suing god there's an interesting case in the texas courts. guy builds bar. church opposes with petitions and prayer sessions. lightning strikes bar. nearly complete bar burns to ground. church thanks god. behold the power of prayer! guy sues church. okay. guy argues the church indirectly caused the destruction of his property through their prayers to the almighty. if they hadn't held the prayer sessions then the bar wouldn't have been destroyed. now, the church is in the awkward position of arguing that their prayer sessions had nothing to with god's actions. in other words, we have a bar owner who believes in the power of prayer suing a church that doesn't. that just giggles my berries. if i was the judge, i'd rule responsibility is a two way street. if you claim your prayers are responsible for the actions of an angry god, then you must accept the responsibility of the consequences. ie pay for the guy's destroyed bar. which would put the church in the position of either coughing up the dough. or publicly admitting that prayer is as powerful as wishful thinking. awkward. to say the least. then there's the position that the guy should get the money from god. and good luck with that. heh. that's a whole other can of worms. does the money in the collection plate go to god or to the church? and yeah that's a somewhat pedantic hair splittage. but either way, i think the bar owner gets paid. or the church shuts the fuck up.  ¶ 8:00 AM