Houston Mayor, subpoenas Pastors for sermons?

[Solus]

Houston Backtracks on Church Subpoenas

http://www.woai.com/onair/the-joe-pags-show-10/houston-backtracks-on-church-subpoenas-12867545/

[PegLeg45]

Biblically speaking....... Jesus, as final High Priest, having paid the cost Himself, negated the need for the pushments formerly doled out for breaking Levitical law.

It's in the New Testament........check it out.   


True Christians should not desire to stone gays..... that doesn't mean it hasn't happened a time or three over the last couple thousand years....... but if it was done so in the name of Christ, they will answer for it

[TAB]

Biblically speaking....... Jesus, as final High Priest, having paid the cost Himself, negated the need for the pushments formerly doled out for breaking Levitical law.

It's in the New Testament........check it out.   


True Christians should not desire to stone gays..... that doesn't mean it hasn't happened a time or three over the last couple thousand years....... but if it was done so in the name of Christ, they will answer for it

peg you and I both know people like to pick and choose the verses they fallow and those they don't,  the more fanatical they are, the worse they are.

[Ichiban]

Soooo, did she subpoena the sermons from the Muslims mosques as well?


I didn't think so.

[tombogan03884]

It actually falls under 2 aspects of the 1st A, the religion clause that you've already jumped on, but also free speech.
As for the religion clause, it could be used to negate all gay rights, and abortion laws due to lack of jurisdiction .
I'm talking about ALL laws on these subjects, pro AND con .

[Sponsor]

[MikeBjerum]

It actually falls under 2 aspects of the 1st A, the religion clause that you've already jumped on, but also free speech.
As for the religion clause, it could be used to negate all gay rights, and abortion laws due to lack of jurisdiction .
I'm talking about ALL laws on these subjects, pro AND con .

This is why I quote entire Amendments.  Many people like to pick and chose which portion of an Amendment they quote, however, I find that these simple short Amendments work best when looked at in their entirety.

This is a bit of a drift, but I will point to the firearms debate and the Second Amendment:  Many gun rights people will quote only the second half of the Amendment, and many anti-gun people throw the first half back alone.  However, if you look at the entire sentence you will find that it builds the case even stronger.  This is the same for the First and all others.

[tombogan03884]

I hear your point M58, but I will pick the nit that pro gunners use "shall not be infringed" alone to illustrate that no legislation regulating the whole has any legitimacy, while the antis use the "well regulated" part as an excuse for ignoring the second part.

[brushmore]

Leviticus 20:13...

Old Testament..

Thanks for that.  It was an interesting read, I never realized the Old Testament so specific on punishments for those things.  PegLeg45 is right, any Christian that takes this literally has some issues.

[PegLeg45]

peg you and I both know people like to pick and choose the verses they fallow and those they don't,  the more fanatical they are, the worse they are.

I can't argue that... and on top of that, many take scripture out of context, which makes it worse.
I see it in action all the time.....and by people I know.

Also, not saying any one denomination is right or wrong, but the fact that we have separate Christian denominations comes from following specific passages of scripture (not that they take the scripture out of context) and basing worship doctrine on those passages.
 

As to the topic of the OP, I defer to M58 and Tom, as they have the issue pretty well covered. 

[Solus]

If there is cause to believe that the sermons incited violence, there could be a case for subpoenaing sermons already given, but that is iffy unless they can give specific dates the sermons were given and the nature of the incitement.

If there have been no incidents of violence being attributed to congregation members who heard the sermons, it gets even iffier.

This would be similar to music or movies portraying and favoring violence....even if "fans" did commit violence after being exposed.

Were religion would come in is if, for example, a religion mandated that non believers be killed and a follower of that religion were to, say, kill  a co-worker who was a non-believer in a manner practiced by that religion, beheading as an example, while claiming it was done in the name of the religion.

An alternative view is that it would be generic work place violence with not even hints of a religious motivation.