Speaking hypothetically here If god was Real/True/Elvis and he/she showed up in human form, would we not have to arrest him/her for mass genocide. God must have caused all the floods, disease, tornadoes and other natural occurances that have killed people, so he is a marked being. This may have been said before here, if not, cool
Why "must have"? How do we know that God caused these things if He existed? Doesn't the world operate according to natural laws?
Well, if you start with the proposition that the christian god created all and everything happens according to god's plan, then I guess you could say "must have". But don't listen to me, I know nothing about their mythology really.
Won't work in the US right now--maybe someday In what country? For surely it could not be the United States of America, where our President George W. Bush reminds us that the authority of government and law is derived from God. (It seems to me that Bush had something like 90% support from the people on this one, so we get a glimpse of the cultural environs.) Therefore, God is above the law in the US at present. You'll have to take the trial elsewhere, though you may have to go it alone, without the US's help in the arrest and trial of God. There is a reason God loves conservative idiots in the US. It should be noted that someone once sued Satan, and the US courts threw it out for various reasons. However, theology was not their primary motive, though the sarcasm in the decision is obviously theologically-derived. Nonetheless, the plaintiff was unable in pretrial proceedings to demonstrate that Satan was the rightful target of his wrath, and therefore the case is dismissed. This is in stark contrast to an American woman who once sued God for causing the lightning that struck the tree that fell on and wrecked her house. The court was sympathetic, and found for the plaintiff, but noted that means of enforcement were currently beyond the court's capabilities and knowledge, and left collection the responsibility of the plaintiff. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
People in the US call Tornadoes, floods and other natural occurances 'Acts of God'. They are accusing God of killing people and are, by law, supposed to arrest him and question him and see if it can go to court. They couldn't really make an exception for one person no matter who it is, but with the current state of the US, who knows. God must have a hard time finding insurance policies
Addendum: various notes • Representing Satan in Arkansas • God, the Devil, and Their Advocates--German lawsuit on behalf of Jesus Christ • Bob Larson newsletter ... figure it out yourself. Um--yeah. This guy is one of the core evil figures from the anti-expressionist wars of my youth. • Contra Mundum No. 8, Summer, 1993 ... book review containing interesting legalistic considerations. Not the most relevant but worth including. • United States ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and His Staff, (W.D. Penn, 1971) 54 F.R.D. 282 This is a summary of the lawsuit against Satan mentioned in my prior post. I'm seeking the actual decision text. The summary: I'm trying to find the original dismissal. For internationals: very frequently, when filing a lawsuit, the language includes the phrase, ... wherefore we pray before this court for relief." The original decision includes and, as I recall, closes with the phrase: Prayer denied. • Judge rejects lawsuit against God (CNN) • Crimes & Dumb Criminals, includes a passing reference to Russel Tansie, the lawyer who filed what I think is the lightning lawsuit mentioned in my last post. • God sues Catholic Church for undercount of angels (humor ... it's humor.) I would hope that's enough to keep you all chuckling. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Oh brother... Oh, thanks for snapping out of your marijuana-induced haze long enough to regale us "conservative idiots" with more wisdom... Tiassa-style! ============================================== Tiassa wrote: In what country [would God be arrested and tried]? For surely it could not be the United States of America, where our President George W. Bush reminds us that the authority of government and law is derived from God. ============================================== Would you care to surmise where else moral absolutes come from? Did you know that this country was founded on Biblical principles? Or did you miss that part of American history 101? But hell, what do I know, I'm just a conservative idiot. Albeit one who refrains from smoking "pot". ============================================== Tiassa wrote: Therefore, God is above the law in the US at present. You'll have to take the trial elsewhere, though you may have to go it alone, without the US's help in the arrest and trial of God. ============================================== Hey Tiassa... God is above the law (period). And that would be worldwide. ============================================== Tiassa wrote: There is a reason God loves conservative idiots in the US. ============================================== Good news Tiassa, he loves liberal idiots too. Even those who have no self-control and must engage in illegal drug activity. -Mike
Ekimklaw – You wrote - Did you know that this country was founded on Biblical principles? What makes you think that? If we assume that the USA was founded by the Founding Fathers then we have a problem - The Founding Fathers Were Not Christians. http://www.dimensional.com/~randl/founders.htm Or are you making a different assumption for the founding of ‘this’ country? It was during Adam's administration that the Senate ratified the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, which states in Article XI that "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."
