Dominion Family

Tue 5 Sep 2006

22 Comments

1. Apparently, we have to be careful.

   I read at Matt Colvin’s blog about his friend who lost a court battle and his family may be without him. I’m not sure if the penalty for his crime is *prison* or a fine which leaves them penniless.

   His crime….writing a book.

   The book contained information about *targeting* physicians/people who perform abortions.

   Sounds like an interesting court case, which incidentally has been going on for a number of years.

   Dana in GA

   Comment by Dana (September 5, 2006 @ 3:21 pm )

2. Could Bill Gothard have sued me?

   Do you mean technically (deep-pocketed organization vs. blogger), or biblically (Christian vs. Christian)?

   Comment by Rick Saenz (September 5, 2006 @ 3:45 pm )

3. Well, I meant organization vs blogger.
   The whole should a Christian sue seems to be another one of those issues that end up meaning, “You can’t sue me but I can sue you.”

   Funny, Dana, we just reviewed the 1st amendment several times this morning and I am still not sure when something becomes slander. I am sorry about Matt’s friend.

   Comment by Cindy (September 5, 2006 @ 4:22 pm )

4. usually….after substantiating that a law/ordinance has been violated, the plaintiff must also prove injury or loss in order for charges to be brought against the accused.

   how does that armchair lawyering measure up? teehee

   Procastinating in Ga,
   Dana

   Comment by Dana (September 5, 2006 @ 4:26 pm )

5. So what if the goal of the blogger is to cause the ministry to lose its effectiveness because the blogger believes the ministry is cultish (let’s say)?

   Then the ministry would obviously lose money. How does the law look at something like that? Does it look at the facts of the case to see if the slanderer was actually basing his criticism on something valid?

   Anyway, Dana, you are the closest thing to a lawyer we have today

   Comment by Cindy (September 5, 2006 @ 5:36 pm )

6. According to the Wikipedia article on slander and libel, it is pretty tough in the United States to get a conviction, because of the First Amendment. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff, who not only has to prove that the statements in question are false but that the one who made them did so maliciously, knowing they were false or likely false.

   You can defend against libel/slander by showing that the statements are in fact true, or that you made them in good faith and had reason to believe they were true, or that they are matters of opinion rather than fact. That covers an awful lot.

   However, let’s be cynical enough to recognize that the simple fact of an organization’s attorney filing a lawsuit against you, however unlikely to succeed, is enough to do serious damage to the average individual. Which is exactly why dubious lawsuits are often threatened and sometimes filed.

   Comment by Rick Saenz (September 5, 2006 @ 7:34 pm )

7. Well, pretty much anyone can sue you for just about anything - and that is where Rick’s comment is germaine.

   However, I wonder if we aren’t a little myopic on the issue of Christians suing one another. Was Paul’s concern that the Corinthians not engage in formal legal proceedings in court or was he concerned with the larger issue of the shame brought upon the church because the Corinthians were airing their dirty laundry before the watching world?

   What this means for bloggers and blog commenters is something we need to wrestle with, first amendment and legal precedent not withstanding. I’m not taking sides here nor do I have the answers. However, if we are truly thinking Biblically, I do not think our first concern, when we are considering writing something critical about a brother or sister in Christ, should be whether or not we may be sued by them.

   Comment by Greg (September 5, 2006 @ 10:01 pm )

8. It seems in the case of Ligonier, they would have been much better off not filing the lawsuit. Now more people will be reading what the blogger said than before. Least said soonest mended.

   Thanks for that Wikipedia article. I am just blown away about how quickly information can be found on the internet. I sometimes forget to go looking.

   Comment by Cindy (September 6, 2006 @ 7:55 am )

9. I agree, Greg.

   The thing that hit me was that I had never really thought about it before. I do tend to get critical here sometimes because I firmly believe that ideas have consequences.

   It also has to do with a long train of abuses and usurpations that our family experienced at the hands of Bill Gothard followers. After 5 years inside and 5 more outside my dh and I decided it was better to speak out than to keep quiet about it. I was so happy about the Google hits because I knew they were from people truly searching and maybe I could warn them away before they got sucked in.

   Still I don’t particularly feel nice when I speak critically.

   If someone says, “boo,” I usually run and hide.

   Comment by Cindy (September 6, 2006 @ 8:45 am )

10. I was threatened to be sued for slander by my public school district. Tinks teacher found my weblog somehow and didnt like the way I had interpreted a parent teacher conference. She took it to the principle who in turn called me and told me I had better apologize because this teacher was threatening to sue me. I’m sure it couldnt have gone anywhere becasue the teachers name wasnt used nor was the school districts. Even my daughters real name wasnt used.

    I called the teacher and apologized for putting it on the web but I did not apologize for my interpretation of it. She accepted the apology in a half sort of way. Lets just say that the rest of the year was a tense one.

    I wasnt sued.

