66 year-old woman is suing every homosexual on Earth

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,042
8,741
136
Kudos to her for keeping it confined to this planet. You know what they say, "What happens on earth stays on earth."
 

chubbyfatazn

Golden Member
Oct 14, 2006
1,617
35
91
I'm thinking fat, disgusting, angry bitch who couldn't find a guy if she was the only woman who showed up at fleet week and she's blaming the gays for thinning the herd.

She sounds like the perfect woman for TexasHiker. No joke homo.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,101
5,640
126
Why is it always Humans doing things like these?

If God is upset, it should file the papers.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Every homosexual on earth should file separate counter-suits in each of their local jurisdictions

So much this. Force her to appear in court every day of the rest of her miserable bitchy life (stupid bitch).
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,414
8,356
126
i'd like to see her attempt to pay the citation prep fees for all those defendants
 

Paladin3

Diamond Member
Mar 5, 2004
4,933
877
126
I want to see her proof of ambassadorship. Can the defense subpena her boss to confirm it?
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
67,385
12,131
126
www.anyf.ca
Well, it is Murika where you can sue for anything. :p (though I think in Canada too... I've heard some pretty stupid lawsuits here too) Is it even possible to sue a group of people based on a characteristic without specifying specific individuals? I can't see how that would work as far as sending court summoning notices etc.

For some reason this reminds me of the case in the Bible where people wanted to stone a woman who was accused of adultery. Jesus stepped in and said something to the extent "he who has never sinned may cast the first stone" because everyone has sinned, so nobody was worthy to throw the stone but him, but he forgave her and let her go. This woman should look at her own life before wanting to do something as drastic as a lawsuit to others because of a sin. I guess she's just looking for a fabulous payout. :biggrin:
 

natto fire

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2000
7,117
10
76
Well, it is Murika where you can sue for anything. :p (though I think in Canada too... I've heard some pretty stupid lawsuits here too) Is it even possible to sue a group of people based on a characteristic without specifying specific individuals? I can't see how that would work as far as sending court summoning notices etc.

For some reason this reminds me of the case in the Bible where people wanted to stone a woman who was accused of adultery. Jesus stepped in and said something to the extent "he who has never sinned may cast the first stone" because everyone has sinned, so nobody was worthy to throw the stone but him, but he forgave her and let her go. This woman should look at her own life before wanting to do something as drastic as a lawsuit to others because of a sin. I guess she's just looking for a fabulous payout. :biggrin:

You might want to forward this to that crazy lady, because she is using your religion as the basis for her lawsuit. As much as you want this to be a Murika thing, it is more a Christy thing.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,592
29,221
146
whatever bag of dicks filed this suit on her behalf should be disbarred. what a waste of everything.
 

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,237
2
0
The inner workings of the mind of a crazy religious person is truly a sight to behold and fascinating stuff. However, she goes on to significantly reduce and quantify the actual defendants she is intent on suing in her rambling religious diatribe to the courts.

Page 2, line 7.
"Your honor, I've heard the boasting of the defendant: the homosexuals on the world news. From the young, to the old; from the rich an famous, to the not so rich and famous; how they were tired of hiding in the closet, and how glad they are to be coming out of the closet."
(Hmm, I'm not sure if I ever actually came in a closet before, but it's nice she is so concerned about where I come.)

So, unless you are a "homosexual on the world news", you are not a party to her lawsuit at all. Which would narrow the lawsuit down considerably, to only those defendants. All I can say is WHEW, I'm glad I don't have to worry about this lawsuit.

I guess at some point they will need to determine what constitutes being homosexual on "world news" versus local news. And even what kind of "world news" will apply, TV, radio, print and internet. For instance, I guess the local newspapers would not apply, but something like TIME magazine would apply, since it's published regionally around the world.

At any rate, if any conservative, fundie judge decided to actually take on this case, it would literally drag on for decades (if not a century) and most of the present defendants (and certainly the plaintiff) would probably be dead of old age before it's completed. Not to mention, it would tie up the court and court employees shuffling paper work around indefinitely.

image.jpg


And here is the holy ambassadors favorite video game (in case you missed the previous posters link)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/05/kill-the-lovely human-video-game_n_7214374.html
 
Last edited:

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,237
2
0
My mother was quite confused when I informed her she'd been named as a defendant in a class-action lawsuit against literally every gay person on Earth. But I guess it's not every day you get sued simply for existing. Frankly, I think she's going to need a better defense than "oh, horse shit."

ROFLOL! :biggrin:

Well, unless she has been on the "world news" proclaiming her homosexuality, I think she is in the clear.
 

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,237
2
0
She filed the suit as an ambassador for "plaintiffs God, and his son, Jesus Christ." So I'm guessing that it's not a recognized title.

Plus, that would mean the onus is on her to prove her claimed holy ambassadorship, I would imagine.