Posted on 10/18/2014 8:28:58 AM PDT by Patton@Bastogne
.
Ted Cruz Tells Brody File: "Real Risk" Of Pastors Being Jailed For Preaching Against Homosexuality
In an exclusive interview with The Brody File, Senator Ted Cruz says pastors being hauled off to jail by the government for preaching against homosexuality is a “real risk” in the future.
““I think that is a real risk,” Cruz tells me. “Some in the media ridicule that threat saying there is no danger of the government coming after pastors. That is the usual response.”
But he adds: “The specter of government trying to determine if what pastors preach from the pulpit meets with the policy views or political correctness of the governing authorities, that prospect is real and happening now.”
Watch the clip below along with a partial transcription.
The Brody File traveled to Houston Texas Thursday to interview Cruz after his press conference in defense of Houston pastors. They are under a severe religious liberty attack by city officials.
The Mayor and the City Council are trying to subpoena the sermons of these pastors because of their supposed outspokenness on homosexuality and a controversial LGBT ordinance.
The pastors are refusing to give in.
More Brody File analysis on Ted Cruz and evangelicals here.
MANDATORY COURTESY: CBN NEWS/THE BRODY FILE
David Brody: “One of the next battles in this culture war could indeed be right there in the pulpit. Are we going through a potential period or could we very well soon go through a period where pastors are hauled off to jail for a hate crime because they are speaking for traditional marriage?”
Senator Ted Cruz: “I think that is a real risk and you and I have both pointed to that risk in the past and some in the media ridicule that threat saying there is no danger of the government coming after pastors. That is the usual response.”
Senator Ted Cruz: “The specter of government trying to determine if what pastors preach from the pulpit meets with the policy views or political correctness of the governing authorities, that prospect is real and happening now.”
Senator Ted Cruz: “When you subpoena one pastor, you subpoena every pastor. If government has the power to force the pulpit to knuckle under, if government has the power to insist that pastors hand over their sermons for government approval then we’ve lost the very first freedom that begins our bill of rights. We’ve lost the freedom that this country was built on. That’s what this fight is and I very much hope that this serves as a wake-up call to Christians, to people of faith, I hope it serves as a wake-up call to pastors to speak out and make abundantly clear that we will not give up our religious liberty. We will not go quietly into the night but we will stand and fight for principles that are right and true and will speak the truth and the pastors of this country will not be muzzled.
.
“. . . . The clock is ticking.” ????
This doesn’t even deserve the response that I am giving it.
Hint: “The power to tax involves the power to control.”
Yeh, “The clock is ticking” means that it was a test question. The buzzer will go off if it is not answered. Check my test question “hint.”
” It all comes down to whether churches can continue to have their tax exempt status.”
No. In Houston, and anywhere the Pink Mafia has power, it all comes down to “Can a church oppose homosexuality...or any other kind of sexuality? Can a church preach about ANY morality, or does it have to give way to sin?”
This has nothing to do with tax-exempt status. It has everything to do with using the power of the state to intimidate and harass anyone who believes in any moral standard. It is about shutting Christians - not churches, but Christians - up.
I’m waiting for you response. Tick . . Tick . . .
If the people of churches actually started leaning on the Lord and not on worldly strategies, they would find God’s strength beginning to show up in their natural weaknesses.
I think we agree for the most part but any time is the right time to push back. Second, our contract is in the First Amendment, not in the illegal one-sided contracts issued by government solely for its self-preservation. An illegal contract remains illegal no matter how you were coerced to make the agreement.
The First Amendment of churches will be violated when they give up their tax exemption. How? The power to tax is the power to control. It’s that simple. I am really surprised that my fellow Freepers have failed to hit on that principle in this thread. I am very disappointed.
Don’t be an ass (and it matters not how good your point)
Giving up tax exempt status is no freedom. You should know that.
As a side note, your post was almost unreadable. I had to force myself to wade through it all.
This new issue is about tax relief benefits to donors. It is much newer than the settled law about tax exemptions to such things as church property.
Now were I the proverbial king I would give not just tax exemption but tax CREDIT to a very broad range of charitable activity, at least until the state got out of welfare altogether. Churches stumbled when they began to cheer for Caesar “charity.”
Read my post #48. I am really disappointed. The argument for freeing the churches of their tax-exempt status angers me. We know how the IRS use their power to shut down political freedom with tax audits and harassment. This use of the IRS should be our focus and our fight. Those who fail to recognize it need a reality check. I welcome being called an “ass” in this fight.
But no problem if you are a bearded savage and HANG gays!
There should never be any limitation to the “tax relief benefits to donors” when it concerns what tax payers can deduct from their taxes. Never! It is all the same harassment using unconstitutional methods of coercion by the government.
It is time to start throwing tea into the harbor and the snakes out of Congress.
If you think that these churches would be immune from government interference in their teachings and doctrines if they just surrendered their tax exempt status, then you are certifiably insane (with the definition of insanity being doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result).
These churches are not being attacked and singled out because they have tax exempt status. They are being attacked because they preach the gospel and the gospel is an affront to sinners.
These homo activists will not stop attacking churches if they give up their tax exempt status. Indeed they will double their efforts because they will believe (rightly so) that they have managed to win the battle on the way to winning the war.
That is 100% on the mark.
If a religion has 100% of its free exercise money, and any government entity attempts to take any X of its free exercise money, then it afterwards has only 100-X of its free exercise money left. Therefore, government has not permitted free exercise as dictated by the constitution; it has entangled itself and has permitted only 100-X free exercise.
So far as the government 'granting' corporate status, any religion naturally has 'corporate' status. It already is a natural 'body' focused on a particular objective. Government has only ACKNOWLEDGED, and not 'granted', an already existing corporate status. (It is no accident that a church is referred to as 'the body of Christ'.) Whether assemply, body, synagogue (closely related to assembly), coven, etc., religions are gatherings of participants for the most part. I'm sure there are some entirely individualistic religions, but I can't think of any at the moment.
So, this real corporateness is assumed in 'free exercise' as well. Therefore, the government did not grant corporate status, it acknowledged an already existing corporateness. The church did not sign onto government corporateness when it processed corporate paperwork; it merely assisted with legal clarification that which already existed.
And, just to be honest, and I'm no businessman, lawyer, or corporate executive, I'm betting that there are places in law wherein the government has acknowledged a natural corporateness of other clubs/gatherings/assemblies and held that that natural corporateness did not allow individuals to be held individually liable for corporate issues.
I hope they arrest the black pastors first because they’re usually responsible for electing democrats.
Preach on, bro!
Yes, we generally agree.
“An illegal contract remains illegal no matter how you were coerced to make the agreement.”
In this case, entities have voluntarily agreed to enter into the 501c3 contract. No coercion involved.
I have helped start a number of churches and it has always amazed me when a number of the other founders would say “ok, now that we have a number of families and a structure, all we need now is to register our church via 501c3 and we will be a real church, registered and all.” Wow!! Ok, now starts the education process. Everytime though (except one) I and others have been able to convince everyone to not get the 501c3. Gods church does not need to be registered with the govt to be Gods church. The one time the church did get the 501c3, is where the pastor said, “let them (the govt) come, we will just disband the legal entity and call ourselves something else, and then drop the 501c3.”
The church college wanted to be a 501c3 entity so it’s donors could write off taxes. But the college decided it didn’t want to give the government the handle to control it so the college is not a 501c3 entity.
I believe Hillsdale College is not a 501c3 entity for exactly the same reasons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.