# Ligonier Lawsuit



## AlienPilgrim (Sep 5, 2006)

http://http://www.orlandosentinel.com/orl-blog0506sep05,0,6545015.story


Lawsuit seeks to block blogger
First Amendment advocates decry 'prior restraint.'

Rene Stutzman | Sentinel Staff Writer 
Posted September 5, 2006 



SANFORD -- How much First Amendment protection do bloggers have? That's an issue now before a Sanford judge.

Ligonier Ministries Inc., a Lake Mary religious publisher and broadcaster, is asking Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson to stop blogger Frank Vance from posting any more slurs about its president, Timothy A. Dick.

In the past five months, Vance's blog has described Dick as part of a "family of nincompoops," "a very corrupt man" and "a lying, thieving con artist," according to the lawsuit.

Two weeks ago, Dick and the ministry sued Vance for defamation, asking for unspecified monetary damages.

It also asked for something that judges have historically refused to impose on news organizations -- a publishing ban.

Media lawyers call that "prior restraint."

"It's just so repugnant to the First Amendment that you would request one," said Marc Randazza, a First Amendment lawyer in Altamonte Springs.

Courts have long held that plaintiffs should seek justice only after an item has been published or aired. But judges have been less certain about how to handle bloggers and other material on the Internet.

There are tens of millions of blogs on the Internet. Increasingly, bloggers are being sued -- for defamation, privacy issues and the use of unnamed sources, according to lawyers specializing in Internet issues.

In a very small number of cases, judges are slapping them and other Web sites with prior-restraint orders.

In May, a federal judge in Roanoke, Va., ordered the shutdown of a Web site critical of a nearby military school after the site's creators, the parents of a boy who had been expelled, criticized the academy.

And earlier this year, a Wisconsin judge temporarily closed an Internet chat room that had been sued by a county official angry about comments posted there by anonymous writers.

First Amendment advocates say those judges were wrong. Bloggers and Web-site operators are entitled to the same protections as other media, said Kurt Opsahl, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco,

Greg Herbert, a First Amendment lawyer in Orlando, said, "I think a lot of judges don't know what a blog is."

Ligonier, which filed the Sanford case, is a nonprofit, interdenominational group with offices in a business park. The company employs about 50 people, publishes religious materials and its founder, R.C. Sproule, broadcasts a radio show called Renewing Your Mind.

Dick is Sproule's son-in-law.

The Orlando Sentinel was unable to reach Dick or the company's attorney, Daniel Brodersen, for comment.

Vance, the blogger, is less well known. He won't say where he's from, except that he is in the United States. He launched his Web site -- vancetribe.blogspot.com -- in May and has a day job. He writes only about Ligonier.

He has criticized its choice of president -- Dick -- and the way the group acquired another religious publisher.

Vance learned about the lawsuit from the Sentinel.

"To prevent me from publishing, I view as a very serious breach of First Amendment rights," he said by phone Friday.

Some plaintiffs sue bloggers, asking for things they would never dream of asking from a conventional news organization, said Robert Cox, president of the Media Bloggers Association.

"They think they can push bloggers around," he said.

Rene Stutzman can be reached at [email protected] or 407-324-7294.

[Edited on 9-5-2006 by AlienPilgrim]


----------



## AlienPilgrim (Sep 5, 2006)

If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren. 1 Corinthians 6:4-8


----------



## Puritanhead (Sep 5, 2006)

Who prevailed in the contest of Jerry Falwell versus Larry Flynt? For good or bad, the U.S. Supreme Court has greatly diminished the odds of recovering for damages against slander, libel, and defamation or getting court-ordered injunctive relief. This law is not what was in the 1790s.

Generally, defamation consists of: (1) a false statement of fact about another; (2) an unprivileged publication of that statement to a third party; (3) some degree of fault, depending on the type of case; and (4) some harm or damage. The burden of proof is the plaintiff or victim, and it's difficult to establish sometimes. Once the proof is established, it becomes the burden of the defendant to overturn it.

[Edited on 9-6-2006 by Puritanhead]


----------



## Puritanhead (Sep 5, 2006)

1 Corinthians 6:4-8 notwithstanding, there are times when restitution is called for. Even the Bible prescribes it, so tread lightly. The principle purpose of that passage was to encourage Christians to distinguish themselves by not embracing a spirit of discord and contention that lead to disputes among themselves for the outside world to see in the courts of pagans, which maligned the cause of the church.

Regarding Tim's case; this is merely an act for injunctive relief to restrain a harrassing party. I don't see anything wrong with his action myself. I empathize.


----------



## Ambrose (Sep 5, 2006)

So what will the world remember about R.C. Sproul the most? His preaching and teaching, or the escapades of his son and son-in-law? 

Ligonier has the media spotlight now, and all that will accomplish is everyone becoming familiar with Tim Dick and R.C.'s grandson Ryan (aka Party Boy).


----------



## Ambrose (Sep 5, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> 1 Corinthians 6:4-8 notwithstanding, there are times when restitution is called for. Even the Bible prescribes it, so tread lightly. The principle purpose of that passage was to encourage Christians to distinguish themselves by not embracing a spirit of discord and contention that lead to disputes among themselves for the outside world to see in the courts of pagans, which maligned the cause of the church.
> 
> Regarding Tim's case; this is merely an act for injunctive relief to restrain a harrassing party. I don't see anything wrong with his action myself. I empathize.



Frank Vance says he wasn't even notified of the lawsuit, he heard about it from the Orlando Sentinel reporter. Sound biblical Ryan?


----------



## Puritanhead (Sep 5, 2006)

Originally posted from this thread:


> _Originally posted by Chad Degenhart_
> Uncalled for.



Do your actions sound biblical Chad? 

By your own words, you malign yourself by an air of inconsistency. Judge Not.

Titus 2:7-9 

A Moral Checkup for Your Mouth by Dr. Greg Bahnsen. Scan down to the part about tale-bearing.

[Edited on 9-6-2006 by Puritanhead]


----------



## Ambrose (Sep 5, 2006)

What "tales" am I telling Ryan?


----------



## Puritanhead (Sep 5, 2006)

R.C. Sproul, his family, Tim Dick, and Ligonier Ministries have done a lot for the Reformed community and the Christian church. I get sick and tired of how so called Christians pick each other apart like a bunch of vultures. Y'all need to hold your tongues, and quit being so publicly judgmental, and act like Christians.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Sep 5, 2006)

Discuss the issue without attacking eachother, gentlemen....


----------



## Puritanhead (Sep 5, 2006)

Or better yet, lets just not discuss it at all....


----------



## LadyFlynt (Sep 5, 2006)

Good Idea.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Sep 5, 2006)

Useless information. They could at least spell Sproul's name correctly. Good idea to close it Colleen!

[Edited on 9-6-2006 by Scott Bushey]


----------

