Page 1 of 1 [ 1 post ] 

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,865
Location: Stendec

19 Jun 2024, 5:52 am

2014-05-07: A judge in Omaha has thrown out Nebraska woman Sylvia Driskell’s lawsuit against all homosexuals. Omaha.com reports:

In a strongly worded opinion, [Judge John Gerrard] said it is not up to the court to decide whether homosexuality is sinful.  Gerrard said Driskell lacked subject matter jurisdiction and cannot sue a class of unidentified defendants.  Driskell did not set forth a factual or legal basis for a federal claim.

"The United States Federal Courts were created to resolve actual cases and controversies arising under the Constitution and the laws of the United States," Judge Gerrard said. "A federal court is not a forum for debate or discourse on theological matters."

Read the Complete and Unedited Article  HERE 

• • •

Sylvia Driskell is a Nebraska-based self-declared ambassador of "God, And His, Son Jesus Christ [sic]" who received some attention back in 2015 when she sued every gay person on Earth, asking a federal judge to rule on whether homosexuality is a sin.  In Driskell v. Homosexuals (yes, that’s the name), Driskell served as her own lawyer, and although her seven-page petition (written entirely in cursive) -- officially against “Homosexuals, Their Given Name Homosexuals Their Alis Gay [sic]” -- failed to reference any relevant or irrelevant case laws, it liberally quoted only the Bible and Webster’s Dictionary.  The goal was to make the District Court in Omaha decide, once and for all, whether being gay is a sin: "Why are judges passing laws, so sinners can break religious, and moral laws," stated the complaint, and "[w]ill all the judges of this Nation, judge God to be a lier [sic]"?  Given her role as ambassador, Driskell saw it as her responsibility to take on the case, and to "start standing up for the moral principles on which our great nation, our great states, and our great cities were founded on."  The District court promptly refused to take a stance on Driskell’s theological hypotheses and tossed the case.

Read the Other Complete and Unedited Article  HERE 


_________________
 
The previous signature line has been cancelled.