Lawsuits are not compatible with christianity

  • Thread starter Thread starter arunangelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

arunangelo

Guest
God forgave us, not merely by forgetting or forgoing the offenses we have committed against Him, but also by sacrificing His life, in order to compensate for the offenses we committed against Him (Matthew 26:27-28). Forgiveness, therefore, is, not only to forget and forgo what our offenders have done to us, but also to bring healing to our offenders and compensate for the offenses they committed against us by our prayers and sacrifices.

The scriptures are very clear about forgiveness and mercy. It tells us to be merciful, just as our Father is merciful (Luke. 6:36) and forgive others of their transgressions against us (Eph 4:32). In James 2:13 we are told that mercy is above law. In Matt. 6:14-15 we are told that we would not be forgiven if we do not forgive others. In the Lord’s Prayer (Luke 6:12) we ask God to forgive us the way we forgive others. In Luke 17:4 Jesus tells us that we must forgive others repeatedly. In Luke 6:27-36 Jesus tells us to love our enemy, pray for them, do good for them, if someone takes our coat, give them our shirt as well, offer the other cheek if someone slaps us on one, lend and do not expect it back and be merciful like our heavenly Father. In Romans 12: 17-21 Paul tells us to not pay evil with evil, never take revenge, feed our enemy, not allow evil to defeat us and to over come evil with good. He further tells us in 1Cor. 6:7 that a legal dispute is a sign of our complete failure; and that it is better to be wronged or robbed than to wrong others or rob them.
visit: surrendersacrifice.com
 
And yet, St. Thomas More was a lawyer.

It’s one thing to say one should not use the law to exact revenge or to loot one’s neighbor. It is quite another to seek justice in the sense of righting a wrong; getting back one’s property or requiring another to stop doing a wrongful act.

If all farmers, for example, in “X county” depend on the water of the “Y River” for irrigation, but for which they would all lose their crops, and if “Big Bad, Inc” begins appropriating all the water upstream, and if it’s against the law to do that, are you saying the farmers should all just starve out rather than go to the law to make BBI stop? If, beforre the courts made BBI stop, the farmers downstream all lost their crops for a year and are threatened with foreclosure because of it, are you saying the farmers should not seek damages from BBI so they can pay their mortgages and keep their farms?

Some Amish, at least, and maybe all of them, will not sue anybody, for any reason, no matter what. Yet, if it was not for the fact that they live in a society in which there are ways for the society to protect people like the Amish through the law, they would be looted and dispersed in short order.
 
“Bob” goes into a business venture with “Ted”. Bob has a family, wife and 4 kids. Ted steals money from the business, forcing it to go under.

Unchristian for Bob to sue Ted to get his money back to support his family?
:confused:

Now punative lawsuits are a different matter. Bob sues Ted to get back everything he’s owed and to bankrupt Ted to “teach him a lesson”, methinks, would be rather unchristian.

Same for suing, say McDonalds for millions of dollars over a minor burn from spilled coffee. :eek:
 
correction based on a misconception of the events. This woman was not minorly burned. If you do alittle digging you will know that this woman was the only one who won her case which had been proposed by many other McDo customers. The truth was that this specific Macdonalds had been serving ppl coffee at least 20 degrees above regulation. Many customer complained. 700 ppl actually until a very elderly woman of 81 spilled the coffee. She had NEVER sued anyone before. All she wanted was money for her gruesome 3rd degree burns and skingrafts. McDo only offered her $800. She only sued for more because she needed it. So don’t judge till you do the research. This was not just some angry woman aiming to get rich. she just wanted to live. Without the skin grafts she wolud have died from infection. Yo kind of like…need skin.

and it was half a million. Skin graft surgery is quite costly
 
Naztakuan said:
This was not just some angry woman aiming to get rich. she just wanted to live. Without the skin grafts she wolud have died from infection. Yo kind of like…need skin.

and it was half a million. Skin graft surgery is quite costly
Click to expand...
I sometimes see the bills from horrendous burns and resulting grafts, and half a million would be an awful lot even for that. But I didn’t see the bills, so I couldn’t know for sure.

