Friday, January 27, 2006
Prove it!
An Italian court is to decide whether a priest should be called to face questioning over whether or not Jesus Christ actually existed.
There's nothing that a lawyer likes better than those famous "landmark cases".
You know the ones. Roe vs. Wade in the US of A on the right to have an abortion, Cassis de Dijon concerning free movement of goods in the EC and those famous Maltese human rights cases (which every budding law student got goose pimples quoting) such as Joseph Azzopardi vs Kummissarju tal-Pulizija et. on inhuman and degrading treatment. In the Azzopardi case "Il-Qorti kkritikat id-dawl ferm ristrett tac-cella, in-nuqqas ta' servizzi sanitarji, in-nuqqas ta' arja u dawl dirett, u nuqqas ta' ventilazzjoni. Kienet ziedet il-Qorti :'ic-cella hi nieqsa mid-dawl u arja tant li d-detenut jinzamm il-hin kollu illuminat artificjalment, qisu tigiega ghall-produzzjoni'. Today, the court registrar would probably file the case as Joseph, sive Peppi, Azzopardi. But that's another story.
Some of these cases define an era. Others actually seem to give birth to an era, at least to an extent. And they obviously give the naive law student the impression that the law is really, really thrilling. Sexy even. Whereas quite often it's plain humdrum.
This case in Italy (pointed out to the editor by a Lanzarote fan) shows that lawyers have a wonderful sense of humour. On second thoughts they may be dead serious. At any rate, I'd advise the current crop of studenti tal-ligi to follow it closely while l-avukati tat- Times u tas- Sunday Times would also do well to scrutinize the implications.
The sky's the limit.
¶ 5:12 AM
Comments:
<< Home
Easy one for the defence....
Nevertheless, Mr Cascioli says he hopes to use the case "to denounce the abuse that the Catholic Church commits by profiting from its prestige to present historical facts as if they are real when they are only inventions".
The church does not present historical facts as real... it asks you to believe that they are. The church has no claim on history it holds claims on faith (fijucja?).
Whether you believe or not is your choice... and if you do not ... it is hellfire... which is probably what really worries Mr Cascioli
Nevertheless, Mr Cascioli says he hopes to use the case "to denounce the abuse that the Catholic Church commits by profiting from its prestige to present historical facts as if they are real when they are only inventions".
The church does not present historical facts as real... it asks you to believe that they are. The church has no claim on history it holds claims on faith (fijucja?).
Whether you believe or not is your choice... and if you do not ... it is hellfire... which is probably what really worries Mr Cascioli
Jacques - I did say that Cascioli's lawyers must have a great sense of humour. And I like this story because I find it funny.
However it all kicked off because of this:
Mr Cascioli sued Father Righi in 2002 after the priest attacked him in print for casting doubt over the legitimacy of the Christian gospels.
And the Church wasn't exactly thrilled by the Da Vinci Code either. It did feel that it had to contest the FACTS.
But well, you do have to admire a guy who takes on an entire institution, even if it's done tongue in cheek.
Martin Luther was a tad more serious I suspect. Maybe Cascioli is planning to join him at the barbeque.
However it all kicked off because of this:
Mr Cascioli sued Father Righi in 2002 after the priest attacked him in print for casting doubt over the legitimacy of the Christian gospels.
And the Church wasn't exactly thrilled by the Da Vinci Code either. It did feel that it had to contest the FACTS.
But well, you do have to admire a guy who takes on an entire institution, even if it's done tongue in cheek.
Martin Luther was a tad more serious I suspect. Maybe Cascioli is planning to join him at the barbeque.
the sky's the limit indeed fil-kaz tieghek david (issa tara ghalfejn fil-bloggata tieghi li ser nohrog dalwaqt...) :p
Post a Comment
<< Home
