quick thought... March 4th, 2007 - 11:04PM
So, I’m in the middle of negotiating language in a rather large service agreement with a potential client, and I come across the use of the term “God” in reference to “force majeure” — where an “act of God” can legally prevent the delivery of promised work. Out of curiosity, I asked my lawyer about it and he said, “the law recognizes God.” I’ve heard the phrase before, I just haven’t seen it in past contracts. Interesting.
Tags: America, lawyer, linguistics.
Search
No Tweets RSS feedLatest Posts
- grateful for the silence while…
- getting back to the basics: me…
- can’t sleep. in a bad way…
- singing words of wisdom… let…
- i finally understand the conce…
- thinking about painting my bed…
- getting to know the morning ci…
- getting to know the morning ci…
- what a ride this week has been…
- 37 years is what it took for m…
What I Write About (see all)
- 9 11 accountability activism Adam Smith Problem advertising America antiwar artsy fartsy blogging business capitalism change citizen media community Congress corporation corruption creativity disturbing experience design film funny George Bush government graffiti Greensboro Hip hop humanity information architecture innovation inspiration internet Iraq War journalism lyrics media music New World Order New York City North Carolina personal philosophy photography poetry politics reality Republican Party terrorism video World 2.0
“Act of God” is big in the meetings and convention business and it makes a lot of sense if you think about it. Take ConvergeSouth. If you were charging a $1,000 a person and you had a 1,000 people signed up and the day before it’s set to begin the facility is leveled by a hurricane then if you don’t have insurance that covers “act of God” events then you’re hosed.
I never thought about the law actually having to acknowledge God though, because to me it was always just a saying to imply natural occurences. I actually wondered why they didn’t use a term like natural catastrophe, but I guess they probably have precedence out the wazoo defining what an Act of God is so why bother having to do all that over again?
yeah, that was my take as well. “natural disasters or occurrences” is pretty understandable language. i’m guessing the “Act of God” reference is terminology leftover from back in the day.
though i gotta admit, i still can’t accurately describe what “separation of church and state” really means… technically speaking, isn’t law a part of the state? not that i have a real problem with the word “God” being in the clause, it’s just strange…