Fourth – alcohol\’s in the fifth.
The lawsuit, if filed, should be against those who mis-used it and not the manufacturer.
Speaking of ethanol in various forms……..alcohol should be drunk not burned.
cheers
Don\’t forget to include the printer of the menu in the suit. They should have know better than to supply non-fire retardant menus to establishments serving flammable liquids.
This is a stupid sounding but serious question: Can alcohol actually cause severe burns? Somewhere I heard that alcohol vaporized and burned above the surface of its supply, not at the surface. A flaming menu could ignite alcohol, but could flaming alcohol ignite a menu??
So Bacardi is responsible for the fact that alcohol burns? Sounds to me more like the customer that lit the stuff on fire was responsible, not the manufacturer.
Of course, I\’m one of those that think that guns don\’t kill people, stupid people with guns kill people. Which came first, the french fries or the fat?
From the story, this woman has a legitimate case to recover for her injuries (look at that, an injury lawsuit that\’s not frivolous!), but I think she may be pursuing the wrong party. Then again, that\’s probably at the direction of her scum-sucking attorney that\’s going for a gold mine against deep pockets…
I think the better question here is what was the one man doing lighting up a menu? He is the one that caused the whole incident to unfold. How can you prove that rum is defective? What does that mean? It fails to give you a buzz? I agree the lawyer is going for the gold since he obviously knows that the restaurant, the bartender or even the fellow that started the fire won\’t have enough money for him to get his hands on.
You know what\’s coming… there was no warning lable on the bottle of rum advising not to dispense near an open flame. Nor one warning not to drink in a bar that caters to flaming idiots.
I need a good lawyer to represent me, I was not aware that this was a defect in the product, I thought that it was common knowledge that alcohol was flammable. I need to sue the petroleum companies because gasoline has this same defect. I use it as fuel for my car, and knew it was flammable, but now that I know this is really a \”defect\” I should be compensated for the dangerous exposure that I have had, I also want to make the petroleum companies make a safer fuel that is NOT flammable. I just thought that if I kept flames away from gas that I was safe, clearly this attorney is smarter than me and has possibly saved my life. All this time I just thought that if I stayed away from freaking idiots that light things on fire while I am pumping gas, that I was safe. NO now it is defective gas because it has explosive and flammable vapors that make it dangerous. To quote a famous philosopher \”Here\’s your sign\”
This woman and her lawsuit are so stupid that I can\’t even comment on it. Her stupidity is giving me a headache…. And lawyers would why they have a bad name.
First of all: the word is \”idiocy\” not \”idiocity\”. Second: Bacardi 151 rum has a red flammable warning on the label. Third: Bacardi 151 rum has a flame retardant screen-like cover on top of the bottle, underneath the cap. Fourth: Alcohols in the
The complaintent is merly in the wrong place at the wrong time! when someone next to you has lit a fire and the other person next to you has fuel for the fire, then it\’s your CALL to RUN, otherwise get BURNED. If it can happen then it WILL HAPPEN, BIG DUMMY.
Point is stay away from FIRE. In the time it took for the ignition of the menue I would of realized that the outcome of that fire would expand to the RUM being served right in front of me. I don\’t know, mabee she does\’nt frequent good bars.
Please run when you see FIRE from now on. Otherwise stick around for the BURN.
No, Hal, the moron who lit the menu has no coverage. Or, maybe, the coverage was subject to an exclusion; like maybe intentional acts, since it sounds like he was intending to be \”cute\” by trying to ignite the rum as it was being poured. Either way, no pockets, deep or otherwise.
From a strategy standpoint, do you sue someone with no insurance and risk a default judgment on liability, so that the jury HAS to assess SOME liability against that party; or, worse, make the uninsured person subject to the jurisdiction of the court and he testifies honestly to his stupidity? Or, do you not sue the uninsured party and hope that no one can find him to get his deposition, and that the jury won\’t assess liability against the \”empty chair\”?
For all of the high-minded talk of the plaintiff bar about \”protecting\” the injured, the reality is that it’s really about the money in cases like this.
Mud, unlike you, they are smart enough to know that if you throw enough garbage law suits out there eventually you will hit the jack pot. Intelligent but greedy.
Also, THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE AND MORALITY. Some of the most evil human beings are genious lawyers docters and politiciains.
So, collecting money from an inocent party is ok as long as you get the money. Sounds like a hold up.
And I thought some insurance companies were despicable.
