Houston Mayor Harrassing Religion

[tonie]

City of Houston demands pastors turn over sermons

The city of Houston has issued subpoenas demanding a group of pastors turn over any sermons dealing with homosexuality, gender identity or Annise Parker, the city’s first openly lesbian mayor. And those ministers who fail to comply could be held in contempt of court. ... 

 

a nationally-known law firm specializing in religious liberty cases, is representing five Houston pastors. They filed a motion in Harris County court to stop the subpoenas arguing they are “overbroad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and vexatious.” ...

 

Mayor Parker will not explain why she wants to inspect the sermons.

 

 

 Contact Information for Mayor Parker

 

Mayor Annise D. Parker
City of Houston 
P.O. Box 1562 Houston, TX 77251 
Phone: 3-1-1, or 713.837.0311 
Email: mayor@houstontx.gov

 

Office of the City Attorney

David M. Feldman, City Attorney

City of Houston Legal Department
P.O. Box 368
Houston, TX 77001-0368

832.393.6491

 

Administrative Office of City Council
City Hall Annex
900 Bagby, Second Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.0791
Fax: 832.393.0783

 

Council Member Brenda Stardig
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3010
FAX: 832.393.3302 
E-Mail: districta@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Jerry Davis
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3009
FAX; 832.393.3291 
E-Mail: districtb@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Ellen R. Cohen
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3004
E-Mail: districtc@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Dwight Boykins
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3001
FAX; 832.393.3201 
E-Mail: districtd@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Dave Martin
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

 

Clear Lake Office

17629 El Camino Real, Suite 415

Houston, TX 77058

Phone: 832.393.3008
FAX: 832.393.3279 
E-Mail: districte@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Richard Nguyen
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3002
E-Mail: districtf@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Oliver Pennington
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3007
FAX; 832.395.9571 
E-Mail: districtg@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Ed Gonzalez
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3003
FAX: 832.393.3224
E-Mail: districth@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Robert Gallegos
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3011
FAX; 832.393.3313 
E-Mail: districti@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Mike Laster
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3015
FAX: 832.395.9423 
E-Mail: districtj@houstontx.gov

 

Council Member Larry Green
City Hall Annex 
900 Bagby, First Floor
Houston, TX 77002

Phone: 832.393.3016
FAX; 832.395.9410 
E-Mail: districtk@houstontx.gov

Edited October 15, 2014 by tonie

[rockpond]

A complete violation of first amendment rights. I'm glad the pastors are not complying. Hopefully state officials will step in quickly and shut down this abuse.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

A complete violation of first amendment rights. I'm glad the pastors are not complying. Hopefully state officials will step in quickly and shut down this abuse.

I agree it is. At the same time I am not holding my breathe on this one either.

[Storm Rider]

....and you reap the whirlwind.  This will not be the last we hear of such actions.  I cannot really see anyone being surprised that this tactic.  I have my popcorn and will enjoy the show from Qatar while I listen to my Muslim friends keep asking me to explain what freedom is and how it applies to this kind of effort by the US government and want to know how anything done in the Middle East is different except they think they stand for morality and civil society. 

Edited October 15, 2014 by Storm Rider

[ksfisher]

It would be interesting to hear the city of Houston's side of the story.

[Storm Rider]

I read the link and I am even more stunned than I was at first.  This is a fight worth fighting.  That a mayor in the USA could actually think like this is beyond overwhelming. It demonstrates such arrogance, such ignorance, and such an outlandish sense of self that it boggles the mind.  This is not San Francisco or one of the whack-job cities of California, this is Texas.  

 

Completely flummoxed.  

[Freedom]

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/10/15/why-is-houston-mayor-annise-parker-subpoenaing-pastors-for-sermons-that-are-already-publicly-available/

 

http://www.chron.com/news/politics/houston/article/City-subpoenas-pastors-sermons-in-equal-rights-5822403.php

[Calm]

Mayor Parker agrees with those who are concerned about the city legal department’s subpoenas for pastor’s sermons. The subpoenas were issued by pro bono attorneys helping the city prepare for the trial regarding the petition to repeal the new Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO) in January. Neither the mayor nor City Attorney David Feldman were aware the subpoenas had been issued until yesterday. Both agree the original documents were overly broad. The city will move to narrow the scope during an upcoming court hearing. Feldman says the focus should be only on communications related to the HERO petition process.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/10/15/houston-mayor-criticizes-city-lawyers-subpoenas-of-sermons/

[Calm]

It would be interesting to hear the city of Houston's side of the story.

Houston City Attorney David Feldman suggested to the Houston Chronicle in a story published Tuesday that the documents demanded by the city could shed light on the extent to which signature gatherers opposing the ordinance were aware of the rules governing the referendum process.

 

[Ahab]

I think they should send her copies of all they have. Maybe reading them will do her some good. I think they would have been happy if she had asked to hear or them, but to demand them? She must really want to hear or at least read what they have to say.

[ksfisher]

 

It would be interesting to hear the city of Houston's side of the story.

Houston City Attorney David Feldman suggested to the Houston Chronicle in a story published Tuesday that the documents demanded by the city could shed light on the extent to which signature gatherers opposing the ordinance were aware of the rules governing the referendum process.

 

 

That sounds much more reasonable.

[Kenngo1969]

Neither the mayor nor City Attorney David Feldman were aware the subpoenas had been issued until yesterday. Both agree the original documents were overly broad. The city will move to narrow the scope during an upcoming court hearing.

 

That sounds much more reasonable.

Narrow the scope?  Those subpoenas should be quashed outright.  Just sayin'!  (This is the problem with so-called "human rights" ordinances: any time freedom of religion and freedom of expression come up against them, the ordinances will win.  Period.) Shades of Orwell's 1984.

[Calm]

From a link in the first link:

 

 

Opponents of Houston's new non-discrimination ordinance did not get enough valid signatures to force a November repeal referendum, Mayor Annise Parker and City Attorney David Feldman announced Monday.

"With respect to the referendum petition filed to repeal the 'HERO' ordinance, there are simply too many documents with irregularities and problems to overlook," Feldman said. "The petition is simply invalid. There is no other conclusion."

The council approved the ordinance on an 11-6 vote in May. Opponents who took issue with the protections extended to gay and transgender people under the ordinance promised to send the issue to the voters. On July 3, they claimed to have delivered more than 50,000 signatures to the city secretary's office.

Opponents needed a minimum of 17,269 valid signatures - 10 percent of the ballots cast in the last mayoral election - to put a referendum on the November ballot. Feldman said some of the petition gatherers did not satisfy the requirements set out for such petitions in the city charter, such as by not being registered Houston voters or by not signing the petition themselves. If such requirements were not met, he said, all the signatures the circulator gathered were invalid.

Less than half of the more than 5,000 pages opponents submitted were valid, Feldman said, leaving the final valid tally at 15,249 signatures.

 

 

 

From one of the links in Freedom's post:

 

Opponents of the equal rights ordinance are hoping to force a repeal referendum when they get their day in court in January, claiming City Attorney David Feldmanwrongly determined they had not gathered enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.

 

 

My understanding….the city created a new ordinance (HERO…Houston Equal Rights Ordinance).  The opposition sees it as problematic and attempts to get a referendum passed invalidating it.  The CA rejects the petition on the grounds not enough valid signatures.  Oppostion sues.  Some of the city's pro bono (volunteer?) lawyers helping defend the city and the ordinance issued subpoenas for everything and the dog that might have the very least thing to do with the attempt to get the referendum including just the subject of homosexuality or the mayor (which is absolutely absurd) or perhaps even are just looking for stuff they can use to discredit the opposition in any way possible (which occurs to me only because of the massive demand).

 

The city then announces they are looking for information about how accurate the opposition's knowledge of the referendum process was (probably so they can challenge any possible claims that it was unclear to excuse any technicalities if there were any or to prove intentional use of invalid signatures maybe) and the pro bono lawyers erred.

 

I don't think the search premise if accurate is unreasonable or a violation of free speech though it may be premature if the suit is about the city attorney doing it the wrong way and not the opposition.  If others see it as such, could they please explain.  That the probono attorneys included everything they did makes me very suspicious of the probono attorneys and their purpose, but if the city attorneys only intended to pursue a much more limited correspondence solely dealing with knowledge of the HERO referendum process, I don't see that as problematic in and of itself…but then I am not a lawyer so perhaps one could explain it to me.

