People who claim I am harassing them when I am not harassing them make me a very sad panda.
*
*
*
*
*
Here is the newest e-mail:
My issue is not about your freedom of speech. You can write whatever you wish to write about; that of course is your right as an American. The issue I have is you throwing it in our face and repeatedly attempting to make contact. Write whatever you wish. Posting a link directly onto his Facebook, e-mailing him,friend requesting him, calling into his radio show after you've been repeatedly ignored is harassment. We wish to have nothing to do with you. Write whatever you'd like to write, but please do not attempt to make contact . We ignored you initially hoping you would get the hint. There will be no debate. Your free to write whatever it is you would like to express; but please do not attempt to make contact. He nor I wish to engage in further conversation with you.
The claim of "throwing it in our face and repeatedly making contact" is baseless. She claims that "Posting a link directly onto his Facebook, e-mailing him, friend requesting him, calling into his radio show after you've been repeatedly ignored is harassment."
Here are the facts: Dr. Dan has a weekly radio show and asks people to send him e-mails and call in with any questions. I called the show one time and sent him an e-mail with my blog post critiquing him (at the time, there was only one).
I never posted a link directly on his Facebook - and I could not because the friend request never went through due to Dr. Dan blocking me. The friend request on Facebook was days ago and months after I was on the radio show one time and sent an e-mail one time. One can hardly claim harassment for a friend request, calling in a public radio show one time, and sending one e-mail.
Her timeline is way off; she claims that I called the radio show after being ignored and this is simply not true. Regardless, Dr. Dan has a radio show that invites callers on the air. I could understand if she claimed harassment after I called his office multiple times, contacted him on the internet, found his cell and/or phone number and kept calling, but this is simply not the case.
Even if I did repeatedly call in the radio show and send many e-mails, how does this constitute harassment when Dr. Dan is inviting people to call in his radio show and send e-mails. Dr. Dan never responded to my initial blog post with a "I don't want to talk to you message" and I was never asked to stop contacting him [although I only ever called his radio show once].
Further, how does ignoring someone somehow levy the message of "I don't want to be contacted and if you continue to contact, it is harassment?" I receive all sorts of e-mail and comments from people I might not want to talk to or respond to. They are free to continue sending e-mail and making comments and this is not harassment nor does my failure to respond constitute a message of "leave me alone and stop harassing me."
It is also quite strange that the threat went from potentially pursuing a charge of slander to harassment when the first e-mail never said anything about harassment. It's also interesting that she would respond to the e-mail I sent her with the blog post and continue to have a conversation with me if she didn't want to be contacted. I could understand, perhaps, if the first e-mail said something like, "I don't want you to contact me or Dr. Dan anymore" and that was it, but this simply is not the case.
Dr. Dan's fiancee' has no grounds whatsoever for charging me with harassment, slander, or libel...and since she's now apparently fine with me writing what I wish, I'm going to continue doing so. I would have liked for Dr. Dan (or his fiancee') to respond to the content my posts and show me why I am mistaken, but that has not happened. I even welcomed Dr. Dan to respond to the content of my posts.
Fascinating.
ReplyDeleteI believe you are right that your attempts to engage Dr Dan in a discussion could hardly be called harassment. I think Dr Dan's fiancee' should check out what constitutes harassment before threatening to sue anyone.
Where does this woman get her legal advice?! She's clearly a moron of the highest order.
ReplyDeleteI would pay her no mind.
They know that they are selling bullshit. They don't want the holistic cash cow to go away.
ReplyDeleteRead about this from a Reddit post - in my opinion this email just goes to show that they know that what they're doing is wrong...as well as the fact that they have no idea how the constitution works. Oh, people are allowed to dislike someone and write opinions about things that they've said/done? Harassment!
ReplyDeleteIt's sad that this man might claim to be a good Christian; I don't think his "god" would approve of him scamming his friends and neighbors with this kind of "medicine".
Please allow me to exercise my first amendment right to express my opinion: QUACK, quack, quack, quack, quack . . .
ReplyDeleteMaybe she was embarrased by the first email (which was dissected quite thoroughly :D), and wanted to save face by insisting that you've done something very, very baaaaaaaaaad.
ReplyDeleteSounds like they have had more people questioning his 'theories' and are trying to protect their bottom line, financial health.
ReplyDeleteShe doesn't sound too bright, and does not know what facts are.
Are you the same Justin Vacula who was arrested a couple of years ago for being drunk and urinating on a Nativity scene?
ReplyDeleteI never urinated on a nativity scene. A student, though, from King's College named Nathan Strawn did. I filed a complaint against a nativity scene and had it taken down because it was unconstitutional.
ReplyDelete