- 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 8:02 pm to cwill
Posted on 10/14/14 at 8:02 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.
You're ruining the circle jerk on here by bringing some common sense to this thread.
In addition, the people of Houston deserve to see what anti-gay bigots these "men of God" are.
This post was edited on 10/14/14 at 8:09 pm
6
Posted on 10/14/14 at 8:13 pm to Toddy
quote:Nope. He was wrong. The pastors are not on the lawsuit.
You're ruining the circle on here by bringing some common sense to this thread.
quote:Mother of God. You are a fascist who doesn't believe in religious freedom. Simply imagine a fundamentalist Christian mayor subpoenaing your liberal pro-LGBT church because the people deserve to know the vile things they are saying.
In addition, the people of Houston deserve to see what anti-gay bigots these "men of God" are.
It would be wrong in both cases for those of us who believe in freedom. You support oppression and don't believe in freedom.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 8:16 pm to genro
If they aren't part of the lawsuit then I retract my statement.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 8:18 pm to Toddy
quote:
You're ruining the circle on here by bringing some common sense to this thread.
And just like him, you skimmed right over the part where the pastors weren't a party to the filed lawsuit.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 8:22 pm to MSMHater
Not to mention cwill's description of discovery leaves out a very important piece. Discovery isn't carte blanch. While all discovery material does not need to be admissible...it does need to have a reasonable basis that it will lead to admissible evidence. I'd love to hear him articulate how sermon transcripts could lead to admissible evidence.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 8:48 pm to Toddy
quote:
You're ruining the circle jerk on here by bringing some common sense to this thread.
This has already been addressed. The churches are not part of the lawsuit. This is simple political intimidation by the mayor's office. Thank you for being in support of suppression of dissenting political positions.
quote:
In addition, the people of Houston deserve to see what anti-gay bigots these "men of God" are.
Save your indignation. They have a position, you have a position, let the argument be made for both and the people decide.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 9:17 pm to Toddy
quote:
In addition, the people of Houston deserve to see what anti-gay bigots these "men of God" are.
You really think you deserve and have a right to their beliefs being made public?
Nobody deserves nor has a right know what other people's personal beliefs are whether it be the most noble of them all helping people or being a selfish thug that hates a group of people.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 10:46 pm to tylercsbn9
quote:
The bathroom issue doesn't bother me too much. There should just be private bathrooms for those that have issues and be done with it. The thing I worry about is when one of these people wants to use a locker room or something like that. It makes a bunch of people uncomfortable in place of the feelings of one person. Then there will be idiots that take advantage of it. Not many, but there will be some really dumb stories over time.
I had a conversation with my SO about this tonight. He, too, wasn't overly concerned with the bathroom issue and said it wouldn't bother him if a lady was in the men's room. But, I'm really bothered by it. There's nothing to prevent some perv from just hanging out in the ladies'. I would feel very uncomfortable going into a restroom and finding it occupied by myself and a strange man. I'd have to be escorted to the restroom. I think it's a ridiculous idea and, like you said, makes the majority uncomfortable so the few don't get their feelings hurt. I have always had a live and let live attitude and have laughed it off when people held out extreme examples of what could come of it. And now I'm wondering if they weren't right all along. There has to be rules and norms within a society.
This post was edited on 10/14/14 at 10:47 pm
Posted on 10/14/14 at 10:55 pm to drunkenpunkin
Yeah. There would be very, very few problems, but could you imagine having a teenage daughter and some bro just parks himself in the locker room? South Park touched on it in a humorous way last week.
I've seen numerous stories about elemnetary school parents and their little snowflakes bitching about letting their kid into the opposite genders restroom (I don't even want to comment on a 6 year old having a gender identity issue) and they all seem to have two things in common. The schools have always tried to accommodate the issue. Mostly via letting the child use the staff bathroom. And the second common thing is that not being good enough for the parents of the said snowflake. They raise hell and try to make the majority forcibly accommodate their kid. That's never good for people on the fence or even someone who may have slight sympathies to the cause.
