n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander. Public figures, including officeholders and candidates, have to show that the defamation against them was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment.
Damages for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malice. Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, having a feared disease or being unable to perform one's occupation are called libel per se
or slander per se
and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error.
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit.
Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements, such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease or being unable to perform one's occupation, are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious
and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed.
n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity
(like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion.
While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue
. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for general damages for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called special damages. Libel per se involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent
to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages
. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies
are supposedly immune to actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure" (particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages.
Minor errors in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect.
libel per se
n. broadcast or written publication of a false statement about another which accuses him/her of a crime, immoral acts, inability to perform his/her profession, having a loathsome disease (like syphilis) or dishonesty in business. Such claims are considered so obviously harmful that malice need not be proved to obtain a judgment for "general damages," and not just specific losses.
What follows is a transcription of the recent public statements by Sally Kern, which she was proud to stand by, adamantly refused to retract or correct or apologize for, and which she declared several times on many media outlets is factual truth throughout. We believe that the evidence exists to convict Sally Kern of defamation with slander, slander per se, libel, and libel per se; against specific gay people and against all gay people, both living and dead.
(we have highlighted some of the pertinent statements)
Uh, well first, I have gotten some bills passed in to law, and secondly I was talking with Bill Graves once and he said, "I think youíre doing a good job and you kinda took up my program," and I said, "Well, Bill, thank you, but Iíd like to think that itís somebody bigger than youís program that Iím doing."
But anyway, I am thankful to be here today and I am going to share a number of things so I hope your ears are turned on fast because I want to get through this quickly and I do have . . . the teacher in me didnít pass these out in advance because I know youíd look at them and read them and not listen to me and I want you to listen to me but I have some information you want to be sure to get, three handouts over there.
I like to call myself a social conservative, okay, and for me a social conservative is more than just being pro-life, and wanting smaller governments, and spending less. Itís a whole lot more than that. To me, being a government teacher and a history teacher for about 20 years and loving the beginnings of our nation, I believe being a social conservative you have to embrace the principles upon which this nation was founded if youíre going to be a true social conservative.
Now Iíd like to start by asking you a question and Iím not going to give you time to answer because Iíll probably, Iíll try to finish before one, so if you have any questions youíll have time to ask me. I have no trouble talking. Being a school teacher and a ministerís wife, talking just comes with the territory.
But if I were to ask you, "What is the one thing that has made America great, that makes us unique," what would it be? And then if I were to ask you, "What is the one thing that is actually destroying this nation," what would be your answer? Now, Iím not going to let you give me an answer. Charlieís already got his hand up. But Iím not going to let you give me an answer, Ďcause Iím just going to tell you what I think the one thing is.
Actually, what made us great and what is destroying us is just like a coin, itís a flip side. What made us great is that we were a nation founded on Christian principles. Okay, thatís just the bottom line. If you go to the primary sources and read our founding fathers, what they had to say, they gave preferential treatment to Christianity.
They believed, Iím going to share with you in just a minute, five practical benefits of Christianity.
So whatís destroying this nation? The fact that weíre leaving the roots upon which we were founded. We are crumbling from within because of the bankruptcy that we have in the moral fiber of this nation and leaving the principles of our founding fathers.
Now, Iím going to give away this little book, and I donít know how we're going to do it but, you know, Iíll let Tom figure that out. Itís by David Barton: The Practical Benefits of Christianity
. Itís awesome. Iím briefly going to go through the five practical benefits.
You see the thing about religion, religion isnít just spiritual, itís practical. What we have in our society today is a dichotomy. If youíre a religious person, thatís personal beliefs and thatís kind of like in, you know, private, thatís in the upper story. But if youíre in government, if youíre in school, business, thatís where facts are and you donít mix the two.
Well, you guys, truth is truth. It doesnít matter what realm of society you are in, truth is truth, thereís cold truth.
If youíve never read the book by Nancy Pearcy called Cold Truth
you need to read that book. Awesome book. Cold Truth
, Nancy Pearcy. [transcriptionist Note: actually Total Truth
But there are practical benefits to Christianity. Our founding fathers knew that and thatís why they chose Christianity, the principles of Christianity, and most of our founding fathers were believers in Jesus Christ. Thatís documented, itís not just hearsay. Itís documented.
What are the five practical benefits? First is, a civilized society. And civilized, according the Websterís Dictionary
, 1828 dictionary, "civilized" means decent, respectful, moral behavior. Thatís what civilized means.
And we can stop and look at our society today and we donít have a very civilized society because we can see all kinds of depravity all the time.
Our founding fathers believed that our government was a self-government, and you can only have self-government if you have individual governance in your own life. And the less people are controlled by any restraints, the more government you have to have to control them.
