LGBT News Houston mayor subpoenas sermons regarding homosexuality

If churches paid taxes, I'd see things differently, but so long as they remain these scared entities, who receive public services free of charge, then I think it's only fair that they shouldn't become able to make specific political endorsements.

 

I'm sorry, but I had to stop reading when I saw a blatant anti-trans remark/saying. Nondiscrimination does not let cisgender men use the women's bathroom. It allows transwomen to use the women's bathroom, the gender they most identify with.

Comparing this battle to the Battle of San Jacinto is cute too, especially when they know they're losing.

To comment on the actual theme, if the mayor or the courts believe that the sermons will cause any type of uprising over the discrimination ordinance (inciting violence towards the mayor or any other LGBT person) or using vigilante justice to carry out their doctrine of hatred, then it has every right to be inspected. If not, it's overreach. I'll wit until the Mayor's office makes an official statement on this first. I'm also taking the article with a grain of salt as well, seeing what the source is.

 

Well, religious organizations in Houston are tax exempt, but some have been funding/fueling a movement to repeal the recently passed equal rights ordinance for GLBT folks. So their status as non-political organizations is in question. It is not a matter of free speech or separation of church and state. I think that it is just an issue of tax-exempt status. Are these religious organizations genuine churches, or are they political groups masquerading as churches at taxpayers expense?

Your taxes shouldn't go to subsidize hate speech anyway.

 

It really sounds like infringement on first amendment rights, especially with them going after people who discussed the mayor. Is that implying that it's wrong to criticize the city government?

 

Living in the greater Houston area, I've seen this story all over my facebook news feed today...posted by my "friends" who agree with the ridiculous anti-trans parts of it and the idea that everything wrong with Houston (or really the whole country) is because "this is what happens when you elect a lesbian mayor."

I'd have to do more research about the actual story to comment on it, because all I've read so far is a headline about something involving church sermons, and then a story about how supposedly men are dressing up as women so they can go in bathrooms with little girls because they're pedophiles.

Is it bad if s*** like this doesn't even get to me anymore? I pretty much just expect everyone to hate me.

 

I'm on the fence on this one

 

Religious organizations subtly do tend to steer their congregations to vote or think in particular ways.

I'm a little surprised this is happening in Houston. Well, maybe I'm not. It's a sprawling city that probably has some less enlightened nooks and crannies.

 

That state has a right to sue any churches as well as any businesses or individual and vise versa. Pretty much anyone's allowed to sue anyone. That doesn't mean they'll win the case though

 

It is unfortunate that they are often at war. LGBT and Christianity often seem to be on the opposite sides of a culture war front. It doesn't have to be that way. I saw a poll asking Christians (on a conservative website) what they felt the greatest threat to Christianity was and the two biggest answers were "Islam" and "gay rights".

 

i bet years ago in history, the cultural war opponents were different... maybe.
Im just thinking women's right here, but now we have "many" women working and going to church

 

I'm with stocking and biguy8 on this one. This is an awkward topic to discuss and brings up the whole controversy on how far free speech should be allowed to go. Why can't everyone just live and let live? It's things like this that's only going to make the cultural war between Christians and the LGBT community get worse.

 

One of the worst things you can do, is turn the victimizing into the victims, if your intent is to 'educate' them.

In this case, if you target 'the church', it will be the rallying cry that they need. Not only to attack their government, but to say it is a 'now or never' approach to the homosexual agenda. The religious will use such actions as justification for their words, their actions, and their sermons. They will cling to this, and they will fight -- they now have a reason to, where before it was just 'doing God's will'.

That all said, if we're going to have an issue with things in churches, why don't we throw out all the verses that speak ill of women? What about the legitimacy to have slaves? What about the verses with that guy named Jesus? Let's remove them, too! Consistency, please!

To get back to being serious, here. I'll say this. I might not agree with what you say or think, but I'll defend your right to say or think it. Cliche, yes, but it fits so well.

