Did Craig slander Loftus?

John Loftus is in a tizzy. But, then, when is he not in a tizzy?

He accuses William Lane Craig of defaming his character:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2012/11/william-lane-craig-is-shamelessly.html

i) Loftus has a peculiar way of defending himself. He posts excerpts from his book, in which he describes his adulterous affair with a stripper. Seems like a counterproductive method of vindicating his character.

ii) He’s mad a Craig for suggesting that his apostasy was influenced in part by a pornography addiction. There are some oddities about his reaction.

As an atheist, he presumably doesn’t think pornography is immoral. So why is he so offended by the allegation?

iii) Moreover, Loftus admits to being a moral relativist. But in that case, why does he think Craig wronged him? Even if Craig’s allegation is false, that wouldn’t make it morally wrong unless you subscribe to objective moral norms–which Loftus denies.

He threatens Craig with a defamation suit. I’m no lawyer, but I wonder if that isn’t an empty threat:

iv) Isn’t the bar for proving defamation pretty high? Don’t you have to prove that your accuser knowingly spread false information about you? What is more, that your accuser did so with the intention of damaging your reputation?

v) Wouldn’t the discovery process involve depositing witnesses like Linda (the ex-stripper), and Kathy (the ex-wife). Can Loftus count on them to vouch for his sterling character? Or would their testimony be damaging?

And who knows what other tawdry stuff might come out in the discovery process.

vi) Wasn’t Craig just answering a question? Merely offering his opinion? He didn’t initiate the allegation, did he? Is that really actionable?

vii) Loftus has been riding on Craig’s coattails for years. Baiting him into a debate for years. So it wouldn’t be surprising if Craig has been asking around. Craig is a well-connected guy. Maybe Craig has independent information about Loftus.

viii) Of course, it’s possible that Craig is passing along a rumor that he sincerely thinks is true, even if it turns out to be mistaken. Is that actionable?

ix) Now, if the rumor is inaccurate, then Craig should retract it. But who knows what skeletons Loftus may have in his closet. Who knows what Craig’s sources are.

Loftus professes his innocence. Expects readers to take his uncorroborated word for it.

But that’s hardly how he treats NT accounts of Jesus.

x) Loftus thinks that Craig’s ad hominem attack is irrelevant to his arguments. But that misses the point. If the question at issue is why Loftus became an apostate, then motives are germane to answering that biographical question.