Most of us are aware of the huge wildfire in Canada. It turns out that a lot of people are concerned that the wildfire might be considered an “act of God” by mean and nasty insurance companies so they can deny claims. I am pretty sure this is coming from liberals who frequently believe things that are simply not true. There is no “act of God” exclusion with regard to property insurance. The only time I have seen “act of God” used to deny a claim is when someone a tries to blame a natural disaster on imaginary negligence. This is like when Al Gore tried to blame hurricanes on global warming caused by oil companies.

Of course liberals are already complaining that insurance companies routinely look for ways to deny claims. In reality, the opposite is true. The people in Canada who have insurance are likely to be paid quickly and fairly so they can rebuild their homes and their lives. Those who have to wait for the Canadian equivalent of FEMA, not so much. If you doubt that, check out the homes in New Orleans still waiting for that coveted check from FEMA.

And what about people who don’t believe in God? If there was an “act of God” exclusion, would atheists be exempt? Perhaps we could replace “act of God” with “Mother Nature,” “El Nino” or maybe just “Karma.” Of course this would discriminate against people do don’t believe in these things either.

The good news is that a court case in Britain defined “act of God” about 150 years ago in a way that works even for mentally challenged liberals.

“Circumstances which no human foresight can provide against and of which humanprudence is not bound to recognize the possibility, and which when they do occur, therefore, are calamities that do not involve the obligation of paying for the consequences that may result from them.”

For example, voting for liberals.

TDM