Posted on 11/13/2010 4:33:49 PM PST by John Semmens
**This is satire.**
I don’t know which is worse.. the difficulty in finding the reality over the satire.
Or Effing KNOWITALLS who think we’re so stupid that it has to be explained.
Damn.. you sound like my Motherinlaw (msrip)
I hate John Semmens
Then they don’t have anything to whine about anymore.
My ancestors might have been slaves, too. Slavery was not limited to persons with black skin. What color skin do you think Roman slaves had?
I believe the origin of the word "slave" was
from the Slavs who were held as slaves in
the Roman Empire
Anyone can sue anyone or any thing for any reason.
Doesn’t mean the judge won’t had them their ashes when it comes to trial.
Anyone can sue anyone or any thing for any reason.
Doesn’t mean the judge won’t had them their ashes when it comes to trial or more likely during pre-trial motions.
You had me going...until I saw your name. Another winner!
I was shocked to hear the label “dumb Swede” when my Dad jokingly used it to describe his side of the family.
Should I sue my Dad?
Not nearly so bad however, as the other side of my family that was mainly Irish.
I read that once the Irish were regarded as the “niggers” of Europe.
Since I married an Italian, I can’t figure if I married up or down.
Another head shakin’ chuckler John.
Lawyers are people too. They need to make a living ... just like sharks gotta feed.
Well, the post I was specifically responding to was clearly taking the article literally, hence the explanation. And since failing to identify satire in no way indicates stupidity, pointing out that something is satire in no way indicates the belief that someone is stupid.
Yeah, and I’m the Queen of Sheba. That little girl needs to get over her dream that she is a “princess.” Like most of us, she’d better accept the greater likelihood that she has gypsies, tramps, and thieves in her background.
It’s just for publicity, and it’s frivolous.
A person can file suit against anyone, but that doesn’t mean a suit can proceed.
A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted would get rid of this suit in the pretrial phase.
Well if being told that some of her ancestors may have been slaves is traumatic, then I've got something that will completely crush her. Try as she might she is never going to be a princess.
Bump for later comment.
The article states, “Jala was permanently damaged both mentally and emotionally by being taught that her ancestors might have been slaves.”
From the phrasing it sounds to me like they’re planning on suing under tort for intentional infliction of emotional distress as their cause of action. And that’s absurd. Even in cases of genuine emotional abuse, it’s a very tough standard to meet, and doesn’t have a snowflake’s chance in hell of being met here. It’s wholly frivolous and any attorney filing such a suit should face sanctions.
It’s satire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.