Wow so now it is extremely clear, I can sue anyone for their stupidity. Can I sue public schools for turning out the highest priced idiots on the planet? Can I sue the government for not being able to read the first or second amendment to our constitution? Why when people sue tobacco companies do they always lose, but when the government sues it wins? Can I sue the government for thinking our constitution says it is ok to murder babies through abortion? I keep reading the constitution and can not figure out what big brother is reading!! The lawyer should be put in stupid prison…but it is not his fault it is the university he went to…..can I sue that university for creating such a stupid lawyer?
Actually saw a personal umbrella settlement for a homeowner who served flaming desert and dropped it on guest.
As for Bacardi named in suit it is probably for deep pocket as I am sure moron lighting menu does not have assets or liability limits to satisfy damages.
As for comment on intentional act, I do not think HO carrier will be able to deny this one, unless intended act was to burn the individual.
Restaurants should never serve flaming deserts, nor promote flaming alcohol. Do not know the details, but Bacardi seems to have been involved in promotion and distribution at this event. Would like to know more about the customer and involvement with promoter before letting Bacardi off the hook.
If Bacardi was there at the bar for a promotion and the person pouring the drink was either an employee of the bar or Bacardi…then liability can lie with both. Not on grounds of product defects, but on vicarious liability of the bar\’s patrons and/or the employer\’s employee. The lawyer is suing on the wrong grounds in my opinion.
The person who lit the menu is only important in the suit, if they were an employee of either the bar or Bacardi. Otherwise, they are more likely to be criminally charged and possibly sued in civil court which irrelevant to the lawsuit itself.
I am an ins. agent, not an attorney…my job is to find and sell coverage to either company so they are covered for these sorts of things.
You can\’t stop stupid people from suing or just plain…being stupid. However, you should plan on them being around.
Do you really think being greedy and immoral is a sign of wisdom or intelligence? How much stuff can you take from life to death? NOTHING. What is the price of immorality? DEATH. No wisdom there. Schooled idiots I say schooled idiots…..is intelligence blaming an innocent 3rd party for the stupidity of the first party? AS FOREST GUMP\’S MOMMA ALWAYS SAID \”STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!!\”
I guess it depends on the venue\’s interpretation of \”expected\”; as in \”expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured\”. I have seen cases decided where the end result was not specifically intended by the insured, but the triers of fact decided that the end result could be reasonably expected. In one case, the foreperson stated that the jurors couldn\’t figure out how the insured could claim to have expecetd any result except the disastrous one.
If the idiot with the flaming menu was intending to light the pouring rum so that it would catch fire, I would argue that it would be reasonable to expect that the rum could catch nearby patrons on fire. It would at least warrant a reservation of rights.
Evil is not a sign of wisdom. Evil is not doing good. Not doing good creates more evil in response to the original evil- evil is self perpetuating.
Intelligence and IQ tests were given to us by darwinism-a belief we evolved from a rock, and from scientism-a belief tied to darwinism but suggest that only a few in society are capable or \’understanding\’-the bell curve.
Yet, during the first few hundred years of our country most people understood wisdom and that wisdom comes from God by seeking truth. During the 1700\’s American society had an over 95% literacy rate- don\’t confuse that with todays literacy definition of being able to read \”See spot run.\” These humble farmers and business folks read and understood dialetic argument and had an uncanny ability to reason. As a matter of fact I would put an 8th grade educated Amish person up against whoever you think is \’intelligent\’-whatever that really means. In our general culture 90% of all independent business ventures fail-yet we spend more per capita on schooling, by so called experts, than any other country in the world. Yet the Amish have an over 85% percent success rate of independent businesses! None of your lawyer friends would think these folks had any \’intelligence\’ and would most likely fail an IQ test.
Wisdom is knowing the difference between right and wrong and applying these lessons to all situations. Your intelligence is just a repition of facts from one idiot to another-no reasoning no thinking no hard work.
Give me a room full of waitresses and stay at home moms and mechanics and farmers and those like George Washington(2 years of schooling) and Thomas Edison(flunked out of school) and Benjamin Franklin(50 weeks of schooling) and the entire country which destroyed the Intelligencia of the most powerfull nation on earth at the time-England. A lawyer does not add to society as a matter of fact they strangle business and families-with their self-promoted intelligence-schooled idiots!!!!
