August 8, 2010 | 12:00 pm

‘The Last Excorcism’ at Grace Community Church

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Follow me on

I saw “The Exorcist” at the Fox Village during my first weekend in college. (I’m getting old, but this was the re-release.) A good movie, though I wonder what I’d think of it after five years of having a reporter’s eye for religion.

Because we live in an era when every movie, recent or old, gets a sequel or a spin-off or a rip-off, “The Last Exorcism” is about to hit theaters. Here’s the Wiki synopsis:

The film is told from the perspective of a disillusioned Protestant minister, who after years of performing exorcisms decides to participate in a documentary chronicling his last exorcism while exposing the fraud of his ministry. After receiving a letter from a farmer asking for help in driving out the devil, he meets the farmer’s afflicted daughter. The tagline and premise of the movie is “If you believe in God, then you believe in the Devil.” The film itself is presented as “found footage”.

I’m pretty tired of the “found footage” gimmick. It was great for “Blair Witch Project” and even “Cloverfield.” But enough already.

As for the plot, I’m not sure what to make of it. It has potential, though I’m pretty skeptical of a story like this being told in a meaningful way, even if John Anderson at Variety thinks “‘The Last Exorcism’ makes first-rate use of religious doubt and religious extremism to concoct a novel horror-thriller clever enough to seduce unbelievers while satisfying the bloodlust of its congregation/fanbase.”

Whose bloodlust?

Anyway, advertising for “The Last Exorcism” has started to pop up, and my law school classmate Joy Odom spotted the poorly placed bus bench spot shown here.

August 8, 2010 | 1:52 am

Tim Tebow’s new friar ‘do

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Everyone likes Tim Tebow—why wouldn’t they like him in Super Timmy in Denver? (Some people have their reasons.) Make that Friar Tim. The joys of being a rookie.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

August 7, 2010 | 11:32 am

Taliban kills 10 members of foreign aid team

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Tragic news out of Afghanistan:

Ten members of a foreign medical team — including six Americans and three women, all doctors and technicians — were shot to death on Thursday in a remote corner of the Hindu Kush in northern Afghanistan, officials confirmed Saturday.

Their aid group, the International Assistance Mission, said they were eye doctors, nurses and technicians, hiking into one of the toughest areas of the country to provide services. But the Taliban, who claimed responsibility, accused them of being spies and Christian missionaries.

This is exactly why short-term mission trips don’t go to Afghanistan or Iran or North Korea. But the reality here is that even humanitarian aid that comes from a religious place, even when proselytizing is not involved, is not without serious dangers.

2 Comments — Leave your comment

August 6, 2010 | 11:13 am

The Summer for Justice ends

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Today marks the end of Summer for Justice 2010. After 11 weeks at Bet Tzedek, I’ll be returning to the classroom—copyright, entertainment law and digital wars, here I come—and starting an internship at NBC Universal, where I will be researching and writing memos outlining the company’s rights to exploit content from across it’s entertainment library.

I’m looking forward to the fall, but today brings an end to a great summer—and not just because Big Ben got married and I was again playing basketball three or four days a week. It was great because I got to give back to a community that has unknowingly given so much to me.

It really has been a rewarding journey through the Jewish community these past three years, and I’m sure it’s far from over. (Next up: Summer 2011 at a “Jewish” law firm? I have a few in mind.)

Assisting Holocaust survivors in their claim for ghetto pensions this summer wasn’t as challenging as feeling comfortable in Kevin MacDonald’s office nor as fanboy-fun as profiling Jordan Farmar. I spent much of my time speaking with survivors and worked primarily on cases that either required further information or that were being appealed. I also spent a few weeks on work related to the underlying network of pro bono attorneys participating in the Holocaust Survivors Justice Network, which has assisted thousands of survivors in applying for ghetto pensions.

Many of the survivors I spoke with (not the attorneys) suffer from dementia or the consequences of stroke or lingering trauma that impairs their memory, so pulling important details about their experience in the Holocaust was no small feat. It was also, at times, emotionally exhausting.

