Houston control

The internet is abuzz over the subpoena of sermons and communication records of five Houston area Pastors. There is merit to the assumptions that the move by the Mayor of Houston is intended to have a "chilling effect" on speech from the pulpit, or intimidate preachers into staying out of political issues. Unfortunately, there is a deeper issue that should not be lost in the larger discussion. How is the information sought by the subpoena intended to be used by the Mayor's legal team?

When the City of Houston passed an ordinance expanding gay rights it ran afoul of public sentiment over bathroom access for transgenders. Similar ordinances in other places have resulted in young girls being forced to deal with naked men in women's locker rooms or saunas. What we thought was crazy in Seattle a couple of years ago, is now on the verge of becoming "normal" in Houston. A Houston petition drive gathered several times the number of required signatures to have the removal of the ordinance placed on the November ballot. The city is now responding to a law suit over its rejection of the petition. The rationale behind that rejection is what needs some serious scrutiny.

The City of Houston is asserting that the petition was rejected because the signatures were improperly collected. In order to bolster their case that the signatures were improperly collected they now want to know how involved churches were in the process. The point of their argument is that signatures collected at church, or collected by drives organized at church, or even signatures resulting from the persuasion of church leaders are invalid. To have this type of thought process coming from elected officials is deeply disturbing. If the City of Houston's argument is successful, the ramifications for the 1st Amendment are profound.

Elections have consequences at every level of government. Local races often get little attention from voters, but the impact that these races have on our society can be dramatic. Whether a candidate is running for school board, or President of the United States, that candidate's philosophy regarding individual liberties and constitutional government must be an essential part of the vetting process. Remember to vote the entire ballot this November.