\”unlike you, they are smart enough to know that if you throw enough garbage law suits out there eventually you will hit the jack pot.\”
Intelligence is having a stupid plan that hurts people and all of society. Give me wisdom and truth and you can have your \’intelligence.\’ How long did it take to come up with that stupidity
the problem here is that in the US it seems easy to win these kinds of law suits. Do we forget the McDonalds hot coffee claim that was won.
if juries would only see past the fact that it is only an insurer suffering these cases would never happen.
next we will end up with a situation like the doctors where malpractise insurance become unavaible to most people or the charge by the doctor increase by 50% to cover insurance costs
Because we have schooled idiots on juries. Everyone keeps saying the schools are broke and need fixing-but are they broke or are schools intending to dumb down the masses and determine through Standardized Testing, in the first and second grade, who will be allowed to be invited into the Intelligent pool. Prior to public schooling(not educating),a little over 100 years ago, kids were taught at home or self taught how to read before going off to school. Only a few years of schooling was helpful to establish a hunger for wisdom back then. Kids learned reading by phonics, so why then did the Intelligencia change what was working when they began forced schooling around 1905. Is it because they want a mass of robotic people to fill their factories? Think about it. Juries prior to this forced schooling even used common sense when deciding cases. Today the jury pool is filled with people, because of forced schooling, who cannot reason. Juries will not change until we go back to educating children and not schooling them.
Read the book UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF AMERICAN EDUCATION.
I just need to compare your so called intelligence to God\’s wisdom.
1)God says love your neighbor like yourself.
2)You say sue your neighbors till we are rich.
Let us see the difference:
In 2, I could harm anyone so that I could get my own greediness fulfilled. I could threaten anyone and force them to give me what I want-result is- people living in fear, hating eachother, suspiciousness of all, anarchy!!
In 1, I will love my neighbor, if he needs help-I will help. When someone wants to do evil to him, I will help him defeat the evil-result is- people caring for eachother, love, compassion, trust, cohesive neighborhood intent on good.
Vote now:
Wisdom or Evil(intelligence)
Uhmmmm…….Wisdom hands down!!!!!!!!!!!!
Intelligence: the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
I believe the word we should be looking to equate to evil called-
Ignorance: the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness
Intelligent people have the CHOICE of their actions whether it is knowledge, education, or religious in nature.
The ignorant just don\’t know what time to wake up for church on Sunday…using your line of thought Muddy.
You are dead wrong! These so called IQ tests have shown many evil people, such as Hitler, Stalin, Chao are at a genious level IQ. Our lawyer friend said quite clearly being able to create plans falsely accusing innocent people until someone gives in is a sign of intelligence. I agree wholeheartedly. Intelligence is not wisdom. Read my 9:54 am post. I agree with your definition of intelligence that all people are created equal, by God, with an ability to learn and to respond to new and challenging situations. But our compuslory government schooling removes true learning. BUT if you leave wisdom from God out of your definition only evil will follow.
EXAMPLE: Stalin learned that when he took over Russia the easiest way to maintain power was to remove(kill) millions of free people from the face of the earth. He had intelligence based on Websters and your definition, but no morality-God\’s Law. This will happen every time because people are born with a sinful nature. If the search for truth(real education) is followed evil will disappear except for the occasional evil acts. Look at Amish communities that live this out in the real world-surrounded by greed and evil- yet they live in peace with very little crime.
No it has nothing to do with going to church early in the morning. You can quote dictionaries all you want, just look at the comparison between intelligence and wisdom.
Wisdom is free it\’s only cost is in the time to acquire it.
Intelligence takes years of dumming down, the average cost for 1 student K-12 is over $200,000(including slight interest). 13 years learning how to read. 13 years learning how to be an order taker for some big corporation and one day hoping to climb the stupid ladder and become some stupid systems manager, 13 years to go get a job at McDonalds or at some factory. 13 years of wasted time.
Ignorance has absolutely nothing to do with evil. Ignorance is just pre wisdom. Not knowing the difference between right and wrong. We were all ignorant at some point in time that is why God says seek ye wisdom. As a matter of fact there will always be ignorance in us, cause we cannot know about everything. Wisdom is a journey, never completed.
This should not be a religious platform nor a government knocking forum. If you want to be Amish..go right ahead…then you wouldn\’t be on this blog…I am fairly certain they don\’t use computers.
This also shouldn\’t be a debate over a certain word…quote all the books and refer to all people in history you want. The simple fact is that religious, non-religious, intelligent, and yes, even the wise have done bad things. Maybe you missed that part in your readings.
Reality is that you have to protect yourself from those people or events so you don\’t get burned by the Bacardi molotov coctails of the world. I am surprised you didn\’t rip the woman for even being at the bar???