Without getting into specifics, let’s just say that most of the survivors I spoke with were among the only members of their family to make it out alive. Now well into their 80s, some their 90s, they may have outlived their spouse and are living in desperate poverty. More on that here.

There were of course survivors who didn’t appear to need our help—there was that survivor who claimed to be worth millions as she stormed out, apparently unaccustomed to the windowless offices involved with free legal services. But, in general, we served an essential bridge—both in terms of legal knowledge and the ability to decipher documents and correspondence in a foreign language—between indigent survivors and a German government trying to make right.

I’m glad I was able to do this when I did. While I certainly expect to be involved with public interest causes when I’m a practicing lawyer, the need for legal services directed at Holocaust survivors, part of Bet Tzedek’s core mission since its founding in 1974, is fading fast.

P.S. Mitch Kamin assured me I was not to be blamed.

2 Comments — Leave your comment

August 5, 2010 | 11:28 pm

An Orthodox rabbi welcomes Clinton-Mezvinsky marriage

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Rabbi Asher Lopatin, who as head of Anshe Sholom B’nai Israel, a Modern Orthodox synagogue in Chicago that Rahm Emanuel attended, has a fascinating blog post at Morthodoxy. Turns out some Orthodox Jews were willing to welcome the interfaith marriage of Marc Mezvinksy and Chelsea Clinton.

Lopatin writes:

how can you look at the pictures of Marc with his tallis - a wool tallis! - and his kipa with American royalty, Chelsea Clinton, and not say, quietly, hmm… There is something important here for Americans to see.  Here was not a Jew who was hiding his identity, who was minimizing his Jewishness.  No, what the world saw is that a fully attired - proud? - Jew could get right to the top of American society.  Not that reaching high society is our goal.  But the fact that there were Sheva Brachot, a chupa, a k’tuba and that tallis and kipa, for the world to see, doesn’t that put the wedding in the category of Kiddush Hashem as well?  Perhaps not, but I would bet that a lot of our enemies are scratching their heads wondering how the Clintons could marry their daughter to a Jew.  Maybe some are saying, “Aha, see this intermarriage! We now know the Jews are doomed.”  But I would bet most are scratching their heads wondering if the Jews have gotten the upper hand.

We are living in a world where what was once taboo, intermarriage, has the possibility to expose millions - millions of Jews - to a tallit they may never have known about.  And it was a Reconstructionist rabbi Ponet who did the “dirty” work.  For now, Orthodox rabbis, even Conservative, don’t want anything to do with an intermarriage.  But this Mezvinsky guy was willing to wear a tallis and a kippa in all the pictures - should we shun him forever?  No, certainly after the wedding, we welcome him - and Chelsea as well.  But maybe we need to think of a way of extracting the Kiddush Hashem from the Chilul Hashem.  I don’t know how - but I know that a lot of smart people read this blog.

Perhaps Chilul Hashem and Kiddush Hashem are closer than we thought.

Thoughts?

1 Comments — Leave your comment

August 4, 2010 | 3:14 pm

Federal judge deems Prop. 8 unconstitutional

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

The big news out of San Francisco this afternoon was as expected. Prop. 8 is no more. At least that will be the case if its supporters lose on appeal.

From the Los Angeles Times:

U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker said Proposition 8, passed by voters in November 2008, violated the federal constitutional rights of gays and lesbians to marry the partners of their choice.. His ruling is expected to be appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and then up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Plaintiffs challenge Proposition 8 under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment,” the judge wrote. “Each challenge is independently meritorious, as Proposition 8 both unconstitutionally burdens the exercise of the fundamental right to marry and creates an irrational classification on the basis of sexual orientation.”

Vaughn added: “Plaintiffs seek to have the state recognize their committed relationships, and plaintiffs’ relationships are consistent with the core of the history, tradition and practice of marriage in the United States.”