Thatís just . . . we see that happening all the time. So they believed that we needed a civilized society. They also believed that Christian principles were the very reason for the way that our society was going to exist is because, and it goes back again to, you have to have self-governance.
One of our first Speakers of the House, and I never can remember his name, but he said, "Men will be governed either by internal restraints or external restraints. Either by the bayonet or by the Bible."
So we need to have the principles of Christianity for our society to exist.
Another practical benefit of Christianity is just good citizenship. Good citizens, okay. You know it doesnít matter if we live next door to an atheist, an infidel, or whatever, if they believe in a basic principle of right and wrong, which used to always be the Ten Commandments, if theyíre not going to come over and kill me or steal my stuff, or go after my husband and things like that, I can live next to them. No problem. People used to know what was right and what was considered wrong. Today, itís left up to anybodyís, you know, discretion and that wonít work.
Another practical benefit of Christianity was the elevation of knowledge, of learning, of science, okay, of the arts.
They believed, matter of fact, Thomas Payne, who wrote Age of Reason
, where he tried to say you donít need religion, you should keep it out of the public sector, Ben Franklin wrote him a letter, and Ben Franklin arguably is one of our lesser considered religious leaders, but he said to Thomas Payne, donít write that book, donít publish that book. He said it will do you harm, it will do our nation harm.
You know, he believed that we needed to have a society that was based upon Christian principles because elevation of science, elevation of knowledge is very important if youíre going to have an informed public.
And I believe it was Thomas Payne who also said, you know, you can look at a picture and it makes you think of the artist, you can look at some kind of invention and you think of the inventor.
Why is it that we look at the creation and we donít think about the creator? You know, we donít do that.
And if we really had Christian principles our educational system would not be in the mess it is in today. I could give you lots of quotes about, oh, Benjamin Rush and Noah Webster, and Fisher Ames who actually penned the First Amendment. The things they had to say about the main book in school should be the Bible. Thereís a lot of stuff about that thatís really important and we certainly got away from it.
Another practical benefit, the last one, of Christianity, is a cohesive value system. A cohesive value system. We donít have that today. And you know, we think, we hear this all the time, we are such a large society today, we have such diversity in all these different religions and ethnic backgrounds and everything, you canít have a cohesive value system. Well, we didnít just have that right now. You can go back, read some of the writings of John Adams, and he talks about the diverse society that they had back at the beginning of this nation. So Christian principles are very important in order to have a cohesive value system. So regardless of what your faith is you can live together.
We have gotten away from these principles and it is affecting our lives today. One of the main ways, and this is something Iím going to talk about a lot today, that is affecting our lives, is in the "gay agenda".
Now, Iím not a gay basher, okay?
When I taught school, three doors down from me was one of the most obnoxious gay people that you can mention. If I named him you probably have seen him. He writes in the paper all the time and everything. But you know, he has the right to practice that "lifestyle" if he chooses but he does not have the right to indoctrinate his classes. You know, thatís not what education is about.
But what we see happening today is the "homosexual agenda" is destroying this nation. Okay, itís just a fact.
If youíve never read, hereís another book: The Criminalization of Christianity
, by Janet Folger. Every Christian ought to read that book, The Criminalization of Christianity
. It is an awesome book and if that doesnít scare you and motivate you, somethingís wrong.
And hereís the problem, the gay people are motivated. If we as -- whether youíre a Christian or not, if youíre just a good conservative -- if we were as motivated as the gay people were, the contest would be over. Thatís just all there is to it. It would be over.
But we arenít motivated. I think weíve been suckered by this lie of separation of church and state.
But there is a new phenomenon going on, has been going on since the last four years in the gay movement, and itís been headed by a gentleman by the name of Tim Gill. Heís a software mogul guy who sold his Quark, Q-U-A-R-K, however you say that, he sold it for billions of dollars.
He contributed 30-million dollars in í06 to races. He contributed that money to local races, state races and governor races. He gives money, yes, too, on the federal level, but primarily itís on the local level, because his philosophy is this: if weíre gonna really make changes, weíre going to have to do it locally. And whatís the saying we always hear and we know? All politics is local.
And he along with a lot of other gay activists
are very disappointed in the national Democratic Party because theyíve not, you know, they say, they promise all this stuff, you know, weíll acknowledge gays and etc., etc., but when it comes down to really doing policy in Congress, whatís always the first to go? The "gay agenda" stuff, because those Democrats, they donít want to alienate their base.
So Tim Gill along with a bunch of other people, some other millionaires, billionaires, have decided that the way to handle it is on the local level. And they contributed last year over 30-million dollars to state races. They targeted 13 states. They targeted 70 local politicians. They took out 50 of them. Tim Gillís goal is within 10 years to change the face of politics to make it to where there is equality to all people, all lifestyles.