IGNORANCE: LACK OF KNOWLEDGE NOT A LACK OF INTELLIGENCE
KNOWLEDGE: A STOREHOUSE OF AVAILABLE FACTS AND DATA
INTELLIGENCE: AN ABILITY TO LEARN
WISDOM: ACTING(BY INTELLIGENCE) ON A PIECE OF DATA OR FACT(KNOWLEDGE) AND APPLYING IT IN TRUTH
Please Sam, do not tell me not to discuss relevant issues involving this article. It is our duty as citizens of this great country to get to the truth of issues of our day(Wherever that truth leads us). First amendment gives me the right(endowed by my creator) to discuss government, politics, schools, and even religion. If you want to discuss peanut butter, religion may not be involved, but in the discussion of a lawyer bearing false witness against his neighbor(religious theme), how people are incapable of deciding right and wrong(religious and governmental-big brother) and how we as a society have gotten to this point(The most relevent issue). If we can not argue why and then make necessary changes to prevent future harm; then when the same events continue to happen and all you want to do is argue about how silly this part or that part of the system is designed to solve problems- we will gain nothing.
THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WISDOM AND IDIOCY. SHUT OFF DEBATE WHEN YOU CANNOT DEFEND YOUR POSITION-JUST ADMIT AN ERROR AND MOVE ON WITH NEW INSIGHT-NOT IN PERSONAL ATTACK.
At least once legitimately defend your position instead of attacking me personally. You will not attack my argument because maybe you are unfamiliar with healthy debate…..much like the masses from compulsory government schooling.
Very interesting guys but has nothing to with the article.
The question is did the victim contribute to the burning of herself just by being in the bar? No one would expect to be exposed to being burned by going in a bar. Who caused the accident? The patron who lit the menu obviously. The question is, did the bartender continue to serve this patron if he was obviously drunk? If so, the bar is liable. In any event, the patron who lit the menu is also liable. The Bacardi firm has no clear liability. Some posters are right, the lawyer is going after the deepest pocket. However, look at this from the victim\’s viewpoint. She is scarred for life. How would you feel if this happened to you through no fault of your own?
Muddy, I dont know if you actually understand your own philosophy. When God says love others as you love your self, its is actually a paradox. Many people dont love them selves. So you have free will to create your own reality in that sense, and even God is ok with that, in that this World is just an illusion any way. For example, a man might want to be raped by a beautiful girl, so under the do unto others priciple, we would have a problem by most peoples standards. Therefore you may actually not really know what you believe in.
Hey, I agree that if it happened to me, through no fault of my own, that I would be pissed. But, I\’d like to think that I have the integrity to not sue someone who also wasn\’t at fault, just because they have money that maybe the person who was at fault didn\’t.
And, I\’d hope that a jury of my peers would not give away my money just because I can afford it, while the at-fault party can\’t.
One of the concepts that the U.S. brags about is that we have, and adhere to, the rule of law. But, every time a plaintiff attorney asks a jury gives away money based upon the ability to pay instead of true liability, or because the payor is \”big business\” while the claimant is just a \”common man\”, and the jury does, that attorney and that jury are no better than the the tin-pan, third-world dictators we like to look down on.
It is not do unto others as you would want them to do unto you, but is LOVE your neighbor as yourself. If one does not deem himself loveable, he calls God a liar. God so LOVED the world that He GAVE His only begotten son.. Sounds like God has defined love already and it seems more sacrificial and selfless not selfish as you would suggest.
Lets look at your theory and see if we prove it true or false quickly….
We all create our own realities, similar to Hitler. His reality killed milions and millions of people and put the whole world to war. If we all created similar selfish \’realities\’ the results might be similar!! Since we are not better off making our own realities, then your theory is FALSE. God says that people have turned from the truth and accepted a lie. This is apparent when we see mindlessness imagine different realities(as if they were REAL). The druggies from the 60\’s and 70\’s tried this also.
Fourth – alcohol\’s in the fifth.
The lawsuit, if filed, should be against those who mis-used it and not the manufacturer.
Speaking of ethanol in various forms……..alcohol should be drunk not burned.
cheers
Don\’t forget to include the printer of the menu in the suit. They should have know better than to supply non-fire retardant menus to establishments serving flammable liquids.
So much for Cherries Jubilee. Dang, my favorite desert may get ripped off the menu.
Just pour me a glass of regular rum…..
