Liberal Lawyers and Litigious lesbians.......Pt1

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bonnie, Nov 15, 2004.

  1. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    Here is an article that takes political correctness, and ridiculous liberal ideas about society and puts it truly in perspective!!
    www.townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/printma20041115.shtml

    I have some pretty bad news and some really bad news. First the pretty bad news: I have not yet completed the follow-up to my recent article"REligious discrimination at the University of Georgia." I know the that the articel was due this week and I am truly sorry. The delay has something to do with the really bad news: Mike Adams, Townhall.com, and a few other sites that reprint my column have been threatened with a lawsuit by newly elected North Carolina State Senator Julia Boseman.

    On November 9th, Boseman threatened us with a lawsuit for defamation of character as a result of my October 14th article entitled: "If your brother is the father of your child..."According to Boseman's attorney, the following line from the ediotrial is false and defamatory: "Recently, (Julia Boseman) and her 'domestic partner' had a baby, which was made possible by a sperm donation from her biological brother." Instead the attorney insists that the sprm donation came from a sperm bank.

    Boseman made it clear that a defamation suit can be avoided if we will, among other things, print a retraction. Of course, you will recall that I sent Ms Boseman an email, after I called her secretary, and also after I left a detailed message on Boseman's voice mail, asking her to read the article and correct any factual erors. Of course, that was all before the article was printed.

    Since she declined to proof-read the article, you are probably of the opinion that this misunderstanding is Ms. Boseman's fault, not ours. You are also probably reluctant to run a retraction.

    But Jon, I hold a different view of the situation. I thik we should do the right thing and print a retraction immediately. The aforementioned "defamatory" line should be changed to read: "Recently, (Julia Boseman) and her 'domestice partner' had a baby, which was made possible by a sperm donation by total stranger."

    In order to make the article consistent, we should change the title of the previous editorial form "If your brother is the father of your child..." to "If you don't know the father of your child.."

    Finally Jon, I want you to go back and change the first line of the closing paragraph of my October 14th editorial, which oresently reads as folow: "I don't want to challenge Julia Boseman's right to use her brother's sperm to 'father ' her child."

    But my next article on Julia Boseman will also contain some interesting new information. I expect the facts to show Julia Boseman's real motivation for threatening me with a lawsuit. ............
     
  2. Deornwulf
    Offline

    Deornwulf Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Messages:
    153
    Thanks Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +28
    Mike Adams is a funny man, very insightful and inciteful...
     
  3. nakedemperor
    Offline

    nakedemperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +150
    I'm confused... so the author was wrong about the sperm being donated from her biological brother, and blamed it on the Senator not fact-checking the story. This seems odd, because if Senators took the time to personally fact-check every article written about them they'd do less work on the Hill than John Kerry. Just because you send your Senator a copy of your article and you don't recieve any comments on it does not make the falsehoods in your article, well, not un-true. If she did not have a baby by her brother's sperm, than the author SHOULD retract and apologize, because that IS defamation.

    Second, the author also seems to be against artificial insemination, and seems to be ironically ridiculing a lesbian couple for having no choice but to turn to a sperm bank in order to be able to concieve a child. There's a worthy target. Is he going to rip into adoption next? "Recently, Boserman and her domestic partner welcomed a child into their home...and didn't know who EITHER of the parents were!!" The humanity.

    What are the ridiculous liberal ideas this article is illuminating? Artificial insemination? Accurate journalism?
     

Share This Page