Now, I donít know about you, but the book that I base my life upon is Godís word. And it says to love everybody, and I try to love everybody, but not everybodyís lifestyle is equal. Just like not all religions are equal.
Okay. All money isnít equal.
You know, we have this dumb idea nowdays, that "tolerance" means that everything is equal. Well, everything is not equal. We see that in many areas of our lives. You know, all things are not equal. All religions are not equal
But, uh, let me just read you some things
Tim Gill along with four other, three other people
, let me find this here. Iíve got so much information, thereís no way I can get all of this to you today, but I have it for you to read yourself.
Along with a woman by the name of, I think itís Pat Stryker, and then her brother John Stryker
. . . I know Iíve got them right here, Iíll try to fish them out . . . Pat Stryker, Jared Polis and Rutt Bridges, they all right now are in Colorado
and they have changed the face of Colorado. For 40 years Coloradoís legislature was in the hands of Republicans. In í06 it changed to hands of the Democrats. And the main reason is because theyíre pushing, these four people, along with other people, and I have a list of them here, the top ones, that you can see
And this is important because when you start looking at whoís contributing to races, say that particular statewide race weíre all concerned about
, look for some of these names. They donít give more than a thousand because they donít want to draw attention
, okay, but they will give up to a thousand and so you start looking for these names. And what they do, their strategy is very under-the-table, very stealth
, and their goal is to find state legislatures that are very tight in there, you know, Republican/Democrat. And if just a few races can make the difference to switch it from Republican to Democrat, theyíre going to target that. And their goal is, in doing that, to intimidate Republicans.
Now the problem we have, I think itís a problem, weíve got some moderate Republicans who think it doesnít matter what your "lifestyle" is, it doesnít matter if youíre gay, it doesnít matter if youíre for civil unions, you know.
And you notice, the goal is, theyíre pushing civil unions right now. That used to be unheard of, but now thatís pretty much acceptable. A lot of Republicans are going for civil unions, okay. So you know whatís going to happen next, 10 years from now, itís going to be "gay marriage".
Okay, theyíre taking little by little, theyíre taking ground little by little, but theyíre doing it quietly, under-the-table. Theyíre going into states where the races are close. Theyíre putting in lots of money, and not only that, theyíre putting people on the ground.
Let me read you this. Here this was really, I thought, really interesting, I just want to read it. The key -- this is from a guy by the name of Ted Trimpa
, heís kinda like the Karl Rove for Tim Gill -- ďThe key to success is real grassroots, organizing, knocking at the doors, and knock on them again, and donít go turn out the gay vote, go knock on the swing doors as well,Ē he says. ďKnock on every door and knock day after day after day.Ē
They took out in Iowa a guy by the name of Danny Carol who was the Speaker Pro-Tem in the House. He thought his race was safe. He lost, a surprise loss. They put people on the ground, young college kids with their iPods going from door to door. Not just Democrats, though, also Republicans, trying to find those swing voters, but they do it time and time again. They say itís expensive and time-consuming, but it is the absolute right way to do real grassroots politics, door-to-door, talking to the voters, having gay people go to them, allies of ours, go to each of them, walk them through, and you flip votes one by one. Itís a strategy that works both in the legislature and in the field.
They quote Tim Gill on another aspect of their political strategy. Tim says you have to turn down the volume of opponents' "anti-" rhetoric. They canít just say and do everything with license. They have to know beforehand that itís going to cost them some votes and some serious money to play like that. It certainly doesnít stop it, but it turns it way down, and then when they do spew any "anti-" rhetoric, they look extreme. "You have to create an environment of fear and respect," said Tim Gill. ĒThe only way to do that is to get aggressive and go out and actually beat them up politically. Sitting there crying and whining about being victims isnít going to get us equality. What is going to get us equality is fighting for it.Ē
What theyíre trying to do is send a message of intimidation to those people who are taking a stand for traditional marriage and against the "homosexual lifestyle". They want to silence us, is what they want to do. And itís happening all over the state. You know, the very fact that Iím talking to you like this, here today, puts me in jeopardy.
Okay, and so, so be it. Okay, and Iím not "anti-", Iím not gay bashing, but according to Godís word that is not the right kind of "lifestyle".
It has deadly consequences for those people involved in it. They have more suicides and theyíre more discouraged, thereís more illness, their life spans are shorter
. You know, itís not a "lifestyle" that is good for this nation
Matter of fact, studies show no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than, you know, a few decades. So itís the death knell for this country.
I honestly think itís the biggest threat even, that our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam, which I think is a big threat, okay.
Because whatís happening now, theyíre going after, in schools, two-year-olds. You know what? Theyíre trying to get early childhood education. They want to get our young children into the government schools so they can indoctrinate them. I taught school for close to 20 years and weíre not teaching facts and knowledge anymore, folks, weíre teaching indoctrination.
