• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Nebraska Woman is Suing All Gays

Nothing happens unless god wills it.

So I figure my atheism will earn me my place in heaven, as a heaven sent bad example.

(It works to get proselytizers to shut up. )
 
From last month, here's a somewhat more recent story about Sylvia Driskell (the Nebraska woman referred to in the OP) and her lawsuit.

Josh Milton in PinkNews said:
The time a Nebraska woman tried to sue every gay person in existence in 2015 has, of course, become a meme in 2020.

In 2015 Sylvia Driskell was a 66-year-old woman from Auburn, Nebraska. A woman who filed a federal lawsuit titled Driskell v. Homosexuals.

Yes, she was suing every single gay person on the planet. Every single one. And can we really blame her?

A screen capture of a New York Magazine article about her case – Driskell vs homosexuals – has resurfaced online five years later, and a new meme emerged...
Click to expand...
 
Yes, she was suing every single gay person on the planet. Every single one. And can we really blame her?
Click to expand...
Gay homeless people who are living deep inside the bowels of cities don't need crap like this clinging to them like little turdlets. Gay tribal people living deep inside the bowels of the Amazon rainforest don't need crap like this clinging to them like little turdlets.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
This is a good idea actually. Stimulate the economy through massive employment of process servers. It'll be like a second Civil Works Administration, but instead of building rest stops, it'll be chasing down gay people to serve them legal notices.
Click to expand...

Well, it seems that serving all gays would be a difficult task, seeing as how there are still a fair number who are "in the closet". How are they to identify them? Just serve everybody and put a notice in the document to disregard if you are not gay? Or do we hire gay process servers and rely on "gaydar"?
 
casebro said:
Nothing happens unless god wills it.

So I figure my atheism will earn me my place in heaven, as a heaven sent bad example.

(It works to get proselytizers to shut up. )
Click to expand...

I don't worry about it. I don't actually see eternal boredom as an improvement on eternal torment. Also, I'm sure the company is much more interesting in hell than in heaven.
 
Ding dong.
Good day, and excuse me for intruding, but may I ask you how many closets you have in this home?
We have eleven closets.
Well, would you please place one of these legal notices in each of your closets. Here is a pack of twelve copies for you and thank you for your time.
 
William Parcher said:
Ding dong.
Good day, and excuse me for intruding, but may I ask you how many closets you have in this home?
We have eleven closets.
Well, would you please place one of these legal notices in each of your closets. Here is a pack of twelve copies for you and thank you for your time.
Click to expand...

Damn, why didn't I think of that?
 
William Parcher said:
Yes, she was suing every single gay person on the planet. Every single one. And can we really blame her?
Click to expand...


Gay homeless people who are living deep inside the bowels of cities don't need crap like this clinging to them like little turdlets. Gay tribal people living deep inside the bowels of the Amazon rainforest don't need crap like this clinging to them like little turdlets.
Click to expand...


That quote is from an article by Josh Milton at the website PinkNews. I included that information at the top of the quote when I posted it, but I should have also included for the benefit of people who didn't realize it that PinkNews is a gay website and the sentence which reads And can we really blame her is an example of snark on the writer's part.

From Wikipedia: "PinkNews is a UK-based online newspaper marketed to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community (LGBT) in the UK and worldwide."

My apologies for not including that information about PinkNews along with the quote in my previous comment. I had guessed that PinkNews was a gay publication from their name, PinkNews, so easily understood the line in question to be snark, but I should have realized snark often is not recognized as such unless it is clearly labeled as such.
 
CORed said:
Well, it seems that serving all gays would be a difficult task, seeing as how there are still a fair number who are "in the closet". How are they to identify them? Just serve everybody and put a notice in the document to disregard if you are not gay? Or do we hire gay process servers and rely on "gaydar"?
Click to expand...

Sadly we see how this does in effect happen, all it takes is rumours, in many countries that are still viciously anti-homosexuality the merest whisper is enough to get people condemned and identified as homosexual, whether they are or not.
 
Well, what baffles me the most is the idea of asking a secular judge to rule what is a mortal sin. I mean, even if she missed the memo about the whole separation of church and state, wouldn't she want a theologian to rule on what's a sin? WTH?
 
Maybe the suit will be refilled as a class action, the lawyers will make a fortune and the religious litigants will ultimately each receive a $2.00 coupon for a “Gay Eye for the Straight a Guy” DVD.
 
theprestige said:
I also can't decide if I'm impressed that she managed to stay coherent enough to actually file a proper petition with the courts, or if I'm happy that the court petitioning system is indeed easily accessible - as it should be.
Click to expand...

It doesn’t take too much to file a petition. She obviously did some research because the petition has all the required information (at least for filing) and even in the right places and numbered arguments and everything.

The petition was handwritten. In cursive. Which I didn’t even think the Federal courts would allow. But the rules of this district allow handwritten petitions “if necessary”. (I’m guessing that is primarily to allow for petitions from prisoners).

It is legible. And mostly well written, other than a few mistakes and some odd commas and a quote from the book of “Jenesis”.

Leftus said:
Not sure if she had to pay the filing fee, but the judge killed it the same day it was filed.
Click to expand...

It was filed 5/1 and dismissed 5/6, so not the same day, but only a few days.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot, so she would not have to pay a fee. To file a petition a person has to pay the filing fee or file IFP. IF a person files IFP the court determines the person has to pay the fee before commencement of service of the complaint. But the court dismisses the complaint preservice if the action or appeal is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks money from someone immune to such relief. The court ruled that the IFP is moot because the complaint was dismissed preservice (no relief can be granted because the court lack subject matter jurisdiction), which means that it would not proceed to the point where a fee would be due.

It is a bit ironic that she doesn’t have to pay a fee due to a law intended to prevent people from filing frivolous lawsuits. It came about from the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995. That law was intended to restrict lawsuits and appeals by prisoners so that they don’t just file a bunch of worthless petitions IFP where they suffer no consequences. It also allows the court to dismiss IFP complaints outright for the reasons stated above without a motion from the plaintiff or even any service on the plaintiff (which would have to be paid for by the government if IFP were granted).

So, the court doesn’t collect a fee, but the government also doesn’t have to pay for any costs of service or any other costs with the continuance of the complaint. It is cheaper to just dump it at no cost.

Of course, a person could be fined or ordered to pay damages for filing a frivolous lawsuit. Or even be found in contempt or in criminal violation. Or even barred from future filings unless a fine is paid, such as in the case of Matthew Washington who filed dozens of frivolous motions including a “Motion to Kiss My Ass”.

dudalb said:
Was she able to find some lawyer desperate enough to take her case?
Click to expand...

No. She filed pro se. If a lawyer filed this, they would probably be facing fines and/or other sanctions.
HansMustermann said:
Well, what baffles me the most is the idea of asking a secular judge to rule what is a mortal sin. I mean, even if she missed the memo about the whole separation of church and state, wouldn't she want a theologian to rule on what's a sin? WTH?
Click to expand...

A court has power over everybody (within jurisdiction) and a theologian does not. She wants government acceptance of her personal beliefs and authority over people outside her religion. Doesn’t sound very democratic. Or republican. It sounds down right un-American. Love it or leave it, Pinko!

Checkmite said:
Any word on how much each gay person is liable?
Click to expand...

Each gay person is liable to find her rather queer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom