City of Houston subpoenas pastors’ sermons to see if they are critical of lesbian mayor

City of Houston subpoenas pastors’ sermons to see if they are critical of lesbian mayor October 15, 2014

No. Really.

Dear Synod Fathers:  Do be aware that the other side of the question you are deliberating with regard to homosexuality is that not a few members of the gay movement are intolerant draconian persecuting tyrants bent on crushing religious liberty, free speech and free thought.

The pastors of Houston should firmly, politely, and unequivocally tell the mayor to blow it out her ear.

"To be fair -- an enduring romance and a World War probably give a good ..."

Trailer for a new biopic about ..."
"So you inherently object to Shakespeare's ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA or JULIUS CAESAR or RICHARD III ..."

Trailer for a new biopic about ..."
"I've not heard the radio drama, but the BBC, in general, seems to have a ..."

Trailer for a new biopic about ..."
""It will be boon to humanity when the boomers dies off."In case you haven't noticed ..."

Dear Prolife Suckers

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Joseph

    Is that even legal?

    • Dbom

      According to Tim Horne, everything(!) is legal and justified when GLBTQETC Persons are involved…

  • Tim Horne

    That’s a very disingenuous take on the situation. The subpoenas revolve around the recently enacted statutes requiring business to make their public restrooms available based on gender identity rather than biological gender. The key issue here is possible violation of the law or encouragement of violation. It’s not a free speech issue.

    • Paxton Reis

      “Houston’s embattled equal rights ordinance took another legal turn this week when it surfaced that city attorneys, in an unusual step, subpoenaed sermons given by local pastors who oppose the law”

      “Subpoenaed sermons?”.

      If that is the case, then fundamentally we have a free speech issue regardless of how businesses, etc. respond to the new statute.

    • jordanhenderson

      Excuse me? Encouraging people to break a law is protected free speech unless there is immediate threat of violence. Look it up, it’s been adjudicated many times.

      Without it, there’d be no non-violent resistance movement.

      I guess you long for the days when men got lengthy Federal Prison sentences for speaking out against the Draft. That was less than 100 years ago in the US.

      • Tim Horne

        Are you really trying to draw a correlation between conscientious objection to military service and homo or transphobia or is this just a poor choice of example? It seems from what I’ve read that the pastors in question object to their words being made public. It is a subpoena not a criminal charge. If criminal charges are filed then that will open up another debate but for now it seems we have a group of people willing to speak out against a law but not on record.

        • jordanhenderson

          I’m trying to say that free speech rights are protected speech. People have every right to speak privately without fear of intimidation from the Government.

          I reject your characterization of this a psychological disease (phobia), also. That’s just one step removed from having people who disagree with you committed on the basis of a pathology.

          • Tim Horne

            Feel free to reject it all you like. Just because you don’t believe something doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

            • Matthew

              I agree with you completely.
              Jesus Christ is Lord.
              A homosexual orientation is disordered.
              Homosexual sexual acts are always wrong.
              Just because you don’t believe it does not meant that all of the above statements are not true.

        • jaybird1951

          Their words are already public. They spoke them in sermons in church before hundreds or thousands. What they object to is a mayor trying to force them to deliver the texts to her.

        • Hezekiah Garrett

          Ah, now we’re getting to the crux of the issue! speech in support of your values should be free. Speech in defense of those those things you find abhorrent should be squashed.

          free speech for me, but not for thee!

          what a petty little moralist you’ve turned out to be!

    • Dbom

      Tim Horne is an Apologist for .Gov crushing dissent.

      At least be honest about it.

      I don’t trust you. At all.

      • Tim Horne

        I’m a stranger on the internet, you’d be a fool to trust me. I’m also not an apologist for any government (but that’s exactly what such a person would say in a situation like this). Of course if protecting civil rights is something to apologize for then perhaps I am, because that’s what it looks like the government is attempting to do here.

        • Dbom

          Ok, wow. I was really worried.

          But I see now you are against the government overreach and the obvious violation of the 1st Amendment and civil liberties of these pastors by this Lesbian Mayor and her henchman.


        • chezami

          Infringing the first amendment is protecting civil rights?

          • Joseph

            Cha-ching! The man who is *no stranger to the internet* has just proved it by avoid to respond to this rebuttal. The troll *hit and run*.

    • Peggy

      Then I guess the StL cops should have arrested preachers at local black churches where outside agitators trained people for the demonstrations over this past weekend?

    • Athelstane

      The key issue here is possible violation of the law or encouragement of violation.

      The key issue is that there’s no showing – and not likely to ever be any showing – that these sermons will lead to the discovery of any evidence of violating this city ordinance, or even encouragement of the same.

    • Ye Olde Statistician

      Likewhen MLK violated the law and encouraged its violation?

  • quasimodo

    “statutes requiring business to make their public restrooms available based on gender identity rather than biological gender”

    Utter total and complete politically correct nonsense. It is the death of common sense.
    It is the beginning of required “good think.” Complete with useful idiots to enforce and defend it for the “common good.”

    Without common sense they have no clue what the common good looks like any more.

  • Athelstane

    The ADF has filed a motion to quash on behalf of some of the churches:

    The First Amendment is actually only a very secondary ground for the motion. The real problem is that the demand for these sermons is overly broad, harassing, and highly unlikely to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. It’s an attempt by the city to intimidate, plain and simple.

  • SteveP

    It would be immature of me to suggest the pastors in Houston mail a print copy of Jonathan Edward’s “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” I’ll take the high road and not voice that thought.

  • Dave G.

    This reminds me of a little protest going on in our neck of the woods. A man about an hour south of us is being asked to take down three crosses on his property because his property is across the street from a public school. The Freedom From Religion gang is pressing the issue. It’s noteworthy that the crosses are on his private property, but they are still attempting to force them down. Note how those little lines in the sand are being redrawn.

  • GregB

    We get what we vote for. I’ll never understand why Christians vote into office people who don’t share their values. Especially in today’s world where Christians and their beliefs are under attack by the government. Haven’t these preachers in Houston been following the Democrat attack on the Church with regards forcing church health care to fund abortion etc.. The devil’s in the life in room and people are pretending he’s someone else.

  • Jonk


  • A lot of people who are discussing this elsewhere seem confused over what pastors can and can’t do. A pastor can’t endorse a candidate during an election. That’s pretty much it. A pastor can tell his congregation that he thinks an ordinance that would force women to share public restrooms and changing facilities with men is insane and dangerous, especially since there’s nothing at all in these ordinances stopping a man from donning a dress and pretending to be transgender in order to use a women’s room to scope out potential rape victims. In fact, a pastor might share the opinion that a city which passes an ordinance like this and in which a woman–or, even worse, a young girl–IS in fact victimized by such a person (whether actually transgender or merely feigning transgenderism) is going to be well served if the victim sues the city for millions of dollars for having created such an unsafe environment for her. None of that is forbidden by the rules governing tax exemption, unless one’s tax exempt status can be revoked for preaching on the virtues of common sense and the importance of protecting women’s safety.

  • brian_in_brooklyn

    Sounds like much ado about very little:

    This is not an attack on all Houston area pastors, and no
    impression should be allowed in that regard. It is a routine court procedure,
    not even final yet, against a handful a pastors—and only because they are
    implicated in a court case filed.