Ultimately, the judge concluded that Proposition 8 “fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”

And so another appointment of George H.W. Bush continues to haunt conservatives. Here is a PDF of Walker’s opinion.

11 Comments — Leave your comment

August 4, 2010 | 10:41 am

A Christian scholar in Saudi Arabia

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Saudi Arabia still won’t permit churches and prevents Christian proselytizing via capital punishment, but Leonard Swidler’s presence there is a start. He is the first Christian scholar invited to speak with the faculty at Al Imam Muhammed bin Saud Islamic University in Riyadh.

From the Christian Science Monitor:

Dr. Swidler’s visit in late June underscores a shift toward greater openness in some official Saudi religious institutions, which previously had been leery of contact with outsiders of different faiths.

“Maybe it’s not exciting for some people, but it’s a very big change in Saudi Arabia,” says Fahad al-Alhomoudi, a faculty member at Al Imam who helped arrange Swidler’s visit.

Swidler called his meetings at Al Imam campus “kind of a breakthrough” during an interview here. “The opportunity to meet with 40 Saudi professors in the area of interreligious dialogue for me was quite extraordinary,” he says. Ten of the 40 were women, who participated via videoconferencing.

“I would say that we are experiencing a tipping point right now in relations in the field of religion between the West ... and Islam,” added Swidler, a world-recognized expert in interreligious dialogue. “I mean, you can’t get more ‘heartland’ than Saudi Arabia, as far as Islam is concerned.”

I hope the community didn’t give Swidler the Reuven-Firestone-in-Egypt treatment.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

August 4, 2010 | 12:29 am

What to expect in the Prop. 8 ruling

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

The time has come. Twenty months after California voters approved Proposition 8, amending the state constitution to prohibit gay marriage, a federal judge is expected to rule tomorrow morning on whether the amendment to the state constitution violates the rights and protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Both sides appear to believe that Prop. 8 will be struck down.

From CNN.com:

Wednesday’s ruling, expected in the early afternoon, will decide whether that ban violates the U.S. Constitution by creating separate classes of people with different laws for each.

Though stakes in the case are high, neither opponents nor supporters of same-sex marriage say Walker’s ruling will likely be the last. Both sides say the decision will be appealed and eventually wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

“We have little doubt that this trial judge is going to knock down Prop. 8. I hope I’m proven wrong tomorrow,” said Maggie Gallagher, chairman of the National Organization for Marriage. “This has been a judge that looks pretty eager to make a historic decision.”

I voted against Prop. 8, which provoked some thoughtful discussions with fellow Christian brothers and sisters. Why? Because:

Yes or no I could find a Christian minister to support my vote. But on an issue like same-sex marriage, I don’t think it matters whether I believe God is bothered by homosexuality. Proposition 8 has to do with fundamental rights—limiting them, that is. Marriage, despite what we always hear, is not a religious convention. It is a cultural convention. And the words “sanctity of marriage,” to my mind, have more to do with tax breaks and hospital visitation than ordaining a relationship before God.

As an evangelical Christian—as someone who, uncomfortable as it is to sometimes say this, reads in the Bible that homosexuality is a “perversion”—I don’t believe it is the job of government to legislate based on religion. We’ve seen how that works out.

Regardless of the Judge Walker’s ruling, the legal battle, which began immediately after the measure was approved by voters, has a long life left to live.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

August 3, 2010 | 10:01 am

Ground Zero Mosque moving forward

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Also from The New York Times this morning, the Ground Zero Mosque efforts cleared a major hurdle when the city historical commission refused to give a building a few blocks from the World Trade Center landmark status. That means plans to build an Islamic center on the site can move forward:

The city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission voted 9 to 0 against granting historic protection to the building at 45-47 Park Place in Lower Manhattan, where the $100 million center would be built.

That decision clears the way for the construction of Park51, a tower of as many as 15 stories that will house a mosque, a 500-seat auditorium, and a pool. Its leaders say it will be modeled on the Y.M.C.A. and Jewish Community Center in Manhattan.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg was scheduled to deliver a speech in support of the mosque Tuesday afternoon on Governors Island.

