On Behalf of Adam, Eve, and Humanity at Large.
The Defense hereby begins by submitting, on the part of Adam, Eve, and Humanity at Large, a motion to suppress the apple as evidence in the case against the aforementioned parties, on the grounds that God’s request for Adam and Eve to refrain from eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil constituted extortion, given His placement of a serpent in the Garden of Eden, a serpent that He, omniscient and omnipotent by His own avowal, must have known would proceed to tempt Eve, leading, inevitably, to the consumption of the forbidden fruit in question.
Without the apple, there is insufficient evidentiary support to prove that Adam and Eve disobeyed the order not to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Thus, their awareness of their own nakedness and their subsequent decision to craft clothing for themselves cannot, within reason, be called into scrutiny as the result of shame for suspected disobedience. It is an established fact that there was dust in and/or around the Garden of Eden; otherwise, God could not have formed Adam by breathing life into the dust of the earth, nor could He have cursed the serpent to crawl in and eat said dust upon His realization of the serpent’s alleged misdeed in the events that took place there. Thus, we can presume that Adam and Adam’s helpmate, Eve, formed by God from Adam’s own rib, were prompted to fashion clothes for themselves for protection against this dust, and not, in fact, as a result of the indignity they supposedly harbored for their disobedience of Him.
Due to the overt lack of evidence, the issue of Adam and Eve’s guilt in the matter at the time of the beginning of the history of man is moot. Thus God’s decision to expel Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden was completely without merit. Without due cause, Adam and Eve were deprived by Him of access to the place of both their creation and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. It is impossible to calculate exactly how much harm was done unto Adam and Eve as a result of this injustice, although recent scientific studies allow us to speculate that the damage was as irreparable as the punishment was undeserved. We all know how much injury is done unto one who hath no home. So, in addition to the denial of basic needs, for God to curse Adam, and all man thereafter, into labor, as well as to declare Eve, and every woman thereafter, into submission to man, with the added sentence of pain in childbirth, was cruel and unusual.
The penalties imposed on Adam and Eve, along with the burden of Original Sin placed on Humanity at Large, were not only unwarranted for their basis in questionable investigative and judicial practices but gravely exaggerated punishments, even supposing, hypothetically, that Adam and Eve had committed any such crimes as those alleged. Luckily, despite the grievances listed, the Defense is not demanding. But, in conjunction with the move for retroactive dismissal of the charges against it, it follows that the Defense should be granted some form of retribution for enduring undue punishment as the falsely accused for centuries.
Humanity at Large asks not for monetary compensation. They do, however, ask for the right to premarital relations without guilt, or the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, especially herpes. Humanity also posits that the sacrament of marriage be redefined as a union between any two beings wanting to make such a commitment to one another, including alpacas.
Also, the Defense asks for God to retract, or at least revise, or perhaps substantiate, some of His claims found to be troublesome, including, but not limited to, that of His creation of the earth in seven days, that of the existence of the heavens and the afterlife, and that of His body’s manifestation as round pieces of bread that taste like Styrofoam. In return, the Defense generously offers to consider an alternate image to the often-employed bearded, white-robe-draped likeness of Him, should He care to provide one.
Additionally, in due humility, the Defense moves to suggest He use His all-powerfulness toward certain valuable ends, as outlined heretofore. First, He might consider ridding man of his back hair. Second, He might alleviate woman of her tendency to cry at weddings. Third, autism seems unnecessary; He might consider abolishing it. Same for the romantic-comedy film genre, save for movies featuring Owen Wilson. Finally, a four-day workweek would be nice.
With this, the Defense, on behalf of Adam, Eve, and Humanity at Large, rests its case.
SUGGESTED READSMidlife-Crisis Bible Stories
by Susan Schorn (3/14/2008)
Eve the Foodie
by Ferris Jabr (9/4/2014)
RECENTLYA Generic College Paper
by Jon Wu (9/19/2014)
Norse History for Bostonians: The Prose Edda for Bostonians, Gylfaginning, Part X
by Rowdy Geirsson (9/19/2014)
List: Rejected Spaghetti Western Movie Titles
by Nancy Stohlman (9/19/2014)
POPULARIt’s Decorative Gourd Season, Motherfuckers
by Colin Nissan (10/20/2009)
Classic Movies Changed to Not Be Sexist
by Blythe Roberson (8/14/2014)
Best Joke Ever: Mitch Hedberg: Hippie Martian Zen Genius
by Mark Peters (8/28/2014)