Reminds me of Billy Connolly's The Man Who Sued God where the insurance company refuses to pay for the boat because it was destroyed by an alleged Act of God. Looks like the passengers would need to sue God!Alan C. wrote:I can hardly believe what I'm hearing on the radio news re the airline cancellations "people will be entitled to a refund on their tickets but not compensation as it was an act of God"
While I agree that the airlines aren't responsible for the volcano eruption and can't be expected to pay compensation, to call it an act of God just boggles the mind. It's no different to the Bishop of Carlisle blaming floods on our decadent lifestyle.
It reminds me of a Bill Bailey sketch (which I can't find now) about hiring a car.
Now, I confess I rather like the term, because it confines "God" to a purely metaphorical usage, which is all the word is really fit for. But I think the use of the phrase as a legal term might be on the way out. Anthropogenic climate change has already blurred the distinction between "natural" and "human-made" events, and that's only going to get worse. Insurance companies and lawyers are going to have to deal with the outcomes of apparently "natural" calamities that human foresight could and should have provided against, and of which human prudence could and should have recognised the possibility, and that should involve the obligation of paying for the consequences. If it wasn't so depressing it would actually be quite fascinating.Circumstances which no human foresight can provide against, and of which human prudence is not bound to recognize the possibility, and which when they do occur, therefore, are calamities that do not involve the obligation of paying for the consequences that may result from them.
Don't laugh, I took the dog out at 8.00am and I could taste it, I hadn't switched on the radio or the computer at the time and wondered what the hell it was.Fia
My eyes have been watering and itchy all day - I'm blaming volcano dust
I would agree with the insurance companies (shamefully) If he was dead at the time of impact he is indeed uninsured, However; how can they possibly know that he was dead prior to impact?Nick
He had to claim off his own insurance, not the driver's , because he was deemed to be dead by the time he hit the vans, and hence uninsured. I checked it out with several insurance companies not involved in the incident, and they all agreed.
Exactly my thoughts, Alan. From heart attack to death in less than 100 yards? Doesn't sound plausible to me.Alan C. wrote:I would agree with the insurance companies (shamefully) If he was dead at the time of impact he is indeed uninsured, However; how can they possibly know that he was dead prior to impact?
I know the medics can be fairly accurate with time of death but surely not to within minutes, let alone seconds, you could be suffering a heart attack that would cause you to crash and then die some minutes later.
Poor dog.Alan C. wrote:I took the dog out at 8.00am and I could taste it...
sourceHojjat ol-eslam Kazem Sediqi, the acting Friday prayer leader in Tehran, said women should stick to strict codes of modesty to protect themselves.
"Many women who do not dress modestly lead young men astray and spread adultery in society which increases earthquakes," he explained.
Just how, exactly, Mr Sediqi?I would have thought that was obvious - Mr Sediqi must have had adulterous sex and it was so good that the Earth moved for him. He's just extrapolating from his own experience.Fia wrote: This infuriates me on 2 issues: adultery increases earthquakes
Why should muslim men learn self control if they can justify their dalliances by blaming women? It's like an alcoholic blaming sherry for having alcohol in it - they can get drunk with the moral indignation of how drunkeness has been imposed upon them. That's seems like a perfectly fair argument...Fia wrote:And he reckons that it's women's fault for dressing immodestly leading young men astray. Just how difficult is it for men to keep their dicks in their pants? Learn a bit of self control for goodness sake....Grrr....
Nick wrote: Of course, if it results in high winds instead, that'll be a storm in a D-cup...
D-cup...that's nothing!!Act of God? Sounds like most insurance policies in the States (ie. the manifold excuses they use to never pay anythingAlan C. wrote:I can hardly believe what I'm hearing on the radio news re the airline cancellations "people will be entitled to a refund on their tickets but not compensation as it was an act of God"
While I agree that the airlines aren't responsible for the volcano eruption and can't be expected to pay compensation, to call it an act of God just boggles the mind. It's no different to the Bishop of Carlisle blaming floods on our decadent lifestyle.
It reminds me of a Bill Bailey sketch (which I can't find now) about hiring a car.
). Actually this is not remotely the fault of the airlines though, I mean, if airlines could control the weather airports would never be closed, right? Except perhaps on bank holidays? Hellacious, maybe Iceland did commit some serious crime against God? I've no idea what it could be but, maybe you should ask a fundie(fundamentalist) about that? Asatru IS a state religion there, NO? Maybe some other culture's God is angry? Hmmm?