This is a stupid sounding but serious question: Can alcohol actually cause severe burns? Somewhere I heard that alcohol vaporized and burned above the surface of its supply, not at the surface. A flaming menu could ignite alcohol, but could flaming alcohol ignite a menu??
…evidently knows no bounds.
So Bacardi is responsible for the fact that alcohol burns? Sounds to me more like the customer that lit the stuff on fire was responsible, not the manufacturer.
Of course, I\’m one of those that think that guns don\’t kill people, stupid people with guns kill people. Which came first, the french fries or the fat?
From the story, this woman has a legitimate case to recover for her injuries (look at that, an injury lawsuit that\’s not frivolous!), but I think she may be pursuing the wrong party. Then again, that\’s probably at the direction of her scum-sucking attorney that\’s going for a gold mine against deep pockets…
I think the better question here is what was the one man doing lighting up a menu? He is the one that caused the whole incident to unfold. How can you prove that rum is defective? What does that mean? It fails to give you a buzz? I agree the lawyer is going for the gold since he obviously knows that the restaurant, the bartender or even the fellow that started the fire won\’t have enough money for him to get his hands on.
You know what\’s coming… there was no warning lable on the bottle of rum advising not to dispense near an open flame. Nor one warning not to drink in a bar that caters to flaming idiots.
Buy rum futures now.
When rum is outlawed only outlaws will ….. Oh yeah, they tried that already.
I need a good lawyer to represent me, I was not aware that this was a defect in the product, I thought that it was common knowledge that alcohol was flammable. I need to sue the petroleum companies because gasoline has this same defect. I use it as fuel for my car, and knew it was flammable, but now that I know this is really a \”defect\” I should be compensated for the dangerous exposure that I have had, I also want to make the petroleum companies make a safer fuel that is NOT flammable. I just thought that if I kept flames away from gas that I was safe, clearly this attorney is smarter than me and has possibly saved my life. All this time I just thought that if I stayed away from freaking idiots that light things on fire while I am pumping gas, that I was safe. NO now it is defective gas because it has explosive and flammable vapors that make it dangerous. To quote a famous philosopher \”Here\’s your sign\”
This woman and her lawsuit are so stupid that I can\’t even comment on it. Her stupidity is giving me a headache…. And lawyers would why they have a bad name.
Get me a Mint Julep
First of all: the word is \”idiocy\” not \”idiocity\”. Second: Bacardi 151 rum has a red flammable warning on the label. Third: Bacardi 151 rum has a flame retardant screen-like cover on top of the bottle, underneath the cap. Fourth: Alcohols in the
The complaintent is merly in the wrong place at the wrong time! when someone next to you has lit a fire and the other person next to you has fuel for the fire, then it\’s your CALL to RUN, otherwise get BURNED. If it can happen then it WILL HAPPEN, BIG DUMMY.
Point is stay away from FIRE. In the time it took for the ignition of the menue I would of realized that the outcome of that fire would expand to the RUM being served right in front of me. I don\’t know, mabee she does\’nt frequent good bars.
Please run when you see FIRE from now on. Otherwise stick around for the BURN.
Regaurds, Common SENSE
That kind of fire moves way too fast to outrun. The moron who lit the menu is the real culprit but he likely ran away.
No, Hal, the moron who lit the menu has no coverage. Or, maybe, the coverage was subject to an exclusion; like maybe intentional acts, since it sounds like he was intending to be \”cute\” by trying to ignite the rum as it was being poured. Either way, no pockets, deep or otherwise.
From a strategy standpoint, do you sue someone with no insurance and risk a default judgment on liability, so that the jury HAS to assess SOME liability against that party; or, worse, make the uninsured person subject to the jurisdiction of the court and he testifies honestly to his stupidity? Or, do you not sue the uninsured party and hope that no one can find him to get his deposition, and that the jury won\’t assess liability against the \”empty chair\”?
For all of the high-minded talk of the plaintiff bar about \”protecting\” the injured, the reality is that it’s really about the money in cases like this.
Mud, unlike you, they are smart enough to know that if you throw enough garbage law suits out there eventually you will hit the jack pot. Intelligent but greedy.
Also, THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE AND MORALITY. Some of the most evil human beings are genious lawyers docters and politiciains.
So, collecting money from an inocent party is ok as long as you get the money. Sounds like a hold up.
And I thought some insurance companies were despicable.
