According to the 702 Midday Report, airline insurances will not reimburse travellers because they say the volcanic ash cloud was an “act of god”. They should really do away with this clause and instead say that they do not cover natural disasters.
How do they know it was an “act of god”? Did he admit it? Maybe satan was pissed and wanted to draw attention to himself. Will they reimburse Atheists; I don’t believe in a god so why should I lose out because of some supposed deity’s fickle tantrums?
I wonder if that would stand up in court? I mean, you dont believe in acts of God, therefore it shouldnt apply to you?
Its probably hell bubbling over from the amount of heathens added to it in the last couple years. >:D
There was a movie a few years ago with Billy Connelly who played an Aussie whose boat sank after being struck by lightning. His insurance company pulled this crap about “act of God”, so he sued God in the Aussie courts. He summonsed bishops and imams to testify as God’s earthly representatives. Eventually the insurance company settled to prevent more bad publicity. I think it was based on a true story; I’d google it if I had the time.
A court case like that could drag on for yeeeaaars, cause even if they decide
It was an act of gawd, they still have to figure which one of the hundreds is guilty as charged!
In that case all of them would plead not guilty to not pay the fine!(Sudden death for a few gawds atleast)
;D
i would like to pull that one on my insurance, since lightning actually counts as zeus being moerig, but they still pay out of your tv gets roasted. so, being a little hypocrytical. just scheming, if the neighbours dam wall breaks, which im sure will happen soon enough, i will have rice paddies in my backyard, and couches floating down the driveway, will they have a god issue? since the rain is causing the wall to be under pressure etc etc.
but, arent all these money mongers all controlled by the illuminati anyways? do they even believe in gawd.
I agree. Maybe they should make a specific list of what they term “acts of God” and call it something else like “natural disasters”. It seems as if a clause like that has an endless number of open-ended possibilities. How about “acts of the President”? That would be just as ambiguous. Or “acts of Bob” - how will they know.
I would LOVE to see a lawyer PROVE in COURT that this ash was caused by GOD. “Surely, Your Honour, it was caused by a volcano, which in turn is caused by … etc. So, please tell the court where God is in this scenario.”
PS GothCatBabe - nice new avatar - is that you?
It seems that “act of god”, while unfortunately phrased, is just the commonly and traditionally used legal expression for what my Collins dictionary refers to as:
a sudden and inevitable occurrence caused by natural forces and not by the agency of man, such as a flood, earthquake, or a similar catastrophe
There is a Wikipedia entry saying much the same:
which leads to some fun stuff, including a mention of stOnes’ movie, at:
I rather like this, about a lawsuit against god:
a judge finally did throw out the case, saying the Almighty was not properly served due to his unlisted home address
and the response:
Since God knows everything, God has notice of this lawsuit.
I’m sure it’s Thor.
Definitely thor if it hiths you in the nuths.
Ha ha, very good! ;D
[quote author=StevoMuso link=topic=1132.msg9536#msg9536 date=1271878348]
yip, guilty as charged. my small referrence to skeptics in the pub, since i can never attend. so i will be sceptic wherever clever people surround me, and alchohol abounds.
;D Good one Steve. And it is jokes like that that make Thor one of my all time favourite gods.
So since hurricanes and floods are now being ascribed to global warming, does that mean that they are no longer “acts of god”? Will insurance contracts now refer to “acts of the internal combustion engine and the coal-fired power station”. Doesn’t really have the same ring to it.
I would have thought that by now the legal profession would know the cause of hurricanes etc. I mean, their global terminology is SO outdated FFS. Acts of nature, natural disasters - better. And with a comprehensive list. Shouldn’t be too difficult.
GothCatGirl is correct. Saying a hurricane is an “act of God” is as rediculous as saying lightning is an “act of Zeus” (I think it was Zeus and not so Thor). And then would global warming be an “act of Man”?
Is it miracle if one survives an act of God?
Mintaka
No its because of the grace of God that one survives an act of God. Logical.
Julian is raising a valid point here. If disasters are caused by human action, they no longer comply with the legal definition of “acts of God”, irrespective of how misguided the terminology is in the first place. If one could successfully prove that damage resulted from global warming and that global warming is the result of human activity, your claim could be valid, even if the insurance policy precludes “acts of God”.