The $2 million lawsuit seeks the immediate destruction of the pamphlet, which members of the missionary group have been handing out at various points around New York City.Note carefully the punctuation. A question mark on its own leaves room for doubt. "Jackie Mason is a Jew for Jesus?" The answer could be "no." But "Jew for Jesus!?" says, "Are you joking me!?" and implies that yes, Mr. Mason has indeed converted.
"While I have the utmost respect for people who practice the Christian faith, the fact is, as everyone knows, I am as Jewish as a matzo ball or kosher salami," the 75-year-old comedian said in documents filed in state Supreme Court in Manhattan.
Founded in the 1970s, Jews for Jesus practices Judaism but regards Jesus as the Messiah.
The pamphlets feature an image of Mason next to the words "Jackie Mason ... A Jew for Jesus!?" with information inside that outlines the similarities between Jews and Christians.
Which he hasn't.
The JfJ spokeswoman is unapologetic. "Shame on him for getting so upset about this," says Susan Perlman. Shouldn't shame be upon those who stretch the truth to the ripping point?
2 comments:
Jews for Jesus: The Benadict Arnold of Religion
ghttp://www.jewsforjesus.org/blog/20061108jackiemasondenied
Jackie Mason Charges Against Jews For Jesus Denied By U.S. District Court
A decision by U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman was reached today in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York denying a preliminary injunction to Mr. Jackie Mason who sought to stop the distribution of one of the Jews for Jesus gospel pamphlets, entitled, "Jackie Mason, A Jew for Jesus?!"
In the eleven-page finding the Judge ruled that the pamphlet was protected speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Religious pamphlets with pop culture themes like the Mason one have been freely distributed by the organization for over 34 years and while this is a small win for Jews for Jesus, it is a big victory for gospel protected speech.
Judge Berman also addressed the two other contentions in the Mason injunction and could not find merit in them, ruling that a reader of the pamphlet could reasonably see that Jews for Jesus was not asserting that Jackie Mason was a Jew for Jesus and that the Jews for Jesus did not look to gain any commercial benefit from the pamphlet.
David Brickner, executive director of Jews for Jesus, said ‚"We never intended to hurt Jackie Mason's feelings. To many of us Jews for Jesus, Jackie Mason is an icon who reminds us of our Yiddish-speaking grandfathers. We appreciate his good-natured humor. We thought that he would appreciate ours and were surprised by this lawsuit. Nevertheless we felt we had to defend ourselves and are gratified by the court's decision upholding our 1st amendment rights. It is our hope that this can now be ended amicably." A further court date is scheduled for November 16th.
Post a Comment