State of Georgia demands pastor turn over sermons

[Revmitchell]

A lay minister who is suing the Georgia Department of Public Health for religious discrimination has been ordered by the state’s attorney general to relinquish his sermons to the government, according to federal court documents.

“Please produce a copy of your sermon notes and/or transcripts,” Attorney General Samuel Olens wrote to attorneys representing Dr. Eric Walsh.

Dr. Walsh said he will not comply with the request.

“No government has the right to require a pastor to turn over his sermons,” Walsh said. “I cannot and will not give up my sermons unless I am forced to do so.”

Walsh, a Seventh-day Adventist lay minister had been hired in May 2014 by as a District Health Director with the Georgia Department of Public Health. A week later, a government official asked him to submit copies of his sermons for review. He complied and two days later he was fired.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/10/26/state-georgia-demands-pastor-turn-over-sermons.html

 

[HankD]

Yes a Seventh Day Adventist, but that means nothing to the citizens of this world.

Sooner or later they will come after us and all others who name the name of Jesus Christ if we don't nip this in the bud.

Of course if HRC is elected she will probably make that bud blossom (IMO).

HankD

 

[Baptist Believer]

I doubt we are getting the full story here, but the government has no business reviewing the sermons of a pastor. Period.

Sooner or later they will come after us and all others who name the name of Jesus Christ if we don't nip this in the bud.

Yes. Fortunately, I doubt they will prevail. Everyone from the right wing to the left who cares about religious liberty will be on this.

Of course if HRC is elected she will probably make that bud blossom (IMO).

Neither major candidate is great on this issue, but at least the Democratic Party and its people have a measure of influence over their candidate.

 

[Zaac]

Yes a Seventh Day Adventist, but that means nothing to the citizens of this world.

Sooner or later they will come after us and all others who name the name of Jesus Christ if we don't nip this in the bud.

Of course if HRC is elected she will probably make that bud blossom (IMO).

HankD

Oh stop the madness. Y'all are supporting a man who threatens legal action left and right to keep women from talking about his assault of them.[emoji57] The government is just stepping through doors that y'all seem to be okay with being opened in certain circumstances.

Frankly, I don't get what the big deal is about the sermons. If you're preaching the Gospel, then give them all the copies they want and the body of Christ will stand with you.

So many sermons are online as it is.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Don]

It would appear that even though the article has a recent date, this situation actually started back in 2014.

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/hea...lsh-hired-by-georgia-public-health-department
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-eric-walsh-loses-georgia-job-20140516-story.html
http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/evidence-mounts-in-fired-for-being-christian-case/

From the earlier reports, Walsh was offered the Georgia position which was then retracted (fired before actually getting into the job). The part that bothers me is that the hiring office reviewed sermons, which apparently caused their retraction (so yes, he was fired for what he said in his sermons).

I'm guessing that the recent article is an update to the on-going case, and Georgia officials are requesting more sermons to further promote their case against Walsh? In which case, it seems we're looking at a triple-threat: Your sermons could keep you from getting hired; could get you fired; and could be used against you in court.

 

[carpro]

A lay minister who is suing the Georgia Department of Public Health for religious discrimination has been ordered by the state’s attorney general to relinquish his sermons to the government, according to federal court documents.

“Please produce a copy of your sermon notes and/or transcripts,” Attorney General Samuel Olens wrote to attorneys representing Dr. Eric Walsh.

Dr. Walsh said he will not comply with the request.

“No government has the right to require a pastor to turn over his sermons,” Walsh said. “I cannot and will not give up my sermons unless I am forced to do so.”

Walsh, a Seventh-day Adventist lay minister had been hired in May 2014 by as a District Health Director with the Georgia Department of Public Health. A week later, a government official asked him to submit copies of his sermons for review. He complied and two days later he was fired.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/10/26/state-georgia-demands-pastor-turn-over-sermons.html

The lesbian mayor of Houston tried this. The courts slapped her silly.

 

[carpro]

Yes a Seventh Day Adventist, but that means nothing to the citizens of this world.

Sooner or later they will come after us and all others who name the name of Jesus Christ if we don't nip this in the bud.

Of course if HRC is elected she will probably make that bud blossom (IMO).

HankD

President Hillary Clinton would be there cheering them on. For sure.

 

[OnlyaSinner]

"Frankly, I don't get what the big deal is about the sermons. If you're preaching the Gospel, then give them all the copies they want and the body of Christ will stand with you.

So many sermons are online as it is."

If one freely wishes to supply the sermons, fine, and may the Gospel message work on the readers' hearts. However, for the government to demand that a pastor hand over the sermons would appear to tread on the First Amendment. If there's probable cause that the pastor is preaching violence/terrorism or the like, let the authorities get a warrant/subpoena. Due process applies to pastors, too.

