City of Houston demands pastors turn over sermons

"Dear City of Houston:

First Baptist Church, 11 am. Please show courtesy and arrive on time."

Sincerely,
The Pastors"
 
All mine are online...got nothing to hide...hey they might get saved!
 
T-Bone said:
All mine are online...got nothing to hide...hey they might get saved!



I know I am not one of your favorite people (febreeze) but I'd like to visit your site and read some of them. Would you mind sharing your address. I promise I will behave there.

Thanks.
 
Gringo said:
T-Bone said:
All mine are online...got nothing to hide...hey they might get saved!



I know I am not one of your favorite people (febreeze) but I'd like to visit your site and read some of them. Would you mind sharing your address. I promise I will behave there.

Thanks.

Gringo,

I have never had any problem with you...you have always been honest, and I don't have to agree with someone to get along with them.  It is the dishonest religionists and atheist I have a problem with.  BTW... Who's fabreeze.  The sermons are audio not written, though I believe there are outlines, do you still want to listen to some?  I have never hid who I am here. fbcfh.org click on sermons.
 
Thank you so much. I am going there now.

:)
 
This is a blatant violation of the First Amendment. I hope the pastors involved will refuse. I also hope that the churches of Houston will have sense enough to put their differences aside and come together in a show of solidarity against this. This is only the beginning. If the mayor of Houston is able to get away with this then it will start happening in every large city. The war has begun.

ChuckBob
 
ChuckBob said:
This is a blatant violation of the First Amendment. I hope the pastors involved will refuse. I also hope that the churches of Houston will have sense enough to put their differences aside and come together in a show of solidarity against this. This is only the beginning. If the mayor of Houston is able to get away with this then it will start happening in every large city. The war has begun.

ChuckBob

My exact thoughts ....time to stand, and we better today, or we won't have anything to stand on tomorrow!
 
Someone on Facebook raised a good point.  Why doesn't the City of Houston demand transcripts of everything that's said in the mosques?  I bet you'd hear a lot more anti-gay stuff there. 

It's a rhetorical question. 
 
Smellin Coffee said:
So while the City of Houston indeed subpoenaed pastors' sermons, it appears it did so to investigate whether the churches engaged in political organization activities under the guise of preaching.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp#VOqwkpkKt1VBOlq0.99

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp

Though it isn't prohibiting freedom of religious expression against homosexuality, I believe it is still a violation of the Constitution.

The link changes nothing as to the idiocy of the mayor and city of Houston and the violation of the constitution.
And The Obama administration is the Keystone Kops of government.... ;)
 
Smellin Coffee said:
So while the City of Houston indeed subpoenaed pastors' sermons, it appears it did so to investigate whether the churches engaged in political organization activities under the guise of preaching.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp#VOqwkpkKt1VBOlq0.99

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp

Though it isn't prohibiting freedom of religious expression against homosexuality, I believe it is still a violation of the Constitution.
The mayors office wont have any traction from a Constitutional viewpoint, they will however have some traction from the viewpoint of separation of church and state, they will approach them as violating tax laws

http://ffrf.org/faq/feeds/item/14005-churches-and-political-lobbying-activities
Churches and Political Campaign Activity

Churches and other nonprofits are strictly prohibited from engaging in political campaigning. This prohibition stems from the requirements of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”).

An organization that qualifies as “tax-exempt” under Section 501(c)(3) is one that devotes its resources to educational, religious, scientific or other charitable activities, and that complies with a number of other rules, including the prohibition on political activity. In exchange for agreeing to fulfill certain public purposes and following the rules for 501(c)(3)s, these organizations do not pay taxes on their income and contributions received by them are tax-deductible by their donors. Churches are recognized as 501(c)(3) organizations, although under the law, they do not have to get specific approval from the IRS to be tax-exempt under 501(c)(3), unlike other charities.

In order to remain tax-exempt under 501(c)(3), churches must abide by strict guidelines that prohibit election activity. The Code states in relevant part that 501(c)(3) organizations cannot “participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.” I.R.C. Sec. 501(c)(3). Thus, as a 501(c)(3) organization, churches are strictly forbidden from supporting or opposing a candidate for public office. To do so jeopardizes their tax-exempt status. Churches cannot engage in any of the following activities under the federal tax law:

Cannot endorse or oppose candidates for public office
Cannot make any communication—either from the pulpit, in a newsletter, or church bulletin—which expressly advocates for the election or defeat of a candidate for public office
Cannot make expenditures on behalf of a candidate for public office or allow any of their resources to be used indirectly for political purposes (e.g., use their phones for a phone bank)
Cannot ask a candidate for public office to sign a pledge or other promise to support a particular issue
Cannot distribute partisan campaign literature
Cannot display political campaign signs on church property

Under current law, churches, as well as other 501(c)(3) organizations, may engage in nonpartisan campaign activities, primarily consisting of voter education. Thus, they may organize and coordinate nonpartisan get-out-the-vote and voter registration drives; sponsor nonpartisan candidate debates or forums, so long as all legally qualified candidates are invited to appear and wide spectrum of issues are covered; educate all candidates on issues of public interest; and create legislative scorecards or voter guides. All of these permissible activities must be done on a nonpartisan basis. A 501(c)(3) entity should not even tacitly express favor or disfavor of a particular candidate.


This is the "how" they will go after area churches.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
Smellin Coffee said:
So while the City of Houston indeed subpoenaed pastors' sermons, it appears it did so to investigate whether the churches engaged in political organization activities under the guise of preaching.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp#VOqwkpkKt1VBOlq0.99

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp

Though it isn't prohibiting freedom of religious expression against homosexuality, I believe it is still a violation of the Constitution.

The link changes nothing as to the idiocy of the mayor and city of Houston and the violation of the constitution.
And The Obama administration is the Keystone Kops of government.... ;)

Ya wanna bring something to the table I disagree with? ;)

This IS an abuse of power, no question. And YES, it involves the Dems and they are WRONG.

(See? I am an equal partisan hater. :) )
 
Smellin Coffee said:
Tarheel Baptist said:
Smellin Coffee said:
So while the City of Houston indeed subpoenaed pastors' sermons, it appears it did so to investigate whether the churches engaged in political organization activities under the guise of preaching.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp#VOqwkpkKt1VBOlq0.99

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp

Though it isn't prohibiting freedom of religious expression against homosexuality, I believe it is still a violation of the Constitution.

The link changes nothing as to the idiocy of the mayor and city of Houston and the violation of the constitution.
And The Obama administration is the Keystone Kops of government.... ;)

Ya wanna bring something to the table I disagree with? ;)

This IS an abuse of power, no question. And YES, it involves the Dems and they are WRONG.

(See? I am an equal partisan hater. :) )

I just threw that Obama reference in to solidify my M. O. :)
 
Smellin Coffee said:
So while the City of Houston indeed subpoenaed pastors' sermons, it appears it did so to investigate whether the churches engaged in political organization activities under the guise of preaching.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp#VOqwkpkKt1VBOlq0.99

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/houston.asp

Though it isn't prohibiting freedom of religious expression against homosexuality, I believe it is still a violation of the Constitution.

The issue was homosexuality...the town wanted it turned into a political issue...the pastor's rightly spoke against it as a biblical issue.  The town calling it a political issue then saying the pastor's can't legally say anything about it means nothing.  It is none of the town's business what any pastor says in the pulpit...period!  The Establishment Clause is not to restrict the church, but to restrict the government in matters of religion!
 
ItinerantPreacher said:
The Rogue Tomato said:
Yeah, Snopes.  Now that's a reliable source of truth.
I dont put a lot of stock in snopes either, but the link to the "Notice of Intention to Subpoena" seemed legit
http://www.adfmedia.org/files/WoodfillSubpoenaRequest.pdf

In particular the request for information found on the bottom 3 or so pages

Like I said in the OP, it was so outrageous I doubted if it was true.  Looks like it's sort-of true, but not for the reasons implied by the inflammatory article(s). 

Snopes is just a couple of people (the Mikkelsons) with a browser and Google. But it can't be all that bad.  According to Snopes, Snopes "has come to be regarded as an online touchstone of rumor research."  And if Snopes says it, it must be fact-checked and true. 


 
Top