[Boot Hill]

"I think they were defamed, because everyone has a reasonable right to private conversation."

For me, the charge of defamation falls flat for one simple reason -- the ADL charge of anti-Semitism appears to be true! The remarks attributed to the Quigley's were clearly anti-Semitic. The issue of invasion of privacy is a side issue to deciding whether a defamation occurred or not.

--Boot Hill

[American_Centurion]

Then peer through this lens.

If two married people have a sexual proclivity such as BDSM, they only practice this in their bedroom at their own home. They both enjoy it, and don't want their pastor or fellow church members to find out about it because their congregation would view such activities as perversion.

Somehow, it doesn't matter how because the privacy issue isn't being addressed here, a neighbor finds out about the sexual activities of these two people and talks to the pastor about it. The pastor in turn gives a sermon directed at this and then at the end calls these two people out and asks them to repent in front of the congregation.

In this scenario the pastor has indeed defamed the couple.

The Quiglys were defamed in the same manner because the public revelation has an impact on their public stature.

It's really simple, if you don't agree please explain why.