Cannon here: I felt cheerful when composing the post below this one. I feel crummy now.
I'm sure you've heard of The Church of the Sub-Genius, the joke religion that Ivan Stang has kept going for the past few decades. A woman named Rachel Bevilacqua had her son taken away from her because she has been active in this "church." The Honorable (but un-hip) Jimmy Punch -- apparently, a Catholic nut-job of the Mel Gibson school -- saw a photo of Bevilacqua wearing a bondage dress and a paper-mache goat's head while attending a slightly-bawdy Sub-G event (at which her son was not present). He called her mentally ill and ruled that she may not contact her son by phone or in writing.
I wonder how he would have ruled in a case involving Milton Berle or members of the Monty Python troop, or anyone else who has ever worn a goofy costume for comedic purposes?
Fundamentalist fools love to believe that they are, or soon will be, persecuted. In fact, these intolerant dimwits are the persecutors.
Except in this case her ex-husband was constructing a case to get custody. I very much doubt this was the only evidence presented.
ReplyDeleteSometimes ex-husbands are right. You'll have to follow this one up...
Ex-spouses are forever "making cases." Often, the lawyers press them into doing so even when the parties really want an amicable settlement.
ReplyDeleteI have no idea who is right or wrong in the custody dispute between this one woman and her former husband. But I do know that no judge in his right mind would allow photos from a silly Sub-Genius event to enter even SLIGHTLY into the decision-making process. That's akin to calling Carl Barks a pedophile because he drew Hewie, Dewey and Louie without pants.