Jackie Mason is suing the Jay Fer Jays over a pamphlet.
Extract from the AP article:
Saying he's "as Jewish as a matzo ball or kosher salami," Jackie Mason filed a lawsuit against Jews for Jesus for using his name and likeness in a pamphlet.
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.
"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."
Of course this isn't the first time Jackie Mason has been involved in something faintly (hugely) putrid - he made some comments about Islam that can only be considered incendiary (contradicting our beloved leader, who called Islam a 'religion of peace'), and he's also made some remarks about blacks that were quite the opposite of complimentary.
There have been times when he has been wrong, yes.
But what has justifiably got his knickers in a twist is that his face is in a Jay Fer Jay pamphlet, next to the words "Jackie Mason ... A Jew for Jesus!?"
The suggestion that anyone is a Jew for Jayzits is vicious and slanderous...... ghastly barely describes it. Kinda like a mogen Dovid on one side of an equals sign, and Nazi emblem on the other side. It's like gossip that someone is related to Henry VIII.
No wonder he's angry. He should be. He should sue the pants offa those bozos. He should sue for damages and trauma. Take 'em to the cleaners.
Oh, you ask "what about peace and love, acceptance and tolerance, and all the rest of that stuff?"
Those are all good things, yes, and even here they apply.
As legal concepts.
I tolerate Jews for Jayzits, I do not advocate banning them.
I would refuse to sit at the same table with them, or any one who fell for their depraved and ridiculous cult (though I would pay good money for the entertainment of seeing them at the same table as ArtScroll), and I consider anyone who walks into their trap as being a soul lost forever.... poor little priceless Yiddishe neshamas be damned, if they got suckered into that demented cult they were hopeless little moronic nutzoids to begin with (though evenso, deprogramming is probably justified).
But I tolerate JayferJay. I am legally required to do so. Which is a good thing. The fact that so insane a bunch of crackpots can spew their nonsense protects the rest of us. I tolerate them.
That stops at slander.
-----------------------------------------------
ADDENDUM:
Why do I consider Jews fer Jayzits crazier than any other creed, cult, or ideology?
Because if you believe in Jayzits, yer a Christian.
If you do not believe in Jayzits, you ain't.
The term 'Jews for Jezus' is a falsehood.
There ain't no such critter as a Jew who believes in Jayzits. Anybody who keeps all mitzvos except that one about "no other gods" is not a Jew, but someone with inexplicable personal habits.
Once you've accepted Jayzits as your close, personal, and totally imaginary friend, there is utterly no further reason for obeying the taryag mitzvos.
[At that point there are several very good reasons for seeking psychiatric help.... surely as an adult you know that imaginary friends are problematic? And that the big white bunny rabbit with the bowtie isn't really following you around? You do know you're stark raving bonkers, don't you? Haven't your few remaining friends already told you so?]
What I also find repulsive about the JayferJay crowd is that they are directed by and funded by missionary outreach organizations with scarcely anyone of any certifiable Jewish background. It's false advertising. It's like calling Hezbollah a social welfare organization. It hides the evil agenda within under a smiling veneer of chicken soup.
As a final note, suggesting that Rabbi Hyman Krustofski, father of Krusty the Clown, is not a mensh but a madman is hideously offensive.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
OBSERVE THE GLOOMTH!
It's probably a Jerusalem artichoke. Topanimbur. Not ginger. But it looks like ginger. Very young ginger. It flummoxed me, and I feel th...
12 comments:
It hides the evil agenda within under a smiling veneer of chicken soup.
great line
would refuse to sit at the same table with them, or any one who fell for their depraved and ridiculous cult (though I would pay good money for the entertainment of seeing them at the same table as ArtScroll), and I consider anyone who walks into their trap as being a soul lost forever.... poor little priceless Yiddishe neshamas be damned, if they got suckered into that demented cult they were hopeless little moronic nutzoids to begin with (though evenso, deprogramming is probably justified).
Should I introduce you to the guy who davens at our shul and who fell into the trap, yet was able to extract himself and is now very active in Jews for Judaism? (And he's one of the more observant members of our Conservative shul.) I'm sure he's love to hear you call him a "moronic nutzoid."
Get a life. J4J is a mil nuisance, not the major threat to Jewish survival. More Jews convert to Christianity openly through the mainstream denominations than through J4J, even the denomination that have explicitly backed off from targeting Jews. Feh. J4J is a sideshow act, just like Jackie Mason. They deserve each other.
Because if you believe in Jayzits, yer a Christian.
If you do not believe in Jayzits, you ain't.
The term 'Jews for Jezus' is a falsehood.
The first Christians were all Jews.
(Yeah, yeah, I know J4J is something else completely, and they are running a dishonest scam, but this is inrepsonse to your unjustified universalizing.)
Besides what does "Believe in Jesus" mean?
That Jesus existed?
I don't think the historical evidence is very strong, but it's possible.
That Jesus was the messiah?