I am absolutely 100% in support of gay marriage, but shite like the above pisses me off.
I've seen numerous stories about elemnetary school parents and their little snowflakes bitching about letting their kid into the opposite genders restroom (I don't even want to comment on a 6 year old having a gender identity issue) and they all seem to have two things in common. The schools have always tried to accommodate the issue. Mostly via letting the child use the staff bathroom. And the second common thing is that not being good enough for the parents of the said snowflake. They raise hell and try to make the majority forcibly accommodate their kid. That's never good for people on the fence or even someone who may have slight sympathies to the cause.
I am absolutely 100% in support of gay marriage, but shite like the above pisses me off.
This post was edited on 10/14/14 at 10:57 pm
Posted on 10/14/14 at 11:06 pm to tylercsbn9
quote:
Mostly via letting the child use the staff bathroom. And the second common thing is that not being good enough for the parents of the said snowflake. They raise hell and try to make the majority forcibly accommodate their kid. That's never good for people on the fence or even someone who may have slight sympathies to the cause.
I was in technology for a school district and was in charge of some student record things on occasion. This girl had been in our district for 5 years and then decided to switch hit. Her mom somehow got to barking up my tree and asked me to change the F to an M and I wanted to be all "bitch, that's literally not a change in the system I can make. Programming doesn't understand that there was a v and then it became a p. Ain't enough 101010111's in the world to fix that."
Posted on 10/14/14 at 11:18 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
An incorrect position, stated however calmly, cannot be remediated by the zen-like demeanor of the purveyor of the incorrect position
Who is this guy? I like what he has to say.
Posted on 10/14/14 at 11:22 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
It's intimidation in intent only, the action itself is perfectly legal.
Here's the Texas law on abuse of power, under which Rick Perry was indicted for vetoing funding for a disgraced district attorney he'd vowed to get rid of.
quote:
Section 39.02:
A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly ... misuses government property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value belonging to the government that has come into the public servant’s custody by virtue of the public servant’s office or employment.
The Harris County District Attorney should seek indictments of the city attorney and the mayor for abuse of power. They used the power of the office of mayor and city attorney, along with city resources, to punish political dissent.
This post was edited on 10/14/14 at 11:28 pm
Posted on 10/15/14 at 5:14 am to TexasTiger89
It began long ago....
Posted on 10/15/14 at 5:46 am to TexasTiger89
Wow, that's some crazy, fricked up shite.
Posted on 10/15/14 at 6:03 am to FT
quote:
If they're telling people not to vote for her, just pull their tax exempt status.
every black church in the US would fold.
Posted on 10/15/14 at 6:11 am to BigJim
quote:
Now, that said, it's still ridiculous, just not as over-the-top crazy land as first glance would make it appear.
Chris Christie closed a bridge and was demonized.
Posted on 10/15/14 at 6:20 am to Toddy
Interesting...
I am pretty sure Toddy was one of those saying people fearing an attack on religion by the gay marriage crowd were being ridiculous. If this isn't "slippery slope," I am hard pressed to think of what could be.
I am pretty sure Toddy was one of those saying people fearing an attack on religion by the gay marriage crowd were being ridiculous. If this isn't "slippery slope," I am hard pressed to think of what could be.
Posted on 10/15/14 at 6:24 am to Toddy
quote:
In addition, the people of Houston deserve to see what anti-gay bigots these "men of God" are.
So that whole Constitution thing should only apply to people that fit the narrative?
Wow. For someone that desperately demands equality, thats pretty bad.
Posted on 10/15/14 at 10:04 am to elprez00
The city can try and subpoena the sermons but the churches can just say that the sermons are the intellectual property of the pastors.
Posted on 10/15/14 at 10:08 am to Toddy
quote:
If they aren't part of the lawsuit then I retract my statement.
The article clearly states the pastors aren't involved in the lawsuit.
Page 9 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News