Is the Dallas Mayor out of line

[Shadow Wolf]

What excuse?

Turning down work offers that include things that go against your views.

 

[Revoltingest]

Turning down work offers that include things that go against your views.

How often does that happen?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah. This preacher character, Mr. Jeffress, seems to be making up a story (a.k.a. lying) in order to drum up support through Fox News and such sites as Starnes. A Newsweek article reports similar findings as your Dallas News article. The billboard company and the mayor both deny any communication regarding whether or not the signs needed to come down.

When I read the OP's source alarm below went off when I saw that they complained how Facebook thought that they were a 'fake news ' source. That is why I looked elsewhere for another opinion.

 

[fantome profane]

"Billboards promoting a celebration of faith and freedom at the First Baptist Church in Dallas were removed after complaints from Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings and the Dallas Morning News.

The patriotic billboard campaign included the title of the sermon Dr. Robert Jeffress planned to deliver on June 24 – “America is a Christian Nation.”

https://www.toddstarnes.com/faith/c...ards-declaring-america-is-a-christian-nation/

Whether you agree or not... should not a church be allowed to advertise a viewpoint particularly one shared by past Supreme Court justices ?

Free speech works both ways. They had the right to put up the billboard, and people have the right to complain. Other than expressing disagreement, what did the Mayor do? Did he abuse his office in some way? Did the Mayor even call for the billboards to be taken down? Or did he simply express a counter view?

 

[Father Heathen]

"Billboards promoting a celebration of faith and freedom at the First Baptist Church in Dallas were removed after complaints from Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings and the Dallas Morning News.

The patriotic billboard campaign included the title of the sermon Dr. Robert Jeffress planned to deliver on June 24 – “America is a Christian Nation.”

https://www.toddstarnes.com/faith/c...ards-declaring-america-is-a-christian-nation/

Whether you agree or not... should not a church be allowed to advertise a viewpoint particularly one shared by past Supreme Court justices ?

Whether or not the mayor was wrong aside, how could such a billboard possibly be described as "patriotic" when it promotes a notion that defies everything this nation stands for? Have you not read the constitution nor have any familiarity at all with the founding fathers, kid? If you want to live in an oppressive third world theocracy, then move to Iran.

 

[David T]

I wonder if the church wants to keep its tax exempt status, which limits its engagement in politics?

I suspect that this article isn't giving the whole story, but if it is, and the church wants to get involved in politics, it should be allowed to, but should also then pay taxes like the rest of us.

That's a big star. It's a delicate line but one I agree with. But but but corporations seem to actually more problematic. Churches supply votes but corps supply lots of money.

 

[David T]

Whether or not the mayor was wrong aside, how could such a billboard possibly be described as "patriotic" when it promotes a notion that defies everything this nation stands for? Have you not read the constitution nor have any familiarity at all with the founding fathers, kid? If you want to live in an oppressive third world theocracy, then move to Iran.

Oh hell it isn't even Christian it's pop culture nonsense. Lady gaga is infinitely deeper than this dude. How pitiful is that. No Britney spears is more profound... No wierd Al yankovich is deep compared to this nonsense.

 

[sun rise]

The mayor did not order them to be taken down. The extreme far right news source the OP used was far from honest:

https://www.dallasnews.com/life/fai...as-america-christian-nation-billboard-removed

The mayor stated an opinion. That the ads were incorrect and divisive and he was correct in that. The decision came from the billboard company, and they cited an opinion piece, not the mayor, as the reason. I think you will find the article I linked a bit more reliable.

And it's worth noting something that the extremists don't want to acknowledge:

In the past, similar considerations have been taken regarding signs posted by Muslim groups, Scientologists, abortion opponents and abortion-rights supporters, a company spokeswoman said.

Whether or not the company should have allowed billboards for all those groups is another question.

Personally as long as there is no incitement to commit crimes etc, the billboard in question should have been allowed as well as a Muslim group that wants to put "Allahu akbar" on a billboard as well as others including left-hand groups that want to put their beliefs on a billboard.

All or none.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And it's worth noting something that the extremists don't want to acknowledge:

In the past, similar considerations have been taken regarding signs posted by Muslim groups, Scientologists, abortion opponents and abortion-rights supporters, a company spokeswoman said.

Whether or not the company should have allowed billboards for all those groups is another question.

Personally as long as there is no incitement to commit crimes etc, the billboard in question should have been allowed as well as a Muslim group that wants to put "Allahu akbar" on a billboard as well as others including left-hand groups that want to put their beliefs on a billboard.

All or none.

I am not so sure that I support the companies actions. Though prejudice against non-Christian groups is rife the wrong of one group does not justify prejudice against another. I only pointed out that blaming the mayor was false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Free speech works both ways. They had the right to put up the billboard, and people have the right to complain. Other than expressing disagreement, what did the Mayor do? Did he abuse his office in some way? Did the Mayor even call for the billboards to be taken down? Or did he simply express a counter view?

The mayor was falsely accused. All he did was to point out the truth. That the billboard was divisive and historically wrong. The billboard company pointed to a newspaper column, not the mayor for their reason that they took it down. A mayors job is to render such opinions. He did not try to enforce it.

 

[Skwim]

"Billboards promoting a celebration of faith and freedom at the First Baptist Church in Dallas were removed after complaints from Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings and the Dallas Morning News.