And whether or not one supports The Donald (I absolutely do not) has no bearing on the appropriateness or constitutionality of this action against the pastor. Bringing up Trump (and "stop the madness") look like smokescreens from here.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

In some ways this reminds me of the situation in the old Soviet Union. Preachers in the registered churches were expected to submit their messages to the local authorities a year in advance.

 

[Revmitchell]

"Frankly, I don't get what the big deal is about the sermons. If you're preaching the Gospel, then give them all the copies they want and the body of Christ will stand with you.

The issue is not the content but the fact that the government thinks they can demand we turn over our sermons so they can determine if the content is acceptable. Freedom of religion Period.

 

[Baptist Believer]

"Frankly, I don't get what the big deal is about the sermons. If you're preaching the Gospel, then give them all the copies they want and the body of Christ will stand with you.

So many sermons are online as it is."

As has already been stated, the issue is not whether or not the sermons are available publicly, but that the government is demanding to know what is being spoken inside the local "family of God" and then pass judgement on the truthfulness, falsehood, or value of what is said. Religious liberty, as enshrined by the separation of church, demands that the government be religiously neutral. Therefore, the sermons are legally meaningless and outside of the government's constitutional authority and reach.

 

[Revmitchell]

Religious liberty, as enshrined by the separation of church, demands that the government be religiously neutral.

Uh no in fact the government from its inception has been anything but neutral What is demands is that no one is forced by the state to worship a specific way.

 

[Zaac]

The lesbian mayor of Houston tried this. The courts slapped her silly.

[emoji23] I thought we had discussed a similar story before.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Zaac]

If one freely wishes to supply the sermons, fine, and may the Gospel message work on the readers' hearts. However, for the government to demand that a pastor hand over the sermons would appear to tread on the First Amendment.

Interesting. But the government has been doing the same in state, local and federal criminal and civil cases forever through subpoenas.

If there's probable cause that the pastor is preaching violence/terrorism or the like, let the authorities get a warrant/subpoena. Due process applies to pastors, too.

Absolutely. And I suspect they will if they actually think some crime has been committed.

And whether or not one supports The Donald (I absolutely do not) has no bearing on the appropriateness or constitutionality of this action against the pastor. Bringing up Trump (and "stop the madness") look like smokescreens from here.

And? It looks like smokescreens when he and the GOP and it's surrogates being up what Bill Clinton did as the response to questions about what Trump did.[emoji6]

"Frankly, I don't get what the big deal is about the sermons. If you're preaching the Gospel, then give them all the copies they want and the body of Christ will stand with you.

So many sermons are online as it is."

If one freely wishes to supply the sermons, fine, and may the Gospel message work on the readers' hearts. However, for the government to demand that a pastor hand over the sermons would appear to tread on the First Amendment. If there's probable cause that the pastor is preaching violence/terrorism or the like, let the authorities get a warrant/subpoena. Due process applies to pastors, too.

And whether or not one supports The Donald (I absolutely do not) has no bearing on the appropriateness or constitutionality of this action against the pastor. Bringing up Trump (and "stop the madness") look like smokescreens from here.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[annsni]

See, this man was an employee of the state (and he had the same thing happen in California and he resigned then went to Georgia). He was not just your average pastor like any of the men on here are. Other people have been fired from their job for things they posted on Facebook or wrote in blogs or whatever. Would we expect speaking out against sin would be fine for a state employee? What if a state employee were out there speaking very publicly against Christians? Would we feel the same way?

 

[Revmitchell]

See, this man was an employee of the state (and he had the same thing happen in California and he resigned then went to Georgia). He was not just your average pastor like any of the men on here are. Other people have been fired from their job for things they posted on Facebook or wrote in blogs or whatever. Would we expect speaking out against sin would be fine for a state employee? What if a state employee were out there speaking very publicly against Christians? Would we feel the same way?

It doesn't matter. When it comes to religion and sermons it is a whole other subject and nature.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Uh no in fact the government from its inception has been anything but neutral.

Thank you for playing, but that is incorrect.

I could go over the history, but I doubt it would make any difference to you.

 

[Revmitchell]

T
I could go over the history, but I doubt it would make any difference to you.

Ditto

 

[carpro]

In some ways this reminds me of the situation in the old Soviet Union. Preachers in the registered churches were expected to submit their messages to the local authorities a year in advance.

Eventually, that's where we're headed if we keep electing democrats.

 

[carpro]

What if a state employee were out there speaking very publicly against Christians? Would we feel the same way?

Unless he is representing that view as a view of the state, he's free to speak about it in public or in private. It's none of the government's business.