious?

Claims don't make it so.

Next question.

[Rat Faced]

I agree.

However, when the insurance company wont pay for damage because it was an "Act of God", its handy having someone that claims to represent them handy to blame. :P

[Busyman]

I agree.

However, when the insurance company wont pay for damage because it was an "Act of God", its handy having someone that claims to represent them handy to blame. :P
Now all that representative needs is proof that they represent God and we can get the case a rolling along.

Signed papers will do fine along with an appearance in court.

[Rat Faced]

You dont need that.

After all, they are already TAKING money on this basis.

Unless you are accusing them of a huge fraud, then you must let them have the opportunity to PAY money on his behalf too.

[Busyman]

You dont need that.

After all, they are already TAKING money on this basis.

Unless you are accusing them of a huge fraud, then you must let them have the opportunity to PAY money on his behalf too.
I would have to prove fraud. :1eye:

[Rat Faced]

Why?

Your accusing them of the crime?

I wouldnt touch that one... :ph34r:


However im more than happy to take their word that they are Gods' representatives, if they pay for his damages, as well as collecting for his various houses and organisational maintainance and ongoing building programs. If they dont wish to pay his damages, then i must also assume they are not his representatives legally speaking, and shouldnt be collecting on his behalf...

[Busyman]

Why?

Your accusing them of the crime?

If I was I would have to prove fraud. Mmk?

However im more than happy to take their word that they are Gods' representatives, if they pay for his damages, as well as collecting for his various houses and organisational maintainance and ongoing building programs. If they dont wish to pay his damages, then i must also assume they are not his representatives legally speaking, and shouldnt be collecting on his behalf...
Prove there is a God? Prove there isn't one?

[Rat Faced]

Proof of what?

Im accusing no one of anything..

Nor am i asking for them to prove there is a God.

The Insurance companies and the Churches appear to be in complete agreement that there is, why should i question that?

However, if they claim to be his representatives, they should pay his damages or cease collecting on his behalf :P

[Busyman]

Proof of what?

Im accusing no one of anything..

Nor am i asking for them to prove there is a God.

The Insurance companies and the Churches appear to be in complete agreement that there is, why should i question that?

However, if they claim to be his representatives, they should pay his damages or cease collecting on his behalf :P
Whose representatives? An unproven being?

[sArA]

But, should a mere servant of God be expected to pay for His failings?

[notforlong]

Insurance companies often refuse a claim as an "Act of God".


If the insurance companies were denied the use of that particular phrase, what other language could be inserted?

Also makes me wonder at which future point global warming becomes blameworthy for any number of ills, and the insurance industry is in a bind, because, as everybody knows, that isn't an "Act of God", but of man.

Right?

[GepperRankins]

If the insurance companies were denied the use of that particular phrase, what other language could be inserted?

natural disaster

[Busyman]

Insurance companies often refuse a claim as an "Act of God".


If the insurance companies were denied the use of that particular phrase, what other language could be inserted?

Also makes me wonder at which future point global warming becomes blameworthy for any number of ills, and the insurance industry is in a bind, because, as everybody knows, that isn't an "Act of God", but of man.

Right?
Post 38.

[thewizeard]

well one does not normally get insurance coverage for war damage or riots etc. So.. it only seems logical that global warming and it's outfall should be added to the same catagory...it will save the insurance companies millions...but I seem to be wandering off topic..

[rokie]

He should be thinking of nothing else but pay for his crime.

Stupid dumb fuck.