    Comment by mrs darling (September 6, 2006 @ 9:18 am )

11. This is very interesting to me for a variety of reasons. Thanks for posting about it. I’m going to watch this. I also blogged about it as well.

    I would have loved to read your post on ATI. I’ve had a few concerns about them since the early 1980’s myself.

    Comment by Spunky (September 6, 2006 @ 1:47 pm )

12. Looking for stuff on Gothard, you want to get a hold of:

    A Study in Evolving Fadism. The Cultic Leaning of Bill Gothard, by G. Richard Fisher. The Quarterly Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, April-June 1996.
    http://www.pfo.org/evol-fad.htm

    A Matter of Basic Principles: Bill Gothard and the Christian Life. Don Veinot, Joy Veinot and Ron Henzel.
    http://www.midwestoutreach.org/02-Information/01-AvailableResources/index.html#Section3

    The Basic Life Principles of Bill Gothard. Benevolent Ministry or Bondage Making?, by G. Richard Fisher. The Quarterly Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, April-June 1998.
    http://www.pfo.org/bgothard.htm

    Comment by Jeff Downs (September 6, 2006 @ 5:01 pm )

13. Thanks so much, Jeff. Many years ago I did read one of the articles by G Richard Fisher. I am glad to run across it again.

    I also bought a boatload of A Matter of Basic Principles and frequently give them away.
    The only real problem I have with that book is that it doesn’t go far enough. I could have added a few chapters.

    Comment by Cindy (September 6, 2006 @ 7:31 pm )

14. Cindy, If the judge actually makes a ruling (and it sure sounds like a frivolous lawsuit that could go “byebye”), I suspect that this blogger’s rights would be protected if they deem his blog as a part of the “media.” (New York Times v. Sullivan) His right to have an opinion is also protected by First Amendment.

    You have to prove that your reputation/business was damaged in a defam. lawsuit to collect any monies, as Dana pointed out. Very, very hard to do, btw.

    I find this lawsuit extremely petty; speaks poorly of this mininstry, not the blogger.

    Comment by izzy (September 6, 2006 @ 9:44 pm )

15. Glenn Reynolds has mentioned the Ligonier lawsuit. Since his Instapundit site is one of the most popular weblogs around, I guess Ligonier will soon find out whether it was a good idea to make this matter public.

    Reynolds also points to a pretty good article he wrote called “Libel in the Blogosphere: Some Preliminary Thoughts.” What’s most helpful is that Reynolds (a law professor) gives a clear and simple explanation of the purpose of libel law and the protections it is supposed to provide. He then goes on to point out that such protections may no longer be necessary, given how quickly corrections can be published and how easy it is these days to publish one’s own side of the story.

    Comment by Rick Saenz (September 7, 2006 @ 9:42 am )

16. Ligonier Ministries Lawsuit: Did They Have Other Options?

    Comment by Randal Dunn (September 12, 2006 @ 10:47 pm )

17. It is sad to see that if you follow a thread like I have, the important thing bloogers appear to share as a primary concern, is an increase of traffic on their blogs!

    A sad testimony for Christians and homeschool families.

    Comment by Tim (September 13, 2006 @ 12:35 am )

18. For the information of all, the above comment by Tim is not a comment from my husband Tim.

    Comment by Cindy (September 13, 2006 @ 8:50 am )

19. Cindy, tdick@ligonier.org would be Tim Dick, Ligonier’s President/CEO/CFO. He gets paid $230,000 / year but seems to have plenty of time on his hands for surfing the net and posting incoherent blog comments.

    Jen Epstein has written some excellent articles about this Ligonier Ministries lawsuit. Now Jen has posted some Open Letters on her blog. Everyone who’s concerned about the obvious shame and embarrassment that this Ligonier Ministries lawsuit will bring upon the Christian community should copy and paste them and mail them to Ligonier.

    Open Letter to Dr. Sproul (for some strange reason Tim Dick posted a comment on Dr. Sproul’s Open Letter, not his own),
    Open Letter to Vesta Sproul and the Board of Directors
    Open Letter to Tim Dick.
    Contending With Ligonier Ministries.

    Comment by John Steinhausen (September 16, 2006 @ 9:18 pm )

20. Two officail statements have been released by Ligonier. You can view them on their site here:
    http://www.ligonier.org/statement_9_20_2006/from_seniormanagement.php

    http://www.ligonier.org/statement_9_20_2006/from_timdick.php

    Comment by Thankful (September 22, 2006 @ 8:21 pm )

21. So much for “official statements”

    More Ligonier Lies: Ligonier Ministries Has “Withdrawn Complaint”

    Comment by John Steinhausen (September 25, 2006 @ 9:04 pm )

22. This strange saga just never seems to end. RC Sproul Fires Tim Dick as Ligonier Ministries’ President

    Comment by Saved By Grace (August 1, 2007 @ 4:46 pm )

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.