 

Apparently one of the major issues with the ordinance is the use of public restrooms by transgendered individuals (allowing those who identify themselves as one gender use that gender's designated restrooms and other public---not privately owned such as in churches---facilities no matter what sex they may be physically identified with…iirc gender is now the psychological orientation while sex is physical characteristics, someone correct me please if I am wrong).

 

I do think the pro bono lawyers should be kicked off the team so they cannot use any legal authority for any other purposes.  I don't think they demonstrated good faith in their approach…either that or they are totally incompetent lawyers and still should not be given authority.

Edited October 15, 2014 by calmoriah

[Calm]

My solution...

 

All public bathrooms are single user and generic.  No more communal bathrooms.  Have to wait in line longer….but it would remove a lot of arguing.

[ksfisher]

 

Narrow the scope?  Those subpoenas should be quashed outright.  Just sayin'!  (This is the problem with so-called "human rights" ordinances: any time freedom of religion and freedom of expression come up against them, the ordinances will win.  Period.) Shades of Orwell's 1984.

 

Notice I wrote that it sounds more reasonable.  

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

My solution...

 

All public bathrooms are single user and generic.  No more communal bathrooms.  Have to wait in line longer….but it would remove a lot of arguing.

That is not a solution. How about people that have a man parts go to the mens room and people that have woman parts go to the girls room. In the rare case that they have both they can pick. I don't even care. People just need to deal with reality.

[Calm]

How is that not a solution…may be unreasonable to close all the current communal bathrooms and just make individual ones, but at least there would be no more need for arguing.

 

Solutions don't have to be reasonable to be solutions.

 

And women won't have to feel embarrassed about going into an available bathroom marked men's because the women's generally takes longer to cycle through...

Edited October 15, 2014 by calmoriah

[Guest]

A complete violation of first amendment rights. I'm glad the pastors are not complying. Hopefully state officials will step in quickly and shut down this abuse.

Amen, and any compliance would cause a landslide of requests. Hard to believe this happening in Texas. If true and if anyone ever wondered where all of these lawsuits were going as well as goals...this is where. This has less to do with gay marriage and more to do with bringing about hate-speech laws, such a in England, Canada and on. You may remember that a man was arrested in England for reading a speech by Churchill. Don't think that every progressive group in the world were not taking notes, even those who wish to outlaw missionary efforts by any Church, not just ours, JW's, even the local Baptist Church who may be knocking doors to invite people to Sunday meetings. I say least any think I am trying to talk politics or against gays or anyone else. The problem is no matter who you are or what group you identify with when it comes to trying to limit freedom of conscience; if you sow the wind, you will reap the whirlwind.

[Avatar4321]

My solution...

 

All public bathrooms are single user and generic.  No more communal bathrooms.  Have to wait in line longer….but it would remove a lot of arguing.

or men could use the mens room and women could use the womens room

[MorningStar]

I'm not comfortable with a communal bathroom, especially if I'm alone in it with a man I don't know.  I don't get in elevators with a man unless I know I can take him.  A friend of mine was raped on an elevator. Also, I don't want to touch the disgusting toilet seat that they will leave up and I don't want to see them peeing in urinals either. 

[Calm]

 If true and if anyone ever wondered where all of these lawsuits were going as well as goals...this is where. 

 

It is not the GBLT supporters that are bringing the lawsuit in this case.

[Calm]

or men could use the mens room and women could use the womens room

That doesn't remove the problem if an individual claims to be a woman or a man and some people agree while others do not.

[VideoGameJunkie]

This was the subject of last week's South Park. One of the boys wanted to use the girls bathroom because it's nicer so he pretended to be a girl but the other girls were uncomfortable with him there so the school built him his own private toilet.

[BCSpace]

My solution...

 

All public bathrooms are single user and generic.  No more communal bathrooms.  Have to wait in line longer….but it would remove a lot of arguing.

 

Or rather, hang a very sharp knife and a cutting board next to the women's bathroom and a sign with illustrated instructions and large friendly text that reads "Choose Ye This Day..."

[Guest]

It is not the GBLT supporters that are bringing the lawsuit in this case.

I understand I am seeing or wondering the implications for anyone when free speech is subject to any Gov't review...it is not a slippery slop, it is a cliff. Unless a sermon anywhere is calling for murder...leave it alone. Even if it makes your blood boil freedom of conscience should be absolute. D&C 136 or 137 (can't remember which) states that sedition is unbecoming of any man only if Gov't assures freedom of conscience.