- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: City of Houston demands pastors turn over sermons
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:07 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:07 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
Please stop micro-aggressing and shaming my white sister. I will call the Reverend if I have to.
0
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:08 pm to the808bass
quote:
Which is completely not the jurisdiction of the city.
That's what I was wondering here. What does the city have to do with the tax exempt status?
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:09 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
After opponents of the bathroom bill filed a lawsuit the city’s attorneys responded by issuing the subpoenas against the pastors.
C'mon Roger.
The pastors aren't part of the lawsuit.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:09 pm to cwill
quote:
They filed a lawsuit....every lawsuit involves Discovery...to "discover" items attorneys file subpoena's to produce documents. During discovery each party has a wide latitude to collect/demand documentation. Seeing the text of sermons that the preachers would have espoused publicly would not seem to be that dangerous or an overreach.
What would be concerning is if the sermons were seized by gov agents in the absence of a lawsuit. Or if the discovered documents are then used to facilitate an actual abridgment of the pastors' first amendment rights.
If you don't want people to look at your pvt docs don't file a lawsuit and expose them to discovery.
Additionally, they're misrepresenting the bathroom law in that article.
This should end the thread rather abruptly.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:09 pm to Yat27
Hallelujah, I've seen the light (or meaning in this case). Much obliged! 
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:10 pm to Roger Klarvin
You run past the details again. Predictable given the topic.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:11 pm to conservativewifeymom
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:12 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
They filed a lawsuit....every lawsuit involves Discovery...to "discover" items attorneys file subpoena's to produce documents. During discovery each party has a wide latitude to collect/demand documentation. Seeing the text of sermons that the preachers would have espoused publicly would not seem to be that dangerous or an overreach.
quote:
This should end the thread rather abruptly
EXCEPT....
from OP (not OG) article:
quote:
The pastors were not part of the lawsuit.
Reading is FUNdemental
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:12 pm to the808bass
quote:
The pastors aren't part of the lawsuit.
While they individually may not have been, they are part of "coalitions" that are. If they are truly unrelated in any way to the suit, they can very easily squelch the subpoena.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:12 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
This should end the thread rather abruptly.
No...No it shouldn't.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:12 pm to the808bass
quote:
C'mon Roger.
The pastors aren't part of the lawsuit.
The lawsuit amounts to a spiteful, religious tantrum. The subpoena is an equally spiteful response.
Childish? Yeah, but this isn't a matter of the state trying to silence church dogma by unilaterally seizing sermons as the OP suggests.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:14 pm to cwill
Does 'discovery' (and yes, I know what this phase means, just don't know the extent and reach of it) allow asking for things that are patently a violation of freedom of speech? Perhaps lawyers here could educate the rest of us.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:14 pm to Yat27
What the frick is the "Bathroom Law"?
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:14 pm to cwill
quote:
While they individually may not have been, they are part of "coalitions" that are.
So, every human that goes to a church and subsequently is involved in a lawsuit...obligates the pastor to be party to discovery?
horseshite.
The pastors are part of a coalition that opposes the bill. NOT a coalition that "sued".
JEEBUS
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:14 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:You have to let the Trans and Cis kids poop together.
What the frick is the "Bathroom Law"?
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:15 pm to cwill
quote:
While they individually may not have been, they are part of "coalitions" that are
Link?
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:15 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
What the frick is the "Bathroom Law"?
Can't be gender insensitive. Thus, people use any bathroom they want. No such thing as "Men's" or "Women's" bathroom
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:16 pm to FT
quote:
You have to let the Trans and Cis kids poop together.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:16 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Yeah, but this isn't a matter of the state trying to silence church dogma by unilaterally seizing sermons as the OP suggests.
And the pastors aren't part of the lawsuit as both you and will have suggested.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 5:16 pm to MSMHater
quote:
You run past the details again. Predictable given the topic.
quote:
No...No it shouldn't.
quote:
Reading is FUNdemental
cwill beat me to it
quote:
While they individually may not have been, they are part of "coalitions" that are. If they are truly unrelated in any way to the suit, they can very easily squelch the subpoena.
It will work itself out and go away, one way or another.
Page 3 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News