Lesbian Mayor Trying to CENSOR Pastors' Sermons

[BULLDOG]

This is a pretty alarming overreach by the government. I imagine a motion to squash these subpoenas is the making and will be successful.

You really should find out what is really happening instead of just believing the cap you hear on fox. They exaggerate and lie as standard practice. Churches are limited in the political activities they can participate in, and the subpoenas are a result that the churches started. If you sue someone, they have the right to subpoena information relevant to join the proceedings.
snopes.com City of Houston Subpoenas Pastors Sermons

But BLACK CHURCH'S with sermons supporting Obola was OK both in 2008 and 2012?

There isn't a single case of churches being prosecuted for political advocacy for or against social issues of any kind in the entire history of the United States. Churches have been at the forefront of political organizing throughout American history, from the abolition movement to civil rights, or any other social issue, nor has the IRS ever filed any case questioning the tax exempt status of a church for any such activities, either. That's because they aren't violating any laws by doing so.

The churches are members of a suit that was brought against the city. If you are sued, as the city is, you are allowed to subpoena information from the plaintive to support your defense. Are you saying churches shouldn't be subject to the same laws as the rest of us?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Cool deflections. None of that changes the fact that Starnes' article is inaccurate. "The Bathroom Bill" that doesn't doesn't even address bathrooms in the bill. Starnes is playing fast and loose with the facts. This isn't about left vs.right, or D vs. R. It's about honesty and integrity.

Has the mayor used the authority of her office to harass or censor churches and pastors?


If the answer is "yes," she needs some federal prison time. Period.

We hashed this out in the 60's - it's a no-no.

 

[asaratis]

This is a pretty alarming overreach by the government. I imagine a motion to squash these subpoenas is the making and will be successful.

You really should find out what is really happening instead of just believing the cap you hear on fox. They exaggerate and lie as standard practice. Churches are limited in the political activities they can participate in, and the subpoenas are a result that the churches started. If you sue someone, they have the right to subpoena information relevant to join the proceedings.
snopes.com City of Houston Subpoenas Pastors Sermons

But BLACK CHURCH'S with sermons supporting Obola was OK both in 2008 and 2012?

There isn't a single case of churches being prosecuted for political advocacy for or against social issues of any kind in the entire history of the United States. Churches have been at the forefront of political organizing throughout American history, from the abolition movement to civil rights, or any other social issue, nor has the IRS ever filed any case questioning the tax exempt status of a church for any such activities, either. That's because they aren't violating any laws by doing so.

The churches are members of a suit that was brought against the city. If you are sued, as the city is, you are allowed to subpoena information from the plaintive to support your defense. Are you saying churches shouldn't be subject to the same laws as the rest of us?

You do not comprehend what you read, do you? Here is a quote from the OP link.

....
After opponents of the bathroom bill filed a lawsuit the city’s attorneys responded by issuing the subpoenas against the pastors.

The pastors were not part of the lawsuit. However, they were part of a coalition of some 400 Houston-area churches that opposed the ordinance. The churches represent a number of faith groups – from Southern Baptist to non-denominational.
....

Read the bold text. Maybe read it two or three times. Maybe it will sink in. This is not the first time this has been brought to your attention.

 

[Picaro]

....
Read the bold text. Maybe read it two or three times. Maybe it will sink in. This is not the first time this has been brought to your attention.

Yes, but doing that means they have squat as rebuttals, so don't expect any of them to admit they're full of BS. They think merely rewording the same argument in different ways over and over and over is going to require a different answer each time. It's a form of insanity.