to draw your attention to MN'ers being threatened with court for posting

[gordyslovesheep]

By Samaritan's Purse

I know I'm not the only one

who else have they decided to silence?

It's quite interesting that they dislike criticism so much

Yes indeed Edith. In fact, discussion of that entity has dwindled significantly, interestingly.

Come on Calaveras, give them a chance!

MNHQ didn't start this. They are just as much a victim as you, and have at least as much to lose as you. Let them take the time they need to get it right for everyone's sake.

Maybe we should let SP. Speak for themselves.

I found this article from their site very enlightening on their stance

Err Dont panic> personnally I am pretty sure this is a "try on"

The downside of actually suing people on Mumsnet would be huge.

In general, people are well advised NOT to sue for defamation as the effect is to "propagate the libel"

Its a threat, and an empty one, but Mumsnet have to take it seriously and in effect are paying for the legal advice we will all benefit from.

Fact is there are grey areas surrounding data protection and multiple issues surrounding the way MN and every similar organisation uses and stores informatio- and not just your reg details.

The amount of demographic information every single poster offers every time they post is huge- what they hold in your registration is negligible in comparison. Float this company on the stock market and it is worth heaps to companies seeking to break down the info on here and sell it on in a usable format.

er.. why is everyone getting in such a flap over this? surely a court order wouldn't be granted unless they could prove that what you had said was illegal.

We should be grateful that such laws exist - it means that people can only keep their anonymity if what they are posting is legal.

oh! and this

That organisation is useful in as much as it made me consider how I could help other people in a, er, well, better more Christian way. So rather than fill boxes full of tat for a conditional 'gift' I organised something more effective instead of the boxes,, which had been proposed at my workplace!

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/04/21/franklin-grahams-detestable-anti-gay-statements/

www.samaritanspurse.org/article/franklin-graham-statement/

billygraham.org/decision-magazine/march-2014/putins-olympic-controversy/

No comment needed - it speaks for itself

they are big fans of Hinduism as well

I'm just gobsmacked. But if this highlights what it is that Samaritan's Purse is up to and how those shoeboxes of tat are actually way more than that, then it's a job well done - gordy, if I could buy you a pint and a half of gin, I would.

and Suffolk, sorry. I'd buy you gin too.

Yeah, so there seems to be plenty of factual evidence out there that formed some MNer's opinions...that surely can't be defamatory. It's on their website.

Sorry that POSSIBLY formed opinion. In my opinion.

In my opinion there seems to be quite a lot of evidence regarding SP's stance on other religions and lifestyles.

Is that vague enough?

In my opinion, What Pacific said.

it's like an episode of the good wife in here

Hang on, you're being threatened for discussing a documented statement made by an individual? Have I missed something?

I would love to see Mn take a proactive stance on this and stand up for MN users freedom to discuss the issues and evidence put out by Samaritan's Purse. Rather than threatening established users with deregging because they won't conform to the demands made this organisation.

It'd be funny, if it weren't so awful and damaging to all sorts of charities and NGO doing Good Work without the religious baggage attached.

What is it with The Good Wife? I keep seeing it mentioned… Must get back to watching it.

wantacat, 'mon up on the barricades!

there is a judge in TGW who makes all the lawyers say "in my opinion" when they make a statement

Mardy - where have MNHQ threatened de-regging? Rowan asked Suffolk if that was what she wanted - that's all I can see.

I'd like to see MN take a proactive stance on this too.

Just checked my inbox - no threats for me (yet). I'm sure Brian would love to sue me, as I was one of the most active posters on last year's threads.

"I finished by explaining that our God is real and their gods are only small figures on the shelf.

“I know that,” he said with the simple assurance only children have.?“And her gods don’t love her...Our son helped remind us that we are here to serve without pretension, to do a good job, and to show the love of our God to those whose gods don’t love them.,”

I was brought up a Christian and my family and church would have been deeply shocked by such a lack of tolerance, lack of inter-faith respect, lack of theological accuracy ('only small figures on a shelf' is not a true description of Hindu belief) and arrogant chauvinism (I am not saying that this quote shows a SP missionary to be anti-Hindu, of course, oh no).

That SP can put that on their home page as a stance to be proud of potentially calls into question that the gifts in shoeboxes are given in a context which fits charitable best practice. The evidence is SP's, and perhaps some independent observers can tell me I am wrong. Which I might of course be. Allegedly.

Ah! I see

IMO MNHQ are in a difficult position (oh how they must curse outspoken posters with, you know, opinions!) as they must of course obey the Law (as do we) and we don't know what is going on in the background. Their Legal Eagles may well be in communication with SP and their people and are hopefully fighting the good fight. Yes?
I agree, that this is an opportunity to talk about Freedom of Speech (and I for one do not think one should be allowed to say anything at all, but stating something that is on public record…? Purleeeez)