Zguy28 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Houston Seeks Review of Pastors’ Sermons After Lawsuit Filed Over ‘Bathroom Bill’ Initiative http://christiannews.net/2014/10/14/houston-seeks-review-of-pastors-sermons-after-lawsuit-filed-over-bathroom-bill-initiative/ HOUSTON – Officials in Houston, Texas are seeking to obtain copies of sermons delivered by several area pastors after a lawsuit was filed by unrelated Christian leaders whose initiative surrounding a recently passed “bathroom bill” was rejected by city officials.So much for religious freedom. An op-ed source says the subpoenas stated they had to turn over "any sermons dealing with homosexuality, gender identity or Annise Parker".http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/10/14/city-houston-demands-pastors-turn-over-sermons/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 If only we had an ES member who lived in Houston who was familiar with law, and could tie this entire issue back to the third season of Seinfeld. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 If I were a pastor there that was subpoenaed I'd write a very brief letter of response. Dear Mayor; Too bad. Sincerely, Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 If I were a pastor there that was subpoenaed I'd write a very brief letter of response. Dear Mayor; Too bad. Sincerely, Me I'd send a church bulletin with service times highlighted ......and a personal invitation to hear them live. seems rather excessive and broad in scope,pretty sure a judge will agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Finally actually got to read the language in the subpoena. I don't think it's as terrible as everyone is making it out to be, but I can see why it would feed into right-wing paranoia so badly. I don't fully have my brain around the lawsuits here yet. I think their are multiple ones, but I'm not sure. And I don't know what case this subpoena is involved in. The main argument is that Christian opponents are asking for the ERO to be suspended pending a review of the signatures on a petition calling for either a re-vote or for the issue to be put to a ballot. Parker has already suspended the law until the case (or cases) are resolved. I'm guessing they are trying to see if the sermons were used for political ends in gathering signatures, but I can't be sure. The reporting on this is kind of a mess (like most legal reporting, I find). It rather reminds me of "The Limo" but I don't have time to discuss that now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I'm hoping there is more to this story because that is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted October 15, 2014 Author Share Posted October 15, 2014 I agree with LKB that the net is a mess with a bunch of right wing op-eds on it. Here is a more intelligent one I follow though: http://www.russellmoore.com/2014/10/14/houston-we-have-a-constitution/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfaninny Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I find this wrong, unconstitutional, and an obvious attempt to bully or silence the pastors involved. But I also find it very amusing that a group which always points out there is no true separation of church and state defined in the constitution, is saying that there is a separation of the two in this case. So which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 We do not have a separation of church and state. Our state currently supports the establishment of religion by giving tax breaks to churches. Churches should pay taxes or file tax returns just like every other non-profit. I understand that churches get special treatment from the government with a deal that they do not engage in particular kind of speech. Is that not correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I find this wrong, unconstitutional, and an obvious attempt to bully or silence the pastors involved. But I also find it very amusing that a group which always points out there is no true separation of church and state defined in the constitution, is saying that there is a separation of the two in this case. So which is it? both depends on what ya are addressing, not really hard to figure out if you begin with freedoms separating govt from religion does not separate religion from govt....it enhances it. Alexey....Atheists should pay a extra sin tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Alexey....Atheists should pay a extra sin tax. There's an important part of the world where that is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfaninny Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 We do not have a separation of church and state. Technically we do not, and religious groups are keen to point that out frequently. It is ironic that in this case the religious groups are saying that there is a separation of church and state. From Fox news article: “The state is breaching the wall of separation between church and state,” Perkins told me. From Russell Moore article: The separation of church and state means that we will render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and we will. But the preaching of the church of God does not belong to Caesar, and we will not hand it over to him. Not now. Not ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I really don't know what the separation of church and state is supposed to mean anymore. It's evolved so absurdly in the mind of secular Americans that it seems to mean religion should only be seen or heard inside a church. A church that is monitored to make sure it's not making any hateful statements, which should be outlawed, and filing detailed taxes to make sure they are using their money the way the government approves of. I'm sure that's how it was meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 It's certainly an interesting question. I think that everybody (except the Republican Party) would agree that the government shouldn't be endorsing a religion. But should a religion be endorsing politics? (And, I suppose, the next question is: If a church shouldn't engage in politics, and they do, anyway, what is the correct thing to do about it?) ---------- Now me, one possible solution I see to this, and what I think of as related problems (like whether the Tea Party should be tax exempt), would be to decide that political groups should be exempt, too. After all, if "freedom of religion" somehow means "freedom from taxation", then shouldn't "freedom of speech" carry the same, implied, exemption? Make that concession to consistency, and now, if Pastor Bob's Sunday Sermon consists of telling people how to vote on ballot initiative 11, who to vote for, for county judge, and don't forget to register to vote and apply for your absentee ballot on your way out, then he's simply a tax-exempt entity who arguably may or may not be engaging in a different activity, which is still tax exempt, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I'm glad Fox News brought us the reasoned and impartial analysis of Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council as a key part of their fair and balanced news story, so that we all could judge for ourselves what this dispute was about and how we should react to it. (Yeah, this looks like government overreach, but I never tire of pointing out hilarious bias in Fox reporting) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I honestly don't know why the city wants these sermons. It's entirely possible that some over-zealous law clerk stuck the word 'sermons' in there and no one double-checked his work. (I used to write interrogatories when I was a law clerk, and I don't think anyone ever looked at what I wrote). For the record, churches are not supposed to engage in political activities or they risk losing their tax-exempt status. No one ever actually investigates this so that's partially why this is so touchy. If you want to experience irony, though, google "Black churches" "obama" and "503c." You will find article after article of conservatives demanding that the IRS go after churches. By the way, I would love to explain this case further, but every search leads to a thousand right-wing sites with apocalyptic stories. I don't even know the name of the case. WND is the best of the best: "Houston demands oversight of sermons" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 gonna dump it on some law clerk error eh? let me know how that works out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 both Atheists should pay a extra sin tax. That would be part of the New Word Order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I have a close friend of mine who was working for the telephone company in Memphis and had a "calling" to become a preacher. When I went to visit him about 5 years ago, he invited me to listen to his sermon. His church let him be a guest speaker while he was studying theology. The whole sermon was about homosexuality and sin. I was really uncomfortable and I didn't like it at all. A couple of years ago, he completed his degree and now is a Senior Pastor at a church in Bridge City, TX, east of Beaumont and Houston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 gonna dump it on some law clerk error eh? let me know how that works out I don't know if it is an error. I don't know why they are asking. There may be a perfectly logical explanation. The City has been quiet on this so far from what I can tell. I'm just offering some insight into how this stuff actually happens. When we need insight on the best way to lease a 77 Gremlin to a temp refinery worker, we'll come to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 don't know much do ya? http://www.chron.com/news/politics/houston/article/City-subpoenas-pastors-sermons-in-equal-rights-5822403.php Feldman is gonna get a spanking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 That's the article I based my first response on. They did it. I don't know why yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Alexey....Atheists should pay a extra sin tax. i don;t like where THIS is going at all... (I can envision a world where we pay sin taxes based on our browser history, and i'd be hosed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 i don;t like where THIS is going at all... (I can envision a world where we pay sin taxes based on our browser history, and i'd be hosed) They need a cap, my liquor and tobacco ones could fund a small country. only fair the atheist kick in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted October 15, 2014 Author Share Posted October 15, 2014 It was also interesting that according to reports, these particular pastors were not part of the whole petitioning movement and such. I wonder if Joel Osteen got a subpoena? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.