If I remember correctly, you cannot sue God because he does not have an address. o.o
For some reason I was reminded of this... www.imdb.com/title/tt0268437/
As for suing God, I believe corporate liability can allow you to sue the religious organisation of your choice, since they all claim to represent God. But I'm no legal expert...
How would he appear in court? :O
In the smile of every child, in every gust of wind, in every knot of wood in the courthouse and in Manfred Von Karma's body. Naturally.
Well He can't show his face. Or we'll die. 
Hey, go ahead, sue god. But, you'll only have yourself to blame when god tells you to F- off when you try to get into heaven. XD
Good point. But, why would anyone WANT to sue god? What reason?
I believe the article clearly noted that he filed the lawsuit in protest to frivolous lawsuits.
Just wanted to point out that God currently has a 0-1 record in the WWE because he refused to come down to the ring and fight Vince McMahon.
Appeareantly, God 'responded' to the guy
'God' apparently responds to lawsuit
By NATE JENKINS, Associated Press Writer Thu Sep 20, 11:18 PM ET
LINCOLN, Neb. - A legislator who filed a lawsuit against God has gotten something he might not have expected: a response. One of two court filings from "God" came Wednesday under otherworldly circumstances, according to John Friend, clerk of the Douglas County District Court in Omaha.
ADVERTISEMENT
"This one miraculously appeared on the counter. It just all of a sudden was here poof!" Friend said.
State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha sued God last week, seeking a permanent injunction against the Almighty for making terroristic threats, inspiring fear and causing "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants."
Chambers, a self-proclaimed agnostic who often criticizes Christians, said his filing was triggered by a federal lawsuit he considers frivolous. He said he's trying to makes the point that anybody can sue anybody.
Not so, says "God." His response argues that the defendant is immune from some earthly laws and the court lacks jurisdiction.
It adds that blaming God for human oppression and suffering misses an important point.
"I created man and woman with free will and next to the promise of immortal life, free will is my greatest gift to you," according to the response, as read by Friend.
There was no contact information on the filing, although St. Michael the Archangel is listed as a witness, Friend said.
A second response from "God" disputing Chambers' allegations lists a phone number for a Corpus Christi law office. A message left for that office was not immediately returned Thursday.
Attempts to reach Chambers by phone and at his Capitol office Thursday were unsuccessful
Got a link for that, V2?
God has a point. He is not a US Citizen nor does he reside in the US. They really can't touch him on this one, and his defense is tight, not even Von Karma can break that.
WHERE IS YOUR LAW NOW?!
Quote:
I believe the article clearly noted that he filed the lawsuit in protest to frivolous lawsuits.
So he filed a frivolous lawsuit to protest frivolous lawsuits? Oo
It's called making an ironic statement, Ultra. It's an effective way of getting a point across.
And also an effective waste of tax money 
Unless of course he's paying for the legal fees
Agreed @ SX; yeah it'd only make sense that this isn't actually supposed to be about suing "god" so much as making a point about lawsuits.
Quote:
Hey, go ahead, sue god. But, you'll only have yourself to blame when god tells you to F- off when you try to get into heaven. XD
Even within assuming that this "god" exists and that there's only one, what if "god" likes how someone is using religion's influence to help make a point about lawsuits? What if "god" doesn't like it but wouldn't have a "heaven" to reward the person with otherwise?
I think it's ridiclous to assume as to what the intentions and punishments/rewards of a god who may or may not exist are...
I never actually read the article, so I didn't know that it was supposed to be a parody. I really would not be surprised if someone filed a lawsuit like this in all seriousness.
Quote:
First of all, Matt, please stop using the rolling eyes emoticon. The things you say are usually wrong, so acting so overconfident and sarcastic just makes you look silly and annoying.
Secondly, even if you don't know what Fexus is like, it's pretty obvious that he was making a lighthearted joke. There's no need to start a religious debate over a one-liner. You really need to stop doing this.
Quote:
First of all, Matt, please stop using the rolling eyes emoticon.
Granted, I suppose how meaningless it was for me to do so would've been a good reason not to, but...
Quote:
The things you say are usually wrong
Even if that's true (it's quite obvious that there's a lot I've said on this site and I doubt that you can actually "prove" that "most" of it was wrong) it's irrelevant anyway; thinking less of a point merely because of WHOSE point it was is a rather ad hominem approach; I like the way someone on YouTube put it; "if a CRAZY serial killer who believes he is surrounded by teletubbies argues that if you drop a ball it'll fall to the ground because gravity will pull the ball towards the earth... will the ball start falling upwards from now on?"
Quote:
There's no need to start a religious debate over a one-liner.
And yet, when Jeffery Mewtamer started an IDEOLOGY debate, in an SPA thread about a joke article about Linux, I didn't see you say anything along those lines to him.
And yet, when Jeffery Mewtamer started an IDEOLOGY debate, in an SPA thread about a joke article about Linux, I didn't see you say the same to him.
There are MANY replies telling him to stop making serious discussion. He keeps shrugging them off.
Quote:
There are MANY replies telling him to stop making serious discussion. He keeps shrugging them off.
There are!
Original subject plz
Who's the god?? 
Does the senator know what he's doing at the same time??
Everyone knows that you should not punish innocent people.
I'm suspicious about something!
...
...
Buh?
Sorry, I know that's technically a spam post... but whenever I try to actually ask what Fred meant or comment on his post all I can manage is "...buh"...
Who's the god??
[link= 
]I suspect this guy.[/link]
Now then, all joking aside. Anyone got any updates on this one? I'd like to know where this heads to in court if it goes anywhere.
I know that most gods have names.
The god the senator told about does'nt have a name.
I still don't think the senator knows what he's doing.
I think the senator is making a big mistake!
He's making an ironic statement, he doesn't believe in God and openly critizes Christians. He's only doing this in hopes that the court will throw out more frivilous lawsuits.
Quote:
I know that most gods have names.
The god the senator told about does'nt have a name.
He was referring to the Christian God, whose name is simply "God".