Wow so now it is extremely clear, I can sue anyone for their stupidity. Can I sue public schools for turning out the highest priced idiots on the planet? Can I sue the government for not being able to read the first or second amendment to our constitution? Why when people sue tobacco companies do they always lose, but when the government sues it wins? Can I sue the government for thinking our constitution says it is ok to murder babies through abortion? I keep reading the constitution and can not figure out what big brother is reading!! The lawyer should be put in stupid prison…but it is not his fault it is the university he went to…..can I sue that university for creating such a stupid lawyer?
Actually saw a personal umbrella settlement for a homeowner who served flaming desert and dropped it on guest.
As for Bacardi named in suit it is probably for deep pocket as I am sure moron lighting menu does not have assets or liability limits to satisfy damages.
As for comment on intentional act, I do not think HO carrier will be able to deny this one, unless intended act was to burn the individual.
Restaurants should never serve flaming deserts, nor promote flaming alcohol. Do not know the details, but Bacardi seems to have been involved in promotion and distribution at this event. Would like to know more about the customer and involvement with promoter before letting Bacardi off the hook.
Muddy, b4 you start calling lawyers stupid, go to law scool and take a crack at the bar. They are not stupid, they are just greedy and immoral.
If Bacardi was there at the bar for a promotion and the person pouring the drink was either an employee of the bar or Bacardi…then liability can lie with both. Not on grounds of product defects, but on vicarious liability of the bar\’s patrons and/or the employer\’s employee. The lawyer is suing on the wrong grounds in my opinion.
The person who lit the menu is only important in the suit, if they were an employee of either the bar or Bacardi. Otherwise, they are more likely to be criminally charged and possibly sued in civil court which irrelevant to the lawsuit itself.
I am an ins. agent, not an attorney…my job is to find and sell coverage to either company so they are covered for these sorts of things.
You can\’t stop stupid people from suing or just plain…being stupid. However, you should plan on them being around.
Neither does idiocy apparently…
At the cost of defense the defendant has lost upon filing. There is no justice on a case where the defendant is not-at-fault.
Do you really think being greedy and immoral is a sign of wisdom or intelligence? How much stuff can you take from life to death? NOTHING. What is the price of immorality? DEATH. No wisdom there. Schooled idiots I say schooled idiots…..is intelligence blaming an innocent 3rd party for the stupidity of the first party? AS FOREST GUMP\’S MOMMA ALWAYS SAID \”STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!!\”
Bradley,
I guess it depends on the venue\’s interpretation of \”expected\”; as in \”expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured\”. I have seen cases decided where the end result was not specifically intended by the insured, but the triers of fact decided that the end result could be reasonably expected. In one case, the foreperson stated that the jurors couldn\’t figure out how the insured could claim to have expecetd any result except the disastrous one.
If the idiot with the flaming menu was intending to light the pouring rum so that it would catch fire, I would argue that it would be reasonable to expect that the rum could catch nearby patrons on fire. It would at least warrant a reservation of rights.
Evil is not a sign of wisdom. Evil is not doing good. Not doing good creates more evil in response to the original evil- evil is self perpetuating.
Intelligence and IQ tests were given to us by darwinism-a belief we evolved from a rock, and from scientism-a belief tied to darwinism but suggest that only a few in society are capable or \’understanding\’-the bell curve.
Yet, during the first few hundred years of our country most people understood wisdom and that wisdom comes from God by seeking truth. During the 1700\’s American society had an over 95% literacy rate- don\’t confuse that with todays literacy definition of being able to read \”See spot run.\” These humble farmers and business folks read and understood dialetic argument and had an uncanny ability to reason. As a matter of fact I would put an 8th grade educated Amish person up against whoever you think is \’intelligent\’-whatever that really means. In our general culture 90% of all independent business ventures fail-yet we spend more per capita on schooling, by so called experts, than any other country in the world. Yet the Amish have an over 85% percent success rate of independent businesses! None of your lawyer friends would think these folks had any \’intelligence\’ and would most likely fail an IQ test.
Wisdom is knowing the difference between right and wrong and applying these lessons to all situations. Your intelligence is just a repition of facts from one idiot to another-no reasoning no thinking no hard work.
Give me a room full of waitresses and stay at home moms and mechanics and farmers and those like George Washington(2 years of schooling) and Thomas Edison(flunked out of school) and Benjamin Franklin(50 weeks of schooling) and the entire country which destroyed the Intelligencia of the most powerfull nation on earth at the time-England. A lawyer does not add to society as a matter of fact they strangle business and families-with their self-promoted intelligence-schooled idiots!!!!