The patriotic billboard campaign included the title of the sermon Dr. Robert Jeffress planned to deliver on June 24 – “America is a Christian Nation.”

https://www.toddstarnes.com/faith/c...ards-declaring-america-is-a-christian-nation/

Whether you agree or not... should not a church be allowed to advertise a viewpoint particularly one shared by past Supreme Court justices ?

Whether it's a sentiment shared by past Supreme Court justices is irrelevant. I took a look at the billboard and didn't see anything patriotic about it at all. In fact, as the billboard company said, it is divisive. However, as a matter of free, but dumb in this case, speech, I don't see any hard justification for taking it down. I believe one is allowed to lie as long as it doesn't amount to libel. That said, I can see it as perhaps an anti-Muslim message, which may be legal grounds for its removal.

.

 

[HonestJoe]

I’d suggest the mayor here should be celebrated for striking exactly the right balance in his response to the controversy, working from the facts, acknowledging all sides in the debate and reaching a fair conclusion. It strikes me as a good example for certain other US politicians we could name.

 

[whirlingmerc]

The mayor is right. Check out the treaty of Tripoli:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

Unanimously signed by every Senator and signed by the president it clearly states that the U.S. is not a Christian nation.

An overstated argument. Pirates held people hostage and under duress that treaty signed. In a sense not and in a sense founded on Christian principles to a significant degree.

But churches do have freedom of expression and trying to sensor a sermon series seems inappropriate

 

[fantome profane]

But churches do have freedom of expression and trying to sensor a sermon series seems inappropriate

Yes, trying to censor a sermon does seem inappropriate.

Did somebody do that?

 

[Subduction Zone]

An overstated argument. Pirates held people hostage and under duress that treaty signed. In a sense not and in a sense founded on Christian principles to a significant degree.

But churches do have freedom of expression and trying to sensor a sermon series seems inappropriate

Please, now you are claiming that the founding fathers had no scruples. You really can't have it both ways. The U.S. was founded as a secular nation. Though I am betting that you do not understand that term either. There were no "Christian principles" that it was founded on. If that were the actual case we might be much closer to being a communistic country than a capitalistic one. Or have you forgotten how often Jesus preached against worldly goods? What principles unique to Christianity was our government founded on?


Also there was no attempt to censor a sermon. Do you not understand that? When the mayor pointed out that the church giving the sermon was not only divisive but wrong that was not an attempt to censor. He did not say that they can't be idiots.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Please, now you are claiming that the founding fathers had no scruples. You really can't have it both ways. The U.S. was founded as a secular nation. Though I am betting that you do not understand that term either. There were no "Christian principles" that it was founded on. If that were the actual case we might be much closer to being a communistic country than a capitalistic one. Or have you forgotten how often Jesus preached against worldly goods? What principles unique to Christianity was our government founded on?


Also there was no attempt to censor a sermon. Do you not understand that? When the mayor pointed out that the church giving the sermon was not only divisive but wrong that was not an attempt to censor. He did not say that they can't be idiots.

"the Dallas-based megachurch offered to recast the verbiage on the signs into a question: “Is America a Christian Nation?” But the advertising company was not interested in keeping the signs up."

You can't even ask the question?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...lboards-come-down-in-dallas-after-complaints/


The sermon title was inspired by a comments made by Supreme Court Justices John Jay and David Josiah Brewer – both of whom described America as a Christian nation. However, the Dallas Morning News and Mayor Rawlings blasted the pastor’s sermon title suggesting it was hateful and divisive.

https://www.toddstarnes.com/faith/law-firm-faces-charges-for-defending-christian-womens-shelter/

It's a bit reductionistic to call John Jay or David Josiah Brewer haters.

 

[Polymath257]

"the Dallas-based megachurch offered to recast the verbiage on the signs into a question: “Is America a Christian Nation?” But the advertising company was not interested in keeping the signs up."

You can't even ask the question?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...lboards-come-down-in-dallas-after-complaints/


The sermon title was inspired by a comments made by Supreme Court Justices John Jay and David Josiah Brewer – both of whom described America as a Christian nation. However, the Dallas Morning News and Mayor Rawlings blasted the pastor’s sermon title suggesting it was hateful and divisive.

https://www.toddstarnes.com/faith/law-firm-faces-charges-for-defending-christian-womens-shelter/

It's a bit reductionistic to call John Jay or David Josiah Brewer haters.

Are you going to force the billboard company to put up the sign?

 

[whirlingmerc]

Are you going to force the billboard company to put up the sign?

nope... just saying the Mayor had his chilling effect.

 

[Shad]

"

Whether you agree or not... should not a church be allowed to advertise a viewpoint particularly one shared by past Supreme Court justices ?

Churches are free to advertise their views according to their leaders and/or members. Just as those that wish to criticize those views are free to do so. If a business cuts ties because of PR fallout due to the signs they are free to do. If those businesses violated a contract the parties involved can sue if they wish. The churches are also free to be wrong and make it public (not a judgement on their argument as I have no read/heard it)

I see no evidence of the mayor abusing the powers of the officer. Rather I see a politician making typical statements about religion. This one being more moderate than say GOP statements about religion.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Churches are free to advertise their views according to their leaders and/or members. Just as those that wish to criticize those views are free to do so. If a business cuts ties because of PR fallout due to the signs they are free to do. If those businesses violated a contract the parties involved can sue if they wish. The churches are also free to be wrong and make it public (not a judgement on their argument as I have no read/heard it)

I see no evidence of the mayor abusing the powers of the officer. Rather I see a politician making typical statements about religion. This one being more moderate than say GOP statements about religion.

I would not say moderate... left wing... politically correct .. maybe