Jerry Falwell Doesn't Get Critical Typo Websites
from the no-ownership-there dept
Well known televangelist Jerry Falwell has had something of a thin skin over the years concerning websites that are critical of his viewpoints. He’s gone after them legally on more than one occasion. Well, it seems like that isn’t working very well, as the latest effort has backfired. The owner of a website based on misspelling of Falwell’s name which is quite critical of Falwell has been told by the court that he can keep the site and continue bashing the reverend if he so chooses.
Comments on “Jerry Falwell Doesn't Get Critical Typo Websites”
Falwell & publicity
Jerry Falwell has made himself a very public figure.
His actions have married religion to politics.
Public figures open themselves to scrutiny, criticism, and parody — that’s why they get the big bucks.
Political speech is the most strongly protected of all types of speech.
Get used to it, Jerry.
To seek the spotlight and control of others’ lives invites public rebuke.
Attempting to squelch that critical comment is hypocritical.
But then again, what would reasonable people expect from a self professed ‘Christian’ huckster?
We may not know what Jesus would do in like circumstances,
but we know it isn’t what Falwell has been doing for decades.
Re: Falwell & publicity
Married religion to politics? Both seem to be two facets of the same jewel: both look to dupe the masses into believing in things that don’t exist (a Santa Claus and that this guy’s gonna do what you want)
Re: Re: Falwell & publicity
Well said!
Given that two-faced Janus personality of religion and politics,
our constitutional separation of the same becomes all the more important.
Having religion AND politics ganging up to determine the fate of nations and people cannot be good.
Politics (power based) and religion (fable and mysticism based),
when combined, create a brew that is toxic to both freedom and happiness.
falwell is thin skinned?
Not sure I would say he was any more ‘thin-skinned’ than the dozens of celebs and organizations who have also balked at having someone buy a misspelling of their name to poke fun at them. In fact, CNet reminded us of the PETA suit a few years ago that was eerily similar and had a different outcome.
Wish the courts would at least pretend to be consistent. Falwell gets jerked around, but PETA was protected. Ugh. Either they’re both protected or neither one is. I can’t stand to see court decisions biased by personal agendas. Give me a strict interpretation of the law any day. Too much leeway leads to this crap!