It has been brought to Chapel Guardian’s attention that, in mediation, Friends of Chapel demanded that the Chapel Guardian blog be taken down as part of its agreement with Chapel of Awareness. In turn, Chapel of Awareness agreed to this arrangement, provided that Friends of Chapel take its blog down in return.
The statement of intent on this blog is clear, and has been unchanged since the Friends’ blog and legal action began: “Chapel Guardian represents only the opinions of the administrator, and is not a sanctioned activity of the Chapel of Awareness Spiritual Church Corporation or any other entity or person.”
Apparently, the Friends of Chapel mediation group neither read nor understood this statement.
The Friends of Chapel mediation group had no business demanding that a third-party blog be taken down as part of their own lawsuit. Chapel of Awareness had no business agreeing to it.
Such a demand is just as inappropriate as if Chapel were to demand that Rev. Eric Berg take down his blog site (revericsblog.blogspot.com) ... one that uses the words “senile dementia” in the same breath as board chair Rev. Ann Lorenzini ... when he is not a named party in the Friends’ litigation, either.
Therefore, Chapel Guardian does not recognize this demand and agreement on the part of Friends of Chapel and Chapel of Awareness. These parties have no right to demand the silencing of free speech, especially when the blog in question is not a litigant in this case. This demand is not binding on Chapel Guardian.
Chapel Guardian will consider legal avenues if there is a continued attempt to “mediate” away its right to free speech by anyone involved in this dispute, especially when Chapel Guardian is not a plaintiff or a defendant.
The Chapel Guardian was not the first to attack the characters of Chapel congregants, ministers, and board members. But it was the first to defend them, and it will continue doing so.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment