• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

God Files Amicus Brief in Prop 8 Case

S

Sententia

Well-Known Member
lilithu said:
For those of you who don't know, the UUA, along with other liberal religious groups who believe in full equality, filed a law suit challenging the validity of Prop 8 on Monday.

In response, the Kingdom of Heaven World Divine Mission has filed an amicus brief on behalf of God, arguing in favor of keeping Prop 8. (Warning: the link to the brief is a 40 page PDF.)


Who's God will win in court? Wanna start taking bets now? :tuna:
Click to expand...

On behalf of god? Didnt some dude try to sue god?
 
MoonWater

MoonWater

Warrior Bard
Premium Member
Since I have no desire to read through a 40 page PDF do you think you might be able to describe what an "amicus brief" is for me and the rest of us lazy people? Also how is it possible to file anything "on behalf of god" in a SECULAR government?(unless of course the "on behalf of god" bit is "unofficial".)
 
Riverwolf

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Trying to accomplish things on behalf of any god in a country where there is a separation of church and state is a waste of time.

Too bad there isn't really much of a separation of church and state. :D


So who will win? Well, homosexual marriage is pretty much inevitable sooner or later. So I say it doesn't matter.
 
Elessar

Elessar

Well-Known Member
Just as a point - unless the process was incorrectly done, as I understand it, the fact that a new amendment contradicts old states, there is no basis for the UU-favored lawsuit. I mean, not from a moral or political or religious standpoint, from a purely legal one, I see no grounds for lawsuit - unless, as I said, there was some flaw in the process by which Proposition 8 became part of the Californian constitution.
 
lilithu

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
Elessar said:
Just as a point - unless the process was incorrectly done, as I understand it, the fact that a new amendment contradicts old states, there is no basis for the UU-favored lawsuit. I mean, not from a moral or political or religious standpoint, from a purely legal one, I see no grounds for lawsuit - unless, as I said, there was some flaw in the process by which Proposition 8 became part of the Californian constitution.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that if there is a significant amendment to the state constitution, it has to be done by 2/3rds vote, not by simple majority.

I do not think we would waste the money if there were no chance at all, but I'm not assuming that we'll win (this time around). I have no doubt we'll win in the long run.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Seems like God would be supporting the other side.
 
lilithu

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
angellous_evangellous said:
Seems like God would be supporting the other side.
Click to expand...
If you look at the website, "God" is this woman who claims to be the incarnation of the third part of the Trinity. (Which is ironic, because if UUs invoke any "god" it is the Spirit.)

But back to BalanceFX's question, since this woman claims to be God, she can be served with papers. It is now possible to sue God. :yes:
 
lilithu

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
MoonWater said:
Since I have no desire to read through a 40 page PDF do you think you might be able to describe what an "amicus brief" is for me and the rest of us lazy people?
Click to expand...
I'll leave it to the lawyers here to dissect. :D Suffice it to say that an amicus brief is a third-party someone (not the plaintiff and not the defendant) who is weighing in on the case. Here, they have filed a brief "on behalf of God" in order to tell "God's point of view" to the court, so that the court can weigh that for consideration.


MoonWater said:
Also how is it possible to file anything "on behalf of god" in a SECULAR government?(unless of course the "on behalf of god" bit is "unofficial".)
Click to expand...
As long as they follow proper legal procedure it is possible to file something. Whether or not it will be considered is another matter.

I shared this with you guys for your amusement. (Sorry, but imo the lady claiming to be God is whacked.) Please don't take it too seriously. I don't.
 
lilithu

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
Mestemia said:
It is sad that they believe their deity so helpless...
Click to expand...
lol, that was my first reaction too. :p

Hey, if God is really against equality in civil marriages, where are the thunderbolts? Massachusetts should be a wasteland of fire and brimstone by now.
 
Last edited:
McBell

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
lilithu said:
lol, that was my first reaction too. :p

Hey, if God is really against equality in civil marriages, where are the thunderbolts? Massachusetts should be a wasteland of fire and brimstone by now.
Click to expand...
I find it rather interesting that in one breathe they claim how powerful god is, he created all there is, that there is NOTHING that God cannot do, yet in the next breathe they go on and on about how there must be secular laws to enforce "God's Will", because, well, I guess God is unable to enforce His Will Himself....
 
doppelganger

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
Someone should file a "motion to show authority" requiring the lawyers to produce a retention agreement.
 
doppelganger

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
MoonWater said:
:confused::confused::confused:
Click to expand...
They filed the brief on behalf of "God." Where's their admissible evidence that they have authority from "God" to represent it/him/her/whatever ? Procedurally, when one lawyer thinks another lawyer doesn't have authority to act for a particular client, they file a "motion to show authority."

Damn. Nothing ruins a joke like having to explain it. :)
 
MoonWater

MoonWater

Warrior Bard
Premium Member
doppelgänger;1343014 said:
They filed the brief on behalf of "God." Where's their admissible evidence that they have authority from "God" to represent it/him/her/whatever ? Procedurally, when one lawyer thinks another lawyer doesn't have authority to act for a particular client, they file a "motion to show authority."

Damn. Nothing ruins a joke like having to explain it. :)
Click to expand...

yeah I know but I don't speak the legal language so either it's explained to me, which ruins the humor value, or I remain confused, which also ruins the humor value:eek:. Thanks for explaining it to me. Now that I understand it I can still say it was quite clever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top