It  bothers me when I see attorneys attempt to hide intolerance under the cloak legal authority. It’s nothing new.  We have a long history of the courts being used to achieve discriminatory objectives. The latest attempt is a legally misplaced opinion piece by columnist/attorney Peter Ferrara who claims that the government can constitutionally regulate the location of the Ground Zero Mosque using time, place and manner restrictions. He writes:

If the authorities believe a particular location would be offensive to some segment of the public, the time, place and manner doctrine gives them the power to prevent construction of a church, or a mosque, at the offensive location.

It is true that Court has held that the 1st Amendment’s Free-Exercise Clause, the right of citizens for free exercise of their religion, is not absolute. A citizen’s free-exercise right must be weighed against the public interest and a state can regulate to ensure that it is practiced in a reasonable time, place, and manner.

What Ferrara does not tell you is that in the case of religion, these types of restrictions are looked upon skeptically and rarely upheld by the courts.

What Ferrara is really endorsing and calling it something else is content based, viewpoint discrimination.  That viewpoint is the practice of Islam.  For those unfamiliar, for a law to be content based, it discriminates based on the content of the message AS OPPOSED to the, time, place and manner in which the message is made, or the reactions it incites in people. These types of laws are presumptively unconstitutional.  What Ferrara is really saying is that the Ground Zero Mosque should not be built because he finds Islam offensive. Regardless of the validity of his viewpoint on that subject or anyone else’s view, this is content based.  It fits into no legal exception for regulation and is unconstitutional. 

I can not say that I like or respect Mel Gibson any less after his latest racist and violent rantings.  To say that would be to acknowledge any level of affinity or respect in the first place.  He is an anti-Semitic, racist, alleged wife beating pig.  For those who blame it on the alcohol, shame on you.  Alcohol does not make you an anti-Semitic, racist, alleged wife beating pig.  It simply lowers the expressive barriers to what is already there.  For those who point out his great talent, .  I must have missed the “I make great movies” defense to domestic violence  in law school.  Now that my rant is out of the way, I am more flabbergasted by the commentary I have seen on Twitter and Facebook.  When I put up the story on my Facebook page, here is an example of what followed:

“...I don’t want him convicted of felony assault Brian. Because if she was REALLY hit then there would have been a police report.  If she was REALLY hit then she would have had to have her lip sewn up.  It’s “he said she said” and I don’t think it’s good enough for a conviction.No evidence = no conviction as far as I’m concerned. People lie and have agendas so word can only go so far. … ‘

Here is another:

“those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones’. everyone lives in one. Mel, has at least brought some great masterpieces onto the screens. Rubberneckers only see the reck, not knowing the full context of an incident…..

Are these the Neanderthal views the general public has with regards to domestic violence?   If it doesn’t draw blood or leave a mark it didn’t happen?  If he is talented we will excuse it?  According to one study, 27% of the victims of domestic violence in a year period did not report the incident to the police.  With attitudes like this it is no wonder more battered women do not come forward.

While Mel’s outbursts speak for themselves as to his ethnic and racial views, he is certainly entitled to his day in court any criminal allegations.  Is it possible that his ex is lying?  Sure it is.  Regardless of what “truth” comes out,  I read crap like above and despair the human condition just a little bit more..

As I have watch the very sad downward spiral of once promising actress Lindsay Lohan a it brings to mind a blog I wrote almost 4 years ago while she was working on a movie called “Georgia Rule. Sadly prophetic.

The Legalities of Lindsay Lohan written July 29. 2006

I have never seen a Lindsay Lohan movie. I do not read gossip columns, or frequent TMZ. I could not care less about her off screen antics. I however could not resist seeing what kind of threatening letter a top studio executive sends a 20 year old out of control, party-wild, self impressed actress when they are not happy with her work habits.

In this case it involves a movie in production called “Georgia Rule” in which she is the star. The studio is apparently concerned with Lindsay’s failure to show up for production calls and showing up late when she did show. They feel there is some relationship to her perceived excessive partying. In the letter James G. Robinson, CEO of Morgan Creek Productions, calls Lohan’s recent absences from the set “irresponsible and unprofessional.”

Being an attorney, I took interest in the letter. I scanned quickly through all the emotional rhetoric and right down to the legal threats. They of course threaten to take all action necessary to ensure the protection of the integrity of the film. Having some limited exposure to the film industry, the first thing that came to my mind and was what is generally considered one of the more costly aspects of a major motion pictures aside from salaries. This is the completion completion insurance or a “completion bond.”

Now you may ask, what the hell does insurance have to do with Lindsay Lohan and the making of her film? It may not have a lot to do with this film, but I can guarantee you it will affect her future films and if she doesn’t calm down. She may find herself a “B” movie queen because she will be uninsureable or it will be cost prohibitive to insure her.

When a studio is casting for a major production it is a crap shot on whether it makes money. Like most other business ventures it is about minimizing risk. If an actor or actress can not be insured or be insured for a reasonable amount in comparison to the projected revenues of the film that person is probably not going to get many starring or mainstream roles. This is because the producers of the film may not be able to get a completion bond.

A completion bond is a motion picture completion guaranty is a written contract that guarantees a motion picture will be finished and delivered on schedule and within budget. The majority of films produced and fully financed by the major Hollywood studios are self-guaranteed. However, most independently financed films, including many that are released and distributed by the major studios, require a completion guaranty.

A producer usually secures a completion guaranty for the benefit of the bank or other financiers who agree to make the necessary production funding strike price available to the producer. In general, a completion guaranty assures banks and financiers that:
1. The producers will complete and deliver the film in keeping with the screenplay, budget and production schedule that the bank or financiers approved; or
2. The completion guarantor will complete and deliver the film in keeping with such pre-approved screenplay and production schedule, and advance such sums in excess of the pre-approved budget necessary to do so; or
3. In the event production of the film is abandoned, the completion guarantor will fully repay all sums invested in the film by the bank or financiers.

If Lindsay, who is from what I hear a very talented actress when she is sober, does not get her act together soon, she will find herself relegated to low budget Indies such as “Herbie Retooled and Reloaded Again And Again And Again And Again”

Have been checking out the efforts of the JIDF to squash the “Kill A Jew” day events that have been popping up on Facebook.

There was one a few days ago that the organization was successful in getting taken down.  Another one popped up two days later to take its place. It looks like it’s the same people trying to get a rise but the general bottom line is the same.  In addition to all the great content and information on Facebook, there is a lot of antisemitism and hate speech against  ethnic, religious and gender orientation minorities.  Facebook does what it can to keep it in check when made aware of the problem within the inherent flaws of  user-based self-reporting systems.  There however, is simply so much more of the hatred than there are employees at Facebook to monitor it.

I try to take most of this crap in stride as there are idiots everywhere.  The most troubling aspect of “the day” is not that some anti-Semitic idiot would put it up but that so many are willing to play along and incite the hatred in the page commentary.  Strong evidence that it is much more than a silly page put up by a moron. It is a stark reminder that Facebook is not just a place for friends to connect and share information.  It is a venue for those of like mind in hatred of not only Jews but any minority group to take that message, find those who agree and take hatred viral.

I wonder if they will talk about that in the new Facebook movie, The Social Network. I doubt it.  People are more interested In Mark Zuckerberg’s quirks and dalliances than they are about real issues affecting all of us in that network.  That’s to be expected.  People want to be entertained.  I hope it’s more entertaining than Kill A Jew Day.