The proposed mosque has been, not surprisingly, a major political issue, filled with vitriol and dismay.

Among other groups, the Anti-Defamation League opposed the construction of an Islamic center there. The ADL’s statement last week concluded:

Proponents of the Islamic Center may have every right to build at this site, and may even have chosen the site to send a positive message about Islam. The bigotry some have expressed in attacking them is unfair, and wrong. But ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right. In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain—unnecessarily—and that is not right.

11 Comments — Leave your comment

August 3, 2010 | 9:54 am

Israeli and Lebanese troops exchange deadly fire

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Uh oh. Bad news from the Levant, via the The New York Times:

Israeli and Lebanese army troops exchanged lethal fire on their countries’ border on Tuesday, in what was the fiercest clash in the area since Israel’s monthlong war against the Lebanese Hezbollah militia in the summer of 2006.

Israel said a battalion commander was killed. Lebanon said at least two of its soldiers and a journalist were killed in shelling, according to news reports.

Leaders on each side blamed the other for the flare-up and traded accusations of violating the United Nations Security Council resolution that underpins the four-year cease-fire.

Read on here.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

August 2, 2010 | 11:26 pm

American Muslims take on extremism

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

MPAC is pretty excited about this story in The New York Times. It’s about an effort by American Muslims to rebut extremism. It’s in video form, and it includes nine influential voices from different Muslim perspectives:

The video, which is about five and a half minutes long, opens with ominous music, like that used in some of the jihadists’ propaganda videos, and the words “Believers Beware: Injustice Cannot Defeat Injustice.”

“Many people are saying that there are so many issues of injustice taking place around the world,” Imam Mohamed Magid, leader of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society, a mosque in Virginia, says in the video. “That is true, we acknowledge the injustice taking place around the world. But we believe there is a way to address the injustice — not by taking innocent people’s lives.”

Edina Lekovic, director of policy and programming for the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the advocacy group that produced the video, said they intentionally chose scholars who represent a diversity of theological streams.

“We didn’t want to just target the liberals or the conservatives or ultraconservatives,” Ms. Lekovic said. “The point was to show that no matter where you stand on the religious spectrum, we all have a shared belief and shared outrage by the events that are taking place.”

She said the only criticism the council had received was that there were no female scholars in the video — a fact she attributed to scheduling problems. She said the council expected to make another video that would include women. The group is also preparing another version, without the music, for Muslims who consider music haram, or forbidden.

Read the rest here, watch “Injustice Cannot Defeat Injustice” above and comment below.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

August 2, 2010 | 3:29 pm

Tenn. politician calls Islam a ‘cult’

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

I sometimes miss news happening in the middle of our nation. Tennessee pops up from time to time. Steve McNair’s deadly affair. Anti-Semitism in a Memphis congressional race. Religion NIMBYs around Nashville.

This story from Politics Daily is along the line of the NIMBYs who didn’t want a mosque in their backyard. It concerns comments made by Tenn. Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey:

During a campaign stop in Chattanooga earlier this month, Ramsey, a Republican candidate for governor, said, “You could even argue whether that being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality, way of life, cult or whatever you want to call it.”

“Now certainly, we do protect our religions, but at the same time this is something we are going to have to face,” Ramsey said.

Ramsey’s comments, which were recorded on video, were made as he answered a question about a proposed mosque and Islamic community center in the town of Murfreesboro, The Associated Press reported.

“Now, you know, I’m all about freedom of religion. I value the First Amendment as much as I value the Second Amendment as much as I value the Tenth Amendment and on and on and on,” Ramsey said. “But you cross the line when they try to start bringing Sharia Law here to the state of Tennessee, to the United States. We live under our Constitution and they live under our Constitution.”

Real nice, Ron. Read the rest here.

1 Comments — Leave your comment