 

What culture war the church lost at this point, they already starting to back track and adjust their views, same cycle, nothing new, give it a few decades.

 

I am all for First Amendment rights, but also realize that there should be obvious limitations. A church cannot go around inciting people to kill and expect to exercise its religious constitutional privileges. As BryanM said, we don't know the reason behind the subpoenas, and I will also wait to pass judgment, but will have to say that I like to give a very short leash to the government on Bill of Rights issues.

There is a very high threshold the government must pass in order to justify meddling in ecclesiastical affairs.

 

1) Back in June, a gender identity equality bill was passed which, among other things, allows human beings to use restrooms which are open to the public based on their expressed gender, rather than their physical genitalia.

2) The extreme religious right, predictably, freaked the hell out. Sermons, petitions, public speeches, lawsuits, etc etc etc.

3) The attorneys of Houston have now issued subpeonas for written materials and electronic communications from specific ministers which make mention of the mayor, the bill, the public petition against the bill, gender identity, etc.

One thing at a time:

1) My knee-jerk reaction is "OMG you want to let somebody with a penis use the girls' bathroom? EEEEEEWWW!!!" Next thought is equally reflexive. "What if there's a pedophile who uses this as an excuse to get close to children?!? Or a rapist who uses this as an excuse to attack women at their most vulnerable?!?"

Now for the actually thinking part. First, I've cleaned public restrooms, guys are no nastier in their bathroom habits than girls, on average. I've seen horrendous disgustingness in both.
Next, there is already an unwritten exception to gender-segregated restrooms... kids. Nobody thinks twice about a mom taking her young son into the ladies', because it's a safety issue, and in a women's restroom at least, full exposure happens inside a latched stall, so the chance of my kids seeing naughty bits I'd rather they not see is minimal. The scare scenarios? Possible, but rare, I would be present with my child, and there are already laws in place for prosecuting those situations. I've accidentally entered the wrong restroom a few times, and inevitably encountered a man and been hugely embarrassed. I can't even imagine having to face that embarrassment every single time I needed a restroom outside my home. Messing with a kid or another adult in a public restroom for any reason is socially and legally unacceptable regardless of whether your parts are male or female or any variation thereof, so really... I don't see the logic in freaking out over this one. Especially when so many public restrooms are unisex anyway and have only toilets inside full height stalls. Stand or sit as it works for ya, just close the door so my kid doesn't see your naked self.

2) This is expected. Anything challenges the status quo, people freak. Also? This is Texas we're talking about. Battleground of the extreme right and the southern border. Stuff gets real. People are allowed to express their opinions & beliefs, no matter how much others might disagree. People are also allowed to use the process available to them (petitions, lawsuits, & so on) to make certain their concerns are addressed by those in power. That's why we at least aspire to representative government, and have constructed a judicial system with the power to act as a check to the legislative branch.

3) Here's where we have a problem. In the process of defending the city's position in a lawsuit over the bill, the attorneys for Houston have rather egregiously trampled on the First Amendment by demanding written material and electronic communications from private citizens who are not directly involved in the lawsuit. What they want these materials for actually doesn't matter. They haven't got a legal right to them, no matter what the reason.

This is a situation where judicial activism is going to cause a seriously unholy pushback, pun entirely intended. A judge with some common sense will quash that subpeona and deal with the case as-is. Creating a massive First Amendment issue complicates matters beyond all reason and will result in far bigger problems then who gets to pee where.

 

No, the city of Houston isn’t bullying anti-gay pastors – this is basic lawyering – LGBTQ Nation

 

Bingo. In churches all across America, there are pastors that shamelessly electioneer from the pulpit. One state lawmaker from Louisiana told the LA Times that there are pastors all over the state who tell their churchgoers that it's a sin to vote for a Democrat. The church I grew up attending actually played this song during a service back in 2012. It's too bad this story isn't true because if only we could crack down on hate speech, we wouldn't be so far behind the rest of the world in accepting every minority group out there.