\”unlike you, they are smart enough to know that if you throw enough garbage law suits out there eventually you will hit the jack pot.\”
Intelligence is having a stupid plan that hurts people and all of society. Give me wisdom and truth and you can have your \’intelligence.\’ How long did it take to come up with that stupidity
the problem here is that in the US it seems easy to win these kinds of law suits. Do we forget the McDonalds hot coffee claim that was won.
if juries would only see past the fact that it is only an insurer suffering these cases would never happen.
next we will end up with a situation like the doctors where malpractise insurance become unavaible to most people or the charge by the doctor increase by 50% to cover insurance costs
Because we have schooled idiots on juries. Everyone keeps saying the schools are broke and need fixing-but are they broke or are schools intending to dumb down the masses and determine through Standardized Testing, in the first and second grade, who will be allowed to be invited into the Intelligent pool. Prior to public schooling(not educating),a little over 100 years ago, kids were taught at home or self taught how to read before going off to school. Only a few years of schooling was helpful to establish a hunger for wisdom back then. Kids learned reading by phonics, so why then did the Intelligencia change what was working when they began forced schooling around 1905. Is it because they want a mass of robotic people to fill their factories? Think about it. Juries prior to this forced schooling even used common sense when deciding cases. Today the jury pool is filled with people, because of forced schooling, who cannot reason. Juries will not change until we go back to educating children and not schooling them.
Read the book UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF AMERICAN EDUCATION.
I just need to compare your so called intelligence to God\’s wisdom.
1)God says love your neighbor like yourself.
2)You say sue your neighbors till we are rich.
Let us see the difference:
In 2, I could harm anyone so that I could get my own greediness fulfilled. I could threaten anyone and force them to give me what I want-result is- people living in fear, hating eachother, suspiciousness of all, anarchy!!
In 1, I will love my neighbor, if he needs help-I will help. When someone wants to do evil to him, I will help him defeat the evil-result is- people caring for eachother, love, compassion, trust, cohesive neighborhood intent on good.
Vote now:
Wisdom or Evil(intelligence)
Uhmmmm…….Wisdom hands down!!!!!!!!!!!!
Intelligence: the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
I believe the word we should be looking to equate to evil called-
Ignorance: the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness
Intelligent people have the CHOICE of their actions whether it is knowledge, education, or religious in nature.
The ignorant just don\’t know what time to wake up for church on Sunday…using your line of thought Muddy.
:)
You are dead wrong! These so called IQ tests have shown many evil people, such as Hitler, Stalin, Chao are at a genious level IQ. Our lawyer friend said quite clearly being able to create plans falsely accusing innocent people until someone gives in is a sign of intelligence. I agree wholeheartedly. Intelligence is not wisdom. Read my 9:54 am post. I agree with your definition of intelligence that all people are created equal, by God, with an ability to learn and to respond to new and challenging situations. But our compuslory government schooling removes true learning. BUT if you leave wisdom from God out of your definition only evil will follow.
EXAMPLE: Stalin learned that when he took over Russia the easiest way to maintain power was to remove(kill) millions of free people from the face of the earth. He had intelligence based on Websters and your definition, but no morality-God\’s Law. This will happen every time because people are born with a sinful nature. If the search for truth(real education) is followed evil will disappear except for the occasional evil acts. Look at Amish communities that live this out in the real world-surrounded by greed and evil- yet they live in peace with very little crime.
No it has nothing to do with going to church early in the morning. You can quote dictionaries all you want, just look at the comparison between intelligence and wisdom.
Wisdom is free it\’s only cost is in the time to acquire it.
Intelligence takes years of dumming down, the average cost for 1 student K-12 is over $200,000(including slight interest). 13 years learning how to read. 13 years learning how to be an order taker for some big corporation and one day hoping to climb the stupid ladder and become some stupid systems manager, 13 years to go get a job at McDonalds or at some factory. 13 years of wasted time.
Ignorance has absolutely nothing to do with evil. Ignorance is just pre wisdom. Not knowing the difference between right and wrong. We were all ignorant at some point in time that is why God says seek ye wisdom. As a matter of fact there will always be ignorance in us, cause we cannot know about everything. Wisdom is a journey, never completed.
This should not be a religious platform nor a government knocking forum. If you want to be Amish..go right ahead…then you wouldn\’t be on this blog…I am fairly certain they don\’t use computers.
This also shouldn\’t be a debate over a certain word…quote all the books and refer to all people in history you want. The simple fact is that religious, non-religious, intelligent, and yes, even the wise have done bad things. Maybe you missed that part in your readings.