From life, silly Well, Mike, there are certain acts which benefit life and certain acts which harm life. Given the importance of species survival and perpetuity, it is easy enough to see that proper morality finds its firmest roots in those ideas which lend toward the perpetuity and prosperity of our species.(Edit: There are not necessarily any moral absolutes. If moral absolutes exist, they must be regarded as theoretic or in terms of potential. Who can claim to know all the factors which contribute toward a moral absolute? God? Insufficient. Consider the assertion of faith, then, that all the factors lending toward moral absolutes in the human experience are accounted for in a book that fits nicely into the nightstand of an hourly-rate motel.) Which interpretation would you like, the one that hauled naked women from town to town half-naked in the snow to whip them, or the one that owned slaves? They don't even teach that kind of crap in Catholic school. As I recall, some of those "Biblically-principled" founders grew opium. Well, by almost any interpretation of the word I can see, you're quite right. However, the United States Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land in the US. God be damned. Think about it: if God comes down and shows its face and suspends due process, the US government is constitutionally obliged to oppose that suspension. That's right, we'll bomb God, regardless of the result. It's a matter of principle. I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Stick to the topic. --Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Forum Ga Ga Okay... retread... SOME people insist that The United States wasn't founded on Christian (Godly) Principles. Duh... Note I didn't say the United States is a Christian government. This is a common foul-up by hand-wringing left-wingers. However, the fact that the USA was established upon Christian principles is clear. I present to you quote after quote supporting this view. Heck, just read the constitution. The founding fathers, out of deference to the deists and atheists among them, made sure to NOT establish Christianity as a state-sponsored religion, but certain principles were adopted which clearly find their origin in the Christian religion. The fact that the evil institution of slavery was a part of US history does not diminish the greatness of the nation. Ever since the beginning of the government, debates raged about slavery. Everyone knew that one day slavery would cost the US dearly. And it did. In the ensuing conflict that eventually resulted in the abolishment of slavery, 620,000 people were killed. That's a lot of people. In addition to that there was extensive property damage, loss of land, loss of certain industries, not to mention all those wounded during the war. The Civil War touches practically every family in the USA. All my great-great grandfathers (paternal and maternal) served in the Civil War on either side. Our family still carries in its oral history some interesting tales about these men. Anyway, I'm rambling here... But don't think for a minute that slavery was something the USA got away with. If you think that, you're dead wrong. It was precisely the concept of "all men are created equal" that spurred on the anti-slavery movement. By the way, HOW DARE YOU condemn the Christians in the USA for slavery. It was the CHRISTIANS which ran the underground railroad, and led the anti-slavery movement!! ============================================== Tiassa wrote: As I recall, some of those "Biblically-principled" founders grew opium. ============================================== Thats a joke, right? Ha ha. That's one thing I like about you Tiassa... your fantastic sense of humor. That and your smoker's cough. -Mike
No Ekimlaw.. Tiassa is right!!, The drug of choice of those days was opium, and it's factual that some of them grew it here as well. BTW. The civil war was not about slavery, it was due to southern states wanting to seperate from the Union.
How dare I? Calm down, Mike. Really, I promise it ain't that bad. About the only argument one has is that Christianity was a statistical majority. You ought to read some Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin. Yep. And it was about money and politics. Ever hear of the Three-Fifths Rule? It was written into the Constitution that slaves equaled 3/5 of a real person. The problem was that they weren't worth anything in terms of civil rights, but that they did count as part of the population and therefore the government wanted to account for them in terms of apportionment and taxation. And yet they still went forward, leaving it for other people to suffer and figure out. Very ... uh ... Christian? It's pretty hard to miss a war. Too bad they didn't just live up to the rhetoric and avoid the war in the first place, such as your next point: Funny how after that was written the founders went on to write the Three-Fifths Rule. Equal, indeed. What's the folk tale? "Don't forget the women ...."? Oh, right. All men are created equal. Are you sure Christian principles really want to be held responsible for that? Given that some preached it "un-Christian" to teach slaves to read (reading the news would trouble their simpleton minds too much), what am I supposed to say? I remember reading in fifth grade the journal of a slave captain asking forgiveness of God for what he did. But then again, economic necessity, right? If they knew it was wrong, why, oh why did they go forward anyway? What does this say about the Biblical foundations of the US that you allege? And as a humorous side note, have you ever seen the Charleston danced? It's a peculiar-looking dance that originated among the slaves. Essentially, the problem was this: some Christians who happened to own slaves also attended sects that prohibited dancing. Hence, the masters would prohibit the slaves from dancing. However, in African culture, it seems dancing was rather important. The Charleston evolved in South Carolina as a result; technically, because the feet and knees do not cross, it could not be considered dancing according to the rules prescribed at the time. (A Quaker of past association once said to me, while waiting in line at a Carman concert, of all things, "Quakers don't dance. We rhythm.") I would say that in similar fashion, slaves don't dance, they rhythm. And that thanks to Christian principles. No. Try this link: Or this one: If you would like to trace the drug war at all in terms of American history, I recommend that you start with the Harrison Act of 1914. When Congress got around to making marijuana a crime with the Marihuana Tax Stamp Act of 1937, the AMA protested the new measure, reasoning that the Harrison Act was sufficient. Incidentally, since we've been discussing our founding fathers, wasn't it Tax Stamps that pissed them off so much? Especially since less than a decade later the US government would be appealing to farmers to grow "hemp for victory". Drugs have an amazing history in the US. If I could contain "drugs" in a single character, it would make a fascinating epic story, and quite the humorous one at that. Hmmm ... maybe I'll give it a whirl. The Hindu had soma, so why not make a myth out of drugs? Hey, I smell a best-seller. Wait. That's just vanilla hash in the next room. To be honest, I like to think I have a great sense of humor, but I've learned that it's far more subtle than most people at Sciforums enjoy. He who hacks last dies last. Er ... something like that. At any rate, cigarettes are most responsible for my smoker's cough. In fact, pot, properly applied, helps clear my chest. But I don't regularly maintain such expensive equipment as that; the better the bong the better I break it. Oh, well. I do believe I hear a hash joint screaming my name. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Mike, Tiassa: Perhaps. Rather, the US was founded on fairly egalitarian principles, and Christianity has had a substantial positive effect on such principles. However, a sizable amount of the founders were Deists. Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Paine, likely Washington and, if memory serves, Hamilton. Do you mean Christ's injunction to "render onto Ceasar" re: establishment clause? I regard the growth of egalitarianism to be very influenced by Christian principles, but I'm curious as to what you mean by "certain principles". Unfortunately, Mike, it works both ways. There were notable "Christian" apologists for slavery. However, slavery does violate 1 Tim 1:10, although the NT's position on slavery is far from clear. However, to condemn Christians for this is ludicrious at best. Any moron who's ever read "Battle Hymn of the Republic" can tell you that the anti-slavery movement was a very Christian dominated phenomena. Anyways, the condemnation fails on a second and more fundamental ground: People are assholes. While a true Christian is much less of an asshole than your average person*, people will skew and stretch any doctrine to permit them to be assholes. *I never wrote this.
