Actress Cindy Lee Garcia sues over Innocence of Muslims

[playingwithplato]

45. Not sure about this...

Offense, or actions resulting from it, to a piece of art is not covered in 'reckless' or 'malicious' law. I can make a film that has a guy peeing on a crucifix for 90 minutes straight. The illegal actions of those who are offended by my film precisely because of its content, are not protected by the law. If I state that I KNOW someone will be offended by what I deem to me the worst religion around today, this is completely different that stating, or having proved, that my intention, in my expressive piece, is to hurt another. This being said, many artist claim to seek to offend the rational minds, or sensibilities, of their audience.

The very purpose of shouting fire in a theater may be to CAUSE mayhem, or harm to others. You have to prove intent.

This clownshoe making a film to express his disgust with the history of Mohammed, or contemporary Islam practice by some, and publicly acknowledging that he can anticipate the audience's reaction to it does not prove his intent to harm nor does it make him in the least bit culpable in the violence that ensued.

This reminds me of when Mel Gibson made Passion of the Christ and it was later revealed his intent was to stir up a bunch of Christians to storm the Israeli embassy.