Quote:
Originally Posted by lynx
http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/402/ooo8bg.jpg :lol:
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynx
http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/402/ooo8bg.jpg :lol:
Well..if there is a God, I do believe he is responsible for his creation...
not in a court of law.:ermm:Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel123
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 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
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:Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
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:
Yet YOU keep posting :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by 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:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rat Faced
I'll help you along....
In insurance cases God = nature.
Sue nature.:ermm:
Gotta love atheists.
Ah, but the churches claim to be its representatives on earth..
ergo: Sue the churches
When the thread is at the top, yes. I do enjoy how foolish you make yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc