Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Sermon Supoenaes


ThePilgrim

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

With their reactions, backpedaling, changing of terms, etc., I don't think it's lazy secretaries or incompetence...I believe it is a direct frontal assault on religious liberty - intentionally so - by someone who hates Christianity.  

 

The sermons (speeches) that are being subpeonad are those that mention the mayor, homosexuality or gender identity.  It's an egregious overreach, no matter their explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

OBviously we can read any motives we like into these subpoenas being issued, but strictly on the facts alone I don't see what this has got to do with them being pastors or separation of church and state or anything like that.

 

A petition was lodged with the council and there is a dispute about whether it contains enough valid signatures. The group that lodged the petition is OBviously saying that there are and the council is saying that there aren't. So a group of people are now suing the council to force them to acknowledge that there are enough signatures and respond to the petition appropriately. In response to the lawsuit, the council's lawyers have issued subpoenas demanding information from those who collected the signatures, and the pastors in question are among those who collected the signatures.

 

At the end of the day, if it's necessary to collect that information for the sake of defending the lawsuit then those doing the defending are justified asking for it and its irrelevant whether the people who have the information are pastors or not. If the case is about whether a petition was done fairly and it's necessary to scrutinise how those who collected the signatures went about doing it, a person shouldn't be immune from such scrutiny just because they happen to be a pastor, even if they've decided to do the organising/collecting in 'work' time.

 

So if the subpoenas are justified for the sake of defending the suit, then those subject to them ought to OBlige even if they are pastors, and if the subpoenas aren't justified then those subject to them ought not to OBlige even if they aren't pastors.

 

So are they justified? I.M.O no. There are presumably very clear rules about what is a valid signing of a petition and what isn't, and the existence of the paperwork isn't disputed, so surely that's all anyone needs in order to establish whether enough valid signatures were collected--no need for anything else. Moreover the scope of the subpoenas seems to go way beyond collecting information about the petition, which of course is the bit the press has majored on. So I've got some sympathy with those who say this is about trying to intimidate pastors, 'cos it does look suspicious. But there are alternative explanations, e.g. lazy legal secretaries, beaurocratic incompetency etc.

Though there is an argument going on about the subject you are addressing, that is not what the subpoenas are about.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Interesting article by TX State Rep Matt Krause

 

 

Consider this a thank you note to Houston Mayor Annise Parker. After all, it’s rare that someone does something so egregious, so unacceptable and so unconstitutional that virtually everyone comes together to condemn it.

 

Texas has seen two such unifying instances within the past week. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis recently released a campaign ad so crass that it was universally denounced on both the right and the left.

 

Not to be outdone, the city of Houston recently sent subpoenas to five pastors, the Houston Chronicle reported this week. The subpoenas asked them to turn over any documentation (including sermons, emails and text messages — 17 forms of communication in all) related to Parker, homosexuality, gender identity or Houston’s equal rights ordinance. Also known as HERO, the overly broad and far-reaching anti-discrimination ordinance was passed in May but is now caught up in a legal dispute over a petition to repeal it. 

 

This gross overreach stirred outrage among those you might expect: the conservative constitutional litigation firm Alliance Defending Freedom, constitutional scholar and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, and the evangelical Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission. But other groups and advocates who might usually be sympathetic to Parker — including Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Interfaith Alliance — all voiced their disapproval of the city’s move. 

 

Houston officials now appear to be backtracking. Parker and City Attorney David Feldman conceded on Wednesday that the subpoenas were too broad, and they indicated they would attempt to narrow the focus of the legal documents. But absent a court order, I don’t have much faith that the mayor and the city will follow through. Parker herself tweeted on Tuesday, “If the 5 pastors used pulpits for politics, their sermons are fair game. Were instructions given on filling out anti-HERO petition?”

 

It took fewer than 140 characters for Parker to show her lack of understanding of the law. She appears to think that pastors and churches cannot be involved politically, and that if pastors or churches dare to discuss political topics from the pulpit, they’re violating the law and subject to prosecution. That’s a misreading of the law. According to Section 501©(3) of the IRS code, churches and pastors may not endorse or oppose political candidates from the pulpit, but they’re allowed to discuss matters like legislation, initiatives and constitutional amendments as long as the advocacy doesn’t constitute a “substantial part” of their activities — which cannot be alleged here. So even if the pastors had told their congregants to oppose Parker’s proposal, there’s nothing legally wrong with that. The only thing the pastors are guilty of is exercising their First Amendment rights to free speech.

It’s a shame to see an elected official use the bully pulpit to literally bully her constituents. The subpoenas were an attempt to intimidate and silence those who disagree with the mayor’s views. (We should remember that these churches and others helped spur over 50,000 citizens to sign a petition to overturn the “HERO” initiative.)

 

It has been gratifying to see universal opposition to this misguided idea. I also appreciate the boldness and courage of the pastors who are not backing down in face of these bully tactics. Hopefully, Parker will not just narrow the focus of the subpoenas but do away with them altogether.

 

Religious liberty and the freedom of conscience are bedrocks of American civilization. The five pastors are merely carrying on a long American tradition of religious leaders informing their congregants of relevant current events. It’s only because of their viewpoints that they’re being targeted.  

 

In today’s polarized society, it’s often hard to find areas of consensus. But thanks to Parker’s outlandish actions, we’ve found something that we can all agree on. And for that, she deserves our appreciation. 

(On a side note, the fact that the IRS "allows" this kind of speech is not a good thing - what it "allows" it can disallow - ...and just one of the multitude of reasons the IRS should be ended)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Yes, we should pray for them.  But you are wrong that politics shouldn't be our business. God gave us the rights that are guaranteed - and that are being trampled.  To sit back and do nothing (as in the case of this bathroom bill...which would allow pedophiles who want to claim to be transgendered access to children to whom they are sexually attracted) is to fail in our stewardship of this country God gave us. I realize, Invicta, you are not in America and your politics is a bit different. But once upon a time even Englishmen would have stepped up and protested this.

 

God does protect. But bad things happen to good people. And when good people sit back and allow heinous rulings and bills to stand, God is not honored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

No, it sure isn't.  But it's not always all that God wants of us. If it were, then we'd all just sit in our houses, right? There are any number of things to which we need to put our feet to as well as pray.  (please note that I did agree that we should pray, and never ever said praying was doing nothing)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Though there is an argument going on about the subject you are addressing, that is not what the subpoenas are about.  

 

Sure, like I said, you could read any motive into the actions that you like.

 

With their reactions, backpedaling, changing of terms, etc., I don't think it's lazy secretaries or incompetence...I believe it is a direct frontal assault on religious liberty - intentionally so - by someone who hates Christianity.  

 

The sermons (speeches) that are being subpeonad are those that mention the mayor, homosexuality or gender identity.  It's an egregious overreach, no matter their explanation.

 

There are dozens of demands in the document and the majority of them refer to communications related to the petition. It's not a case of a subpeona that has just been issued out of the blue because a major has caught wind of preaching she doesn't like.

 

Like I say, I don't see why anything is being asked for at all--it should be enough for both parties to get together with someone independent and examine all 50,000 pieces of paper one-by-one and count how many are valid according to the black-and-white rules about what a valid signature is. Disappointingly, neither side appears to be interested in genuinely verifiying how many valid signatures there are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

There are dozens of demands in the document and the majority of them refer to communications related to the petition. It's not a case of a subpeona that has just been issued out of the blue because a major has caught wind of preaching she doesn't like.

 

Like I say, I don't see why anything is being asked for at all--it should be enough for both parties to get together with someone independent and examine all 50,000 pieces of paper one-by-one and count how many are valid according to the black-and-white rules about what a valid signature is. Disappointingly, neither side appears to be interested in genuinely verifiying how many valid signatures there are.

Noone has the authority to lawfully examine the sermons, emails, texts, etc., of these pastors. It doesn't matter if every sermon they preached tells people to sign the petitions and vote the mayor out.  There is no constitutional (federal or state) authority, nor even law in Houston that allows it. Examining the petitions for veracity is one thing - and should be done. Examining the pastors' communications another - and demanding them is the overreach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

And now she's claiming she didn't know about the subpeonas...sigh. (article is from christiannews.net)

 


 

HOUSTON – Houston’s openly lesbian mayor says that she did not know that attorneys for the city had requested copies of sermons from several area pastors in light of a lawsuit that was filed surrounding the city’s rejection of an initiative pertaining to a recently-passed “bathroom bill.”

As previously reported, Mayor Annise Parker had promoted an “Equal Rights Ordinance” earlier this year designed to quell any discrimination in America’s fourth largest city—including any discrimination on the basis of “gender identity.” Most opponents were especially concerned about the “Public Accommodations” section of the ordinance, which would allow men to use women’s restrooms, and vice versa, if they identity with the opposite sex.

“It shall be unlawful for any place of public accommodation or any employee or agent thereof to intentionally deny any person entry to any restroom, shower room, or similar facility if that facility is consistent with and appropriate to that person’s expression of gender identity,” the ordinance states.

The only stipulation, according to the ordinance, is that people who use the opposite sex’s facilities must dress, behave, and clothe themselves in a way that is “consistent with the gender designation of the facility the person attempt to access.”


 

In June, Houston City Council passed the bill, resulting in the creation of an initiative signed by area residents who requested that either City Council repeal the ordinance or that it place the matter on the ballot for voters to decide. According to WND, over 55,000 signatures were submitted, and City Secretary Anna Russell confirmed in writing that 17,846 were acceptable. The minimum required by the city for a referendum is 17,269. Although Russell acknowledged that the submission was over nearly 600 votes about the minimum, Mayor Parker and the city attorney rejected it.

In August, those behind the initiative, which included area pastors, filed a lawsuit against the city over its rejection of the signatures and the referendum in general. In response, pro bono attorneys for the City of Houston subpoenaed several area pastors not a party to the lawsuit, and issued discovery requests seeking “all speeches, presentations, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.”

National uproar was quickly generated about the matter, and now Parker is speaking out, saying that she did not know the attorneys issued the discovery requests and that she agrees the scope of the request was too broad.

 

“Mayor Parker agrees with those who are concerned about the city legal department’s subpoenas for pastor’s sermons,” City spokesperson Janice Evans told reporters this week. “The subpoenas were issued by pro bono attorneys helping the city prepare for the trial regarding the petition to repeal the new Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO) in January. Neither the mayor nor City Attorney David Feldman were aware the subpoenas had been issued until yesterday.”

“Both agree the original documents were overly broad,” she continued. “The city will move to narrow the scope during an upcoming court hearing. Feldman says the focus should be only on communications related to the HERO petition process.”

Initial reports about the matter stated that the purpose of OBtaining copies of the sermons were to see if the subpoenaed pastors had ever spoken against the city or the ordinance, but officials claim that misinformation has been generated about the issue. They explain that attorneys had requested the sermons to see if pastors had provided instructions on properly completing the petitions, as the focus of the lawsuit is on the rejection of the initiative and many of the signatures that had been collected.

“If the five pastors used pulpits for politics, their sermons are fair game,” Parker Tweeted on Wednesday before appearing at a press release about the matter. “Were instructions given on filling out anti-HERO petition?”

City Attorney David Feldman made similar statements to the Houston Chronicle.

“Feldman said the pastors made their sermons relevant to the case by using the pulpit to do political organizing,” the publication reported. “That included encouraging congregation members to sign petitions and help gather signatures for equal rights ordinance foes, who largely take issue with the rights extended to gay and transgender residents.”

But the legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) says that it is not just the requests for the sermons that concern them—it is the subpoenas themselves since they involve those who are not even a party to the lawsuit.

“The way to fix this is to withdraw the subpoenas entirely,” said ADF Litigation Counsel Christiana Holcomb. “Otherwise, the city’s and the mayor’s overtures are simply more window-dressing intended to shield them from public scrutiny.” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

“If the 5 pastors used pulpits for politics, their sermons are fair game. Were instructions given on filling out anti-HERO petition?”

 

It took fewer than 140 characters for Parker to show her lack of understanding of the law. She appears to think that pastors and churches cannot be involved politically, and that if pastors or churches dare to discuss political topics from the pulpit, they’re violating the law and subject to prosecution.

 

This is the same as the point you made earlier, Happy Christian, and I want to ask, where is this woman saying this in that tweet? I read that quote and interpreted it as meaning that if the pastors' sermons are relevant to a court case then they are not immune to being investigated for that purpose.

 

But this journalist is basically saying that the mayor is stating publicly that she's issued the subpoenas because she is trying to prosecute the pastors for bringing politics into their sermons. But that's a ridiculous interpretation because the stated reason for the subpoenas is a lawsuit over the petition. Whatever secret motives we might--perhaps rightly--ascribe to the council's actions, those aren't going to be stated ones are they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Noone has the authority to lawfully examine the sermons, emails, texts, etc., of these pastors. It doesn't matter if every sermon they preached tells people to sign the petitions and vote the mayor out.  There is no constitutional (federal or state) authority, nor even law in Houston that allows it. Examining the petitions for veracity is one thing - and should be done. Examining the pastors' communications another - and demanding them is the overreach. 

 

But what's the relevance of them being sermons? Are you saying that nOBody has the authority to examine others' communications and private copies of transcripts of their speeches etc, or are you saying that pastors have a special exemption?

 

In any case, I'm surprised to hear that, since, although I don't know much about the law, I thought that a subpoena was the way that evidence was brought before a court. How can anyone call witnesses or present evidence if no-one has any powers to collect evidence or compell witnesses to turn up? Like I said, I'm not a lawyer but if someone sued me and all the relevant documents that would establish the facts were at their mates' house, I imagine I'd ask for them, and if the judge or the individuals refused then I guess I'd turn to the judge and ask well how I can get a fair trial then? If I insisted on documents that were irrelevent then that's different, of course, and I'm guessing my opponents could then argue I was being vexatious or whatever it's called. But abusing the process is irrelevent to whether in principle there exists powers for people to be compelled to provide evidence to courts (in UK there is), and whether it's right for those powers to exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

This is the same as the point you made earlier, Happy Christian, and I want to ask, where is this woman saying this in that tweet? I read that quote and interpreted it as meaning that if the pastors' sermons are relevant to a court case then they are not immune to being investigated for that purpose. Where did she mention the court case in her tweet? She was defiantly stating that she has the right to demand their sermons if she deems what they say to be political speech.  You might argue that I don't know her state of mind when she said it, but, really - her wording is pretty OBviously thumbing her nose...

 

But this journalist is basically saying that the mayor is stating publicly that she's issued the subpoenas because she is trying to prosecute the pastors for bringing politics into their sermons. But that's a ridiculous interpretation because the stated reason for the subpoenas is a lawsuit over the petition. Whatever secret motives we might--perhaps rightly--ascribe to the council's actions, those aren't going to be stated ones are they?

The amended subpoenas are now calling the sermons speeches...and are demanding all sermons related to HERO (the bathroom bill) and 17 other categories of information

 

From Todd Starnes:

 

According to the Houston Chronicle, Mayor Parker said on Friday, "We don't need to intrude on matters of faith to have equal rights in Houston, and it was never the intention of the city of Houston to intrude on any matters of faith or to get between a pastor and their parishioners."

Folks, that's a load of grade A fertilizer. 

"We don't want their sermons, we want the instructions on the petition process. That's always what we wanted and, again, they knew that's what we wanted because that's the subject of the lawsuit," she said.

There's just one prOBlem, Madam Mayor, the pastors aren't party to the lawsuit. And if you weren't looking for their sermons, why did you put that in the subpoena. 

The pastors aren't party to the lawsuit. The subpoenas are an overreach. The relevance is that government servants do not have the constitutional (read: legal) authority to demand sermons just because they might mention something political.

 

Subpoenas are a way to bring evidence to a trial.  But here we get to the sticky widget again. The pastors aren't party to the lawsuit. Neither are their sermons. Whether they mention the mayor or not in a sermon, a text, an email, has nothing to do with the bathroom bill.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/10/17/houston-to-pastors-forget-your-sermons-now-want-your-speeches/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Where did she mention the court case in her tweet? She was defiantly stating that she has the right to demand their sermons if she deems what they say to be political speech. You might argue that I don't know her state of mind when she said it, but, really - her wording is pretty OBviously thumbing her nose...


She didn't have to mention the court case in the tweet because it's OBvious from the context. The tweet was a response to criticism of the subpoenas. The subpoenas relate to a court case (no court case, no subpoenas) and the court case is about the the council being sued over their handling of a petition.

 

Why on earth would she state or even imply that she was issuing subpoenas to the pastors as part of a lawsuit against them for talking politics when no such lawsuit exists? The existence and the purpose of the lawsuit the subpoenas relate to is not in doubt, as that article you just pasted seems to think. There definitely is one (else by definition the demands would not be subpoenas). And it's definitely about the petition. Maybe there's alterior motives at play, of course, but those aren't going to be the stated reasons.

 

Subpoenas are a way to bring evidence to a trial.  But here we get to the sticky widget again. The pastors aren't party to the lawsuit. Neither are their sermons. Whether they mention the mayor or not in a sermon, a text, an email, has nothing to do with the bathroom bill.
 
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/10/17/houston-to-pastors-forget-your-sermons-now-want-your-speeches/

 
Whether or not the pastors are party to the lawsuit is totally irrelevant. What's relevant is whether the pastors have testimony or evidence that's material to the court case. If the defence are calling for evidence that's irrelevant, then of course that's a good reason for the evidence not to be provided (and people do vexatious things all the time in court cases). But that's a totally different thing to saying that courts shouldn't be allowed to compel people to provide evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I think we are going in circles, here, Carl. The pastors' sermons are not relevant to the lawsuit.  The lawsuit was brought in opposition to the bathroom bill.  The pastors' sermons have nothing to do with that. Nothing. And what the subpoenas are demanding is overreach.  Plain and simple.  Just a few things the subpoenas asked for (again, relevance is an issue: the pastors were not involved in the lawsuit. There were simply critical of HERO...):

 

Mayor Annise Parker, City Attorney David Feldman, HERO or any HERO drafts, and any copies or drafts for the petition to repeal the ordinance

-- Anything related to "the topics of equal rights, civil rights, homosexuality, or gender identity"
-- Any language related to restroom access or "any discussion about whether or how HERO does or does not impact restroom access"
-- Communication with anyone at the religious right group Alliance Defending Freedom, which has criticized the ordinance
-- AND (here's the kicker) "all speeches, presentation, or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by your or in your possession."

 

Overreach. Attempt to silence dissent.  Against our federal constitution, TX state constitution, federal law...Simply put: the subpoenas were wrong.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...