Suing God? Why Not, Unless He Isn't Real

Ernie Chambers is suing God. His point appears to be that the courts have to be open to all, even those who file completely frivolous suits. My point is something very different.

If God was real, then suing God might be foolish, or even futile, but it isn't frivolous. It would akin to filing a suit against someone who now lives on another planet and is forever beyond our grasp. It seems Chambers' point is only made if we agree that God isn't real. He could have made the same point by suing Santa Claus. Now that's frivolous. But with a real God, we have to consider the following seriously:

"The lawsuit accuses God 'of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent.' It says God has caused 'fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects and the like.'

The suit also says God has caused 'calamitous catastrophes resulting in the wide-spread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth’s inhabitants including innocent babes, infants, children, the aged and infirm without mercy or distinction.'

Chambers also says God "has manifested neither compassion nor remorse, proclaiming that defendant will laugh" when calamity comes."

Well, is God real or isn't he? If he did these things, does he not deserve out criticism and condemnation, or not? If not, why not? Again, the humorous way this is all presented implies that it's all fiction! I agree, but be consistent about it. If we can't take suing God seriously, then why should we take praying or swearing to God seriously?

Let's just not take any of it seriously and see what happens. Where there is a lot of God talk, there tends to be a lot of new things that elicit the God talk in the first place.