OK, that's not mainstream, but what makes it more heretical than the Reconsturctionists, the Reform, or the Lubavatchers?
That Jesus was crucified and resurrected?
OK, that's getting more meshuganneh, but show me how that violates any doctrine of Rabbinic Judaism.
That God had Jesus crucified as a way of atonement for our sins, and then resurrected as a way to show us that Jesus was nothing more than a sefirah of God?
OK -- that's Christian and definitely not Jewish.
But if some Jews want to beotherwise Jewish and believe that Jesus of Nazareth was mashiach, whose career was aborted becuase of sinas chinam in the House if Israel, well, it's meshuganna, but not much worse than Chabad.
While I agree with much of what you say, I think it's unnecessary to use offbeat spellings of "Jesus." It's an unnecessary insult to Christians, many (most?) of whom have no desire to convert Jews (or members of any other religion).
I don't deal well with Jews for Jesus. Lowest point probably came for me when they started putting out flyers in my neighborhood in Russian, inviting people to view their Chagall repros--the "White Crucifixion" being a key image.
I love that painting. I would get a repro myself, except I'm not sure where I would hang it. I was furious.
I was also cracking up, after reporting on the situation to a national Jewish org I happened to be on the mailing list for at the time, and having it sternly explained to me by one that Chagall was a famous Jewish painter, and did not paint crucifixions.
Darkness and ignorance, darkness and ignorance...
OK, that's not mainstream, but what makes it more heretical than the... Lubavatchers?
That's not a defense of J4J, it's an indictment of Chabad.
Anonymous the first,
Should I introduce you to the guy who davens at our shul and who fell into the trap, yet was able to extract himself and is now very active in Jews for Judaism? (And he's one of the more observant members of our Conservative shul.) I'm sure he's love to hear you call him a "moronic nutzoid."
Feel free to introduce me to him. Someone who has cured himself of moronic nutzoidism is not only commendable, but may very well have good advice for others. Quite possibly he is a shining example.
More Jews convert to Christianity openly through the mainstream denominations
And that too is a problem.
It often happens that those who are largely ignorant of their own traditions become entranced by other traditions, to the point that they dive right on in. Which explains many of the odd cults. I nevertheless find it difficult to understand how one could get into the NT without first thoroughly exploring Tanach - and, having thoroughly explored Tanach and all that relates to it, why would anyone then sweep all that away for the NT? Baffling, meod.
Anonymous the second,
...what does "Believe in Jesus" mean?
Standarly, the belief that Jesus is the Messiah, AND the son of God, AND god himself in human form.
Related thereto is the belief in the immaculate conception of Mary - the idea that from the moment of her conception she was free of original sin.
Further thereto the sacrifice of "God's only son" for our sins.
The resurrection of god the son of god, who then after a short period of time returns to god.
The problems in that entire slew of conceptions (wordplay intended) are so obvious, and have been hashed over so many times, that it would be pointless to do so here. I will admit that much better minds than myself have done so in exemplary fashion - their words are all over the internet.
It IS however much worse than Chabad. Chabadnikim are still in a state of denial that the Rebbe is nifter, and not the mosshiach. They are slowly and grumblingly coming around to a more reality-based conceptualization of the Rebbe. There is too much within even the Judaic material that they concentrate on that contradicts the idea of a hidden imam - they cannot maintain the fantasy forever, unless, like Christianity, they throw Judaism out the window. And honestly, do you see them doing that?
They may be nuts, but it is only temporary insanity.
Christians, on the other hand, seldom cure.
Anonymous the third,
I think it's unnecessary to use offbeat spellings of "Jesus." It's an unnecessary insult to Christians...
You are right, but I will continue to use offbeat spellings of that name. I find the name mildly nauseating, except when pronounced in Spanish or Arabic - hayzoos and issah. Can't help it. Went to grammar school and high-school with believers, and I have been told so often that I should except the man as my saviour that his name, Pavlovian-reaction like, gives me tension.
...many (most?) of whom have no desire to convert Jews (or members of any other religion).
Respectfully, I have to disagree. Missionary activity and the conversion-drang are fundaments of Christianity, and while many Christians are themselves not personally involved in the process, as actual members of denominations they play a role in the propegation of that faith, the missionary activities of the denomination, and the charitable and good works that that denomination is involved in (which are justified because of the missionary possiblities). Anybody who give money to a denomination, whether it is a donation to a denominational charity, or a few dollars to the collection plate, is supporting missionary activity.
There are indeed charities which have de-stressed the prosyletizing - Catholic Charities comes immediately to mind, as does the Salvation Army - but, if you examine them, you will note that they do so within the framework of good works creating a ripe environment for conversion or returning to the fold.
If it can be said that most Christians do not have a deisre to convert members of other religions, it is because there are already structures and functions within their organizations whose task that precisely is. They do not have to think about it, it is alread thought of.
BiBJ,
They thought perhaps that Chagall only did Hassidic rebbes?
And brides floating above dreaming shtetlach...
http://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