National Love Your Lawyer Day

Saturday, November 7, AD 2015


Did you know that yesterday was National Love Your Lawyer Day?  Me neither.


Most people know a lawyer joke or two. But one association is asking people to refrain from making any digs at attorneys for one day in November in an effort to show appreciation for the profession.

As part of its annual National Love Your Lawyer Day, the American Lawyers Public Image Association is asking members of the public to donate $20 to their charity of choice for every lawyer joke they let slip on November 6.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to National Love Your Lawyer Day

  • What do you call a lawyer with a .00000010 IQ?

    Your Honor!

  • “Leave it to a lawyers group to ignore one of the few aspects of being a lawyer that most people find, if not lovable, at least humorous, the facility of some of us with lawyer jokes.”

    A local aquarium with a large shark tank had a free admission day for lawyers as a “professional courtesy”, and took out radio ads to the effect. The state bar complained! At least they didn’t sue!

  • Once my grandmother was called for jury duty in a lawsuit and asked if she knew the parties. She had, she had babysat both of them as children. Dismissed.

    The stereotype of lawyers as suing over any trifle is definitely false. I’ve known quite a few people who thought they won the lottery but were turned down by multiple lawyers.

  • My two favourites:
    1) Queen Victoria was to visit the Court of Session and the Lord President, Lord Glencorse (John Inglis, a noted advocate and wit) had drafted a Loyal Address, which he read to the assembled judges for approval.
    When he came to the line, “Your Majesty’s judges, deeply conscious of their own many failings,” the Lord Justice-Clerk, Lord Moncreiff (who had been Inglis’s great rival at the Bar) stoutly protested that he was not conscious of “many failings” and, if he were, he would demit office.
    Lord Glencorse suggested as a compromise: “Your Majesty’s judges, deeply conscious of each others’ many failings…”
    2) John Clark (who once described a witness as “not worth his value in hemp”) was attempting to argue a point of construction and the Lord Ordinary, Lord Meadowbank, the son of a famous judge, rather peremptorily insisted that “also” and “likewise” were synonymous.
    “Your father was Lord Meadowbank,” reposted Clark, “and your Lordship is Lord Meadowbank; also, but not likewise.”

So Why Go There?

Thursday, October 27, AD 2011

Here’s an issue near and dear to my heart as an alum of CUA:

The Washington, D.C. Office of Human Rights confirmed that it is investigating allegations that Catholic University violated the human rights of Muslim students by not allowing them to form a Muslim student group and by not providing them rooms without Christian symbols for their daily prayers.

The investigation alleges that Muslim students “must perform their prayers surrounded by symbols of Catholicism – e.g., a wooden crucifix, paintings of Jesus, pictures of priests and theologians which many Muslim students find inappropriate.”

As one of the commenters at the news source said, isn’t this like going to a strip club and being offended by the nudity?  These students didn’t enroll at a Catholic university, they enrolled at The Catholic University of America.  Pretty hard to miss that in the title of the institution, don’t you think?   Fr. Z puts it this way:

Lemme get this straight. They enroll in a Catholic University… and it isn’t a surprise that it is “Catholic” given that it is called “Catholic University of America”. Then they complain that there are Catholic symbols everywhere!

When I was a grad student there I knew a good number of law students.  This was during the time when Doug Kmiec was Dean of the law school and still cared about his faith.  He had instituted a mandatory course requirement that, if I recall correctly, was called Catholic Legal Ethics.  It may had a slightly different name, but it was something along those lines.  My non-Catholic friends complained about the course and being forced to take it.  My response: you’re attending the Catholic University of America law school.  Did you miss  that name when you applied?

Continue reading...

9 Responses to So Why Go There?

  • Not allowing the Muslims to form a student group, if true, is disappointing. As for the other issue, there are probably plenty of rooms at CUA that could fulfill the requirements of Muslims wanting to pray, so I’m surprised this is an issue at all.

  • And this is a surprise? Unexpected?

  • I don’t see why they should allow muslims groups at all on rational…not legal grounds. The Koran explicitly condemns the idea of a Trinity and the idea that God has a Son. So you are providing facilities for a group that explicitly opposes your theology. Of course it doesn’t help their legal case that they’ve had three “lavender graduations” for the campus gay/bi/transgendered group there….despite Romans chapter one. So a judge might rule that the University opposes itself….so why not have other opposers of yourself on campus opposing you.

  • There just aren’t enough bullets.

  • All of this is typical Muslim behavior. There is no rationale not because they are not trying to be reasonable, they are trying to intimidate. Are they really offended? Maybe, but maybe not. “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘War is deceit.'” Qur’an 4:142. If *one* symbol is removed in the name of Christian charity, that is seen as victory by them. Then they will battle on a new front.

    This behavior which is typical of Muslims must be exposed whether or not they are allowed to form some kind of group.

  • I must apologize. CUA does not have Lavender graduations….that is Georgetown that has them. Sorry….it just hit me minutes ago. Sorry CUA alums.

  • “Banzhaf sent a letter to the editor of the school’s newspaper soliciting complainants on September 22, yet readily admits that none have signed on to his case against the school.”

    So in answer to Pauli’s question, it appears that the Muslim students are NOT really offended at all. This is just one sue-happy attorney peddling a “solution” in search of a problem.

  • Pauli owes someone an apology.