First, I’d like to thank all those who expressed support over the last few days and who have patiently borne the lack of blogging that ensued. I very much appreciate your kind words and understanding.
Receiving the threat of a lawsuit is a delicate matter–even when you know that you have not violated the law–and one must proceed with the utmost caution in responding.
There is an old saying that "A man who has himself for a lawyer has a fool for a client," and even people who are themselves lawyers (I am not) are wise to obtain representation when they are being threatened with legal action. Nobody–not even a lawyer–should respond on his own behalf to threats posed by other lawyers. Even those who know the law intimately need someone who has the kind of cool head and situational detachment needed to help navigate such waters.
Consequently, upon reading the letter from Mr. Moyers’ lawyers, I immediately contacted my friend Stephen Dillard (who has a really cool signature) of the law firm James, Bates, Pope, and Spivey and he most graciously offered very timely assistance. I wish to thank him most of all for his effort, support, and wise counsel in handling the matter.
I’d also like to thank the other lawyers and legal professionals who offered their services in the event such were to become necessary.
As individuals have surmised in the combox, I have been advised not to comment on the matter in detail, though Stephen has examined and cleared this post for publication.
I regret that Bill Moyers did not choose to contact me privately and simply ask that I present his side of the story. As individuals have surmised in the combox, I would have been most willing to do so as a matter of basic fairness.
Such an approach would have been in keeping with the Golden Rule on my part and, on Mr. Moyers’ part, it would have been in keeping with Jesus’ directive to approach a brother privately and solve problems on the lowest level possible (Matthew 18), as well as St. Paul’s directive to be hesitant to engage the legal system in settling matters among Christians (1 Corinthians 6). Mr. Moyers is (or has been) an ordained Baptist minister, and I wish that he had attempted such private efforts first.
Finally, I would like to thank the other bloggers and news sources who have linked the story. Though they have expressed a variety of views on the subject, or run the link without comment, they have in any case publicized Mr. Moyers denial and thus helped spread his side of the story, both among those who read the stories on their sites and among those who clicked through and generated the tens of thousands of hits on the Moyers Exchange post on mine. These blogs and news sources include:
Instapundit
Salon.Com
The Corner
Crime & Federalism
No Left Turns
Amy Welborn
The Curt Jester
The Evangelical Outpost
Conservative Bulldog
Irresponsible Journalism
PowerBlog
BillHobbs.Com
The Evangelical Ecologist
No Silence Here
Three Br0thers
Daily Pundit
Hierodule
The Boring Made Dull
Because this exchange is likely to raise in the minds of bloggers and blog commenters the question of how libel law applies to the blogosphere, I felt it would be appropriate to link an article by law professor Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit that should help others understand what the law requires. This is presented as an informational source only and not as legal advice (which I can’t give, anyway):
Glenn Reynolds’ paper "Libel in the Blogosphere: Some Preliminary Thoughts" [.pdf]
One final note: In the interests of fairness to both sides, I plan on covering whatever responses Dr. Beisner and the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance make public and whatever response Mr. Moyers has to them. If the responses are not too lengthy, I will endeavor to post them in their entirety. If not, I will post a relevant excerpt and a link to the originals (assuming they are presented online). If the latter approach is necessary, I will extend both parties equal space.