Reality is that you have to protect yourself from those people or events so you don\’t get burned by the Bacardi molotov coctails of the world. I am surprised you didn\’t rip the woman for even being at the bar???
IGNORANCE: LACK OF KNOWLEDGE NOT A LACK OF INTELLIGENCE
KNOWLEDGE: A STOREHOUSE OF AVAILABLE FACTS AND DATA
INTELLIGENCE: AN ABILITY TO LEARN
WISDOM: ACTING(BY INTELLIGENCE) ON A PIECE OF DATA OR FACT(KNOWLEDGE) AND APPLYING IT IN TRUTH
Please Sam, do not tell me not to discuss relevant issues involving this article. It is our duty as citizens of this great country to get to the truth of issues of our day(Wherever that truth leads us). First amendment gives me the right(endowed by my creator) to discuss government, politics, schools, and even religion. If you want to discuss peanut butter, religion may not be involved, but in the discussion of a lawyer bearing false witness against his neighbor(religious theme), how people are incapable of deciding right and wrong(religious and governmental-big brother) and how we as a society have gotten to this point(The most relevent issue). If we can not argue why and then make necessary changes to prevent future harm; then when the same events continue to happen and all you want to do is argue about how silly this part or that part of the system is designed to solve problems- we will gain nothing.
THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WISDOM AND IDIOCY. SHUT OFF DEBATE WHEN YOU CANNOT DEFEND YOUR POSITION-JUST ADMIT AN ERROR AND MOVE ON WITH NEW INSIGHT-NOT IN PERSONAL ATTACK.
You are going off on a tangent…again…I\’m done with this.
Go vent on someone who can make an immediate difference in your life…say maybe a shrink?
At least once legitimately defend your position instead of attacking me personally. You will not attack my argument because maybe you are unfamiliar with healthy debate…..much like the masses from compulsory government schooling.
Very interesting guys but has nothing to with the article.
The question is did the victim contribute to the burning of herself just by being in the bar? No one would expect to be exposed to being burned by going in a bar. Who caused the accident? The patron who lit the menu obviously. The question is, did the bartender continue to serve this patron if he was obviously drunk? If so, the bar is liable. In any event, the patron who lit the menu is also liable. The Bacardi firm has no clear liability. Some posters are right, the lawyer is going after the deepest pocket. However, look at this from the victim\’s viewpoint. She is scarred for life. How would you feel if this happened to you through no fault of your own?
WHO CARES IT WAS AN ACCIDENT NOT A PURPOSE. ARE THERE NOT MANY BIGGER ISSUES AT PLAY IN THIS ARTICLE?
Muddy, I dont know if you actually understand your own philosophy. When God says love others as you love your self, its is actually a paradox. Many people dont love them selves. So you have free will to create your own reality in that sense, and even God is ok with that, in that this World is just an illusion any way. For example, a man might want to be raped by a beautiful girl, so under the do unto others priciple, we would have a problem by most peoples standards. Therefore you may actually not really know what you believe in.
Hey, I agree that if it happened to me, through no fault of my own, that I would be pissed. But, I\’d like to think that I have the integrity to not sue someone who also wasn\’t at fault, just because they have money that maybe the person who was at fault didn\’t.
And, I\’d hope that a jury of my peers would not give away my money just because I can afford it, while the at-fault party can\’t.
One of the concepts that the U.S. brags about is that we have, and adhere to, the rule of law. But, every time a plaintiff attorney asks a jury gives away money based upon the ability to pay instead of true liability, or because the payor is \”big business\” while the claimant is just a \”common man\”, and the jury does, that attorney and that jury are no better than the the tin-pan, third-world dictators we like to look down on.
It is not do unto others as you would want them to do unto you, but is LOVE your neighbor as yourself. If one does not deem himself loveable, he calls God a liar. God so LOVED the world that He GAVE His only begotten son.. Sounds like God has defined love already and it seems more sacrificial and selfless not selfish as you would suggest.
Lets look at your theory and see if we prove it true or false quickly….
We all create our own realities, similar to Hitler. His reality killed milions and millions of people and put the whole world to war. If we all created similar selfish \’realities\’ the results might be similar!! Since we are not better off making our own realities, then your theory is FALSE. God says that people have turned from the truth and accepted a lie. This is apparent when we see mindlessness imagine different realities(as if they were REAL). The druggies from the 60\’s and 70\’s tried this also.