Weíre turning out a citizenry who are learners but not thinkers. By that I mean, they take whatever is thrown at them. They donít question it. A thinker listens to whatís given to them and then goes and researches and reasons about it and figures out is this right or wrong. We arenít developing students like that today. Weíre developing students who will do whatever the elites want. Thatís what weíre headed toward and theyíre going after our young children as young as two years of age to try to teach them that the "homosexual lifestyle" is an acceptable lifestyle
. And there are programs theyíre going after in school.
It just, uh, Iím not going to say anymore about that because I have the material over there. You really need to read this article, seven pages, but read it. It has some interesting stuff in it. It will show you their strategy and we need to be forewarned.
Okay, now, where are the social conservative billionaires? I want to suggest to you that they are few and far between. Okay. Weíve got some, but they donít give money the way the gay philanthropists are giving their money, okay. And unfortunately I see a lot of our millionaire conservatives are really bought into big business and even big government and they donít support social conservatism. And I think thatís a mistake. But in 10 years time our whole landscape, political landscape, could be changed if we donít start giving money, we social conservatives, people who have it, start giving money to candidates who will stand up for what is right, instead of buckling under this. So, itís just happening to us right and left.
You know, gays are infiltrating city councils.
Did you know, Eureka Springs, anybody been there to the Passion Play? Have you heard that the city council of Eureka Springs is now controlled by gays
? Okay. There are some others: Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, Tacoma, Maryland, Kinsington, Maryland, in Vermont, Oregon, West Palm Beach, Florida and a lot of other places in Florida
Whatís happening? The homosexuals are getting involved politically on the most local level there is, city council, city government, and they are winning elections and the first thing theyíre doing is passing, uh, laws, anti-discrimination laws and hate laws and things like that.
And, uh, you know, one of the things I deal with in our legislature is, I tried to introduce a bill last year that would notify parents, schools had to let parents know what clubs their students were involved in. And the reason I did that bill, primarily, was this: we have the Gay/Straight Alliance coming into our schools.
And we had parents say, if I knew my child was involved in that group I wouldnít let them. Kids are getting involved in these groups, their lives are being ruined, their parents donít know about it. So I introduced a bill that said you have to notify all clubs and things.
And one of my colleagues said, "Well, you know, we donít have a gay problem in my community and thatís why I voted against that bill.Ē Well, you know what? To me that is so dumb. If you got cancer or something in your little toe do you say, "Well, you know, Iím just going to forget about it because the rest of me is just fine?" It spreads, and this stuff is deadly and itís spreading and will destroy our young people and it will destroy this nation.
But theyíre going after city councils. Theyíre influencing schools, sex-ed at schools. Respect for differences in human sexuality is a big sex-ed program theyíre trying to get into all the schools. And basically what it is, itís teaching that you have to be tolerant, you have to accept homosexuality.
This brings in our libraries. Okay, you know I believe in the principle "As a person thinks, as a man thinks, so is he." Thatís why we have to be careful about what we read, what we watch, things like that, what music we listen to and stuff, because what goes in is what comes out. Garbage in, garbage out. We know that with computers. You know, what you put in is what you get out. Okay.
You take our young minds and the garbage that theyíre reading in our libraries and I mean itís garbage. I should have thought and brought you some excerpts of some of the stuff that, uh, I mean, thereís no literary value to it at all. It is pure filth. The language, the acts, the things that are going on, and yet our kids are reading it. I mean, they are reading in the droves.
Okay. Kids go home and I see some high school kids couldnít wait to get out so they could go home and see their favorite soap opera. And I tell them, look, that is not real life. They do anything they want and donít suffer consequences. In real life you got consequences.
So, uh, hate crimes, this leads to hate crimes. If we have hate crimes our free speech will be silenced.
Okay. You know, Iím not a lawyer, but I think I know enough about this. Law should be dealing with our actions, not with what we are thinking. Nobody can read my mind; nobody can read your mind.
Okay. If two little old ladies are both murdered, you know, and oneís gay and the other isnít, why should the one that was gay, her murderers receive a harsher crime than the ones who murdered the other little old lady? Theyíre both dead. You know, murder is murder. So weíve gotta watch; they are coming after these kinds of bills.
Another thing that Iím real big on that is a real detriment to this society is evolution. Evolution undermines Christian principles. Period. Thatís all there is to it. You either believe there is a creator or you believe there isnít. Some people say, well, I believe there is a creator and he used evolution. Thereís a lot of problems there folks. When does sin come in, when does the spirit come in? You know, itís evolution. You read Godís word and you will see the word creation all through it, Old and New Testament. And it undermines peopleís faith. They have trouble reading or believing the Bible.