My guess is the woman also had a lot of rehab and predictable future care necessitated by the burns. That’s all “medical” too.
 
Naztakuan said:
correction based on a misconception of the events. This woman was not minorly burned. If you do alittle digging you will know that this woman was the only one who won her case which had been proposed by many other McDo customers. The truth was that this specific Macdonalds had been serving ppl coffee at least 20 degrees above regulation. Many customer complained. 700 ppl actually until a very elderly woman of 81 spilled the coffee. She had NEVER sued anyone before. All she wanted was money for her gruesome 3rd degree burns and skingrafts. McDo only offered her $800. She only sued for more because she needed it. So don’t judge till you do the research. This was not just some angry woman aiming to get rich. she just wanted to live. Without the skin grafts she wolud have died from infection. Yo kind of like…need skin.

and it was half a million. Skin graft surgery is quite costly
Click to expand...
Wow–talk about misconception! Thank you for sharing this…I had no clue the details about this…everyone assumes that this woman was just greedy…but au contraire! I appreciate you telling us these facts. My dh will be glad to know…he always brings this case up…
 
Naztakuan said:
correction based on a misconception of the events. This woman was not minorly burned. If you do alittle digging you will know that this woman was the only one who won her case which had been proposed by many other McDo customers. The truth was that this specific Macdonalds had been serving ppl coffee at least 20 degrees above regulation. Many customer complained. 700 ppl actually until a very elderly woman of 81 spilled the coffee. She had NEVER sued anyone before. All she wanted was money for her gruesome 3rd degree burns and skingrafts. McDo only offered her $800. She only sued for more because she needed it. So don’t judge till you do the research. This was not just some angry woman aiming to get rich. she just wanted to live. Without the skin grafts she wolud have died from infection. Yo kind of like…need skin.

and it was half a million. Skin graft surgery is quite costly
Click to expand...
McDonalds has been sued many time before for millions (unsuccessfully) for coffee spills resulting in minor burns. Sorry, I probably should have been more specific about the frivilous suits that get dismissed and that we rarely hear about.
 
Naztakuan said:
correction based on a misconception of the events. This woman was not minorly burned. If you do alittle digging you will know that this woman was the only one who won her case which had been proposed by many other McDo customers. The truth was that this specific Macdonalds had been serving ppl coffee at least 20 degrees above regulation. Many customer complained. 700 ppl actually until a very elderly woman of 81 spilled the coffee. She had NEVER sued anyone before. All she wanted was money for her gruesome 3rd degree burns and skingrafts. McDo only offered her $800. She only sued for more because she needed it. So don’t judge till you do the research. This was not just some angry woman aiming to get rich. she just wanted to live. Without the skin grafts she wolud have died from infection. Yo kind of like…need skin.

and it was half a million. Skin graft surgery is quite costly
Click to expand...
What she had no health/medical insurance?
 
I have no idea. I’m thinking probably not. Alot of Americans do not have medical insurance.
 
wifeandmomoftwo said:
What she had no health/medical insurance?
Click to expand...
Didn’t the post say she was 81? It’s highly unlikely that she would have an employer at that age, and most retired people do not have sufficient income to cover insurance out of pocket. Does Medicare even cover stuff like this?
 
zerocrossing said:
Didn’t the post say she was 81? It’s highly unlikely that she would have an employer at that age, and most retired people do not have sufficient income to cover insurance out of pocket. Does Medicare even cover stuff like this?
Click to expand...
have no idea she was 81. I guess it is possible that she did not have other insurance ontop of Medicare.
As to if Medicare covers that stuff…I would think so if her burns where that severe.
 
wifeandmomoftwo said:
have no idea she was 81. I guess it is possible that she did not have other insurance ontop of Medicare.
As to if Medicare covers that stuff…I would think so if her burns where that severe.
Click to expand...
The post said she was 81
 
HA! America does not have a universal health care system. Health care is not a given for anyone. There are Elderly people who have died because they were no longer insured for their medication and simply could not pay out of pocket. Healthcare is mostly a luxery in this country not a right. You can’t assume everyone is so fortunate. Even those who have insurance often get screwed when the companies refuse to pay for certain conditions
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top