Libs are easily offended and butthurt these days. Such aggrieved victims. Just look at this thread.
breaking Supreme Court sides with coach who sought to pray after games
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
The aggrieved victim in this case was a white, male Christian.
You mean the Court that unanimously ruled in favor of the previously referenced individuals, comprised of all of the current scotus justices, in an opinion by Justice Thomas? Boy, somehow I must have missed a light switch being thrown in free exercise cases.
1. This is the third ruling this session by my count that lowers the separation between church and state. Expect more.
2. You are a fool if you don't think a lot of coaches will view any player who doesn't kneel and pray with him negatively, and that there will not be a level of coercion under some coaches.
2. You are a fool if you don't think a lot of coaches will view any player who doesn't kneel and pray with him negatively, and that there will not be a level of coercion under some coaches.
The Supreme Court on Monday sided with a football coach from Washington state who sought to kneel and pray on the field after games.
The court ruled 6-3 along ideological lines for the coach. The justices said the coach's prayer was protected by the First Amendment.
“The Constitution and the best of our traditions counsel mutual respect and tolerance, not censorship and suppression, for religious and nonreligious views alike,” wrote Justice Neil Gorsuch for the majority.
The case forced the justices to wrestle with how to balance the religious and free speech rights of teachers and coaches with the rights of students not to feel pressured into participating in religious practices. The outcome could strengthen the acceptability of some religious practices in the public school setting.
The decision is also the latest in a line of Supreme Court rulings for religious plaintiffs.
Supreme Court sides with coach who sought to pray after games
The Supreme Court has sided with a football coach from Washington state who sought to kneel and pray on the field after games.nonpareilonline.com
Time for the Satanists and Wiccans to organize some on-field "worship services" at games now...
Bullshit. If you're a player on that team, you're compelled to participate or risk being ostracized.
It is my sacred right to eat pasta on the 50 yard line after a game to worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Just wait until it's rolling out the prayer rugs on the middle of the shop floor at work. Why should there be a separate prayer room / space at work? Just need a few minutes to kneel towards Mecca. No big deal.
Especially the team captains who didn't.
Again, the coach played this smartly. Whether he did it in good faith is a fair question for debate, but he did it play it smartly by establishing a specific record of noncoercion.
Re #2, most coaches that I know are actually pretty competitive personalities, and put players on the field to win. So yeah, there's some of that, whether intended or not, but honestly, it's chickenlittleism in significant part.
I'm just curious how this coach is getting everyone so worked up. Did he cause you any harm? Affect your life in any way? Seems like it's an easy thing to ignore if you don't like it. Mission accomplished for the coach if he's a douche just doing it for attention, he's got everyone's.
No he didn't. Doing everything possible would have meant saving his prayer for when he was in his office back in the locker room. The point of marching out to midfield is to coerce, plain and simple.
This. So many people on both sides just search for reasons to be outraged. It's pathetic and has to be exhausting.
It seems like all the leftists on this board agree that the coach was within his rights they just disagree with the decision. The court's only job is to determine the constitutionality of a law or rule and they did their job. Whether you like what the coach did or does is not the issue.
What does their case have to do with this. I don't see ANY relationship.
allowing RFRA claims for money damages by moslems v the fbi ? quite a bit to do with the prior poster's rather ludicrous point.
Fairly certain Jesus addressed this issue directly and he disagrees with this decision.
in a vacuum I agree with you. In practice? There will be some who abuse this practice.
and to the posters who ridiculed what if Muslims did this, sadly, I can’t agree with you here. If this were a Muslim coach, people would go nuts over the encroachment of Sharia Law.
Does the constitution say we all have freedom of religion? If so, than court reached the only decision it could have. There is nothing in the constitution that says we all have freedom of religion but we can only practice it in our dark basement with no windows.
No doubt....but that coaches ability to do that should be upheld as well.
There have been Muslim prayer rooms set up in schools and I support that as well....because they're obligated to pray 5 times a day.
As long as it's an individual decision and isn't mandated I really don't see a problem with these types of things.
my concern is just that tho it seems like this coach tried to avoid any semblance of coercion, and good for him, there will be coaches who won’t. And again, cynically, I can’t see the same reaction if this were a non-Christian coach.
It matters not what his "record" is. He is an authority figure under contract to the state. Until he is on his own time...which isn't until all of his players are beyond his supervision...his actions have a coercive, compulsory effect. Period. That's not even arguable to a rational person. Hell, he could have ordered players to not accompany him specifically to establish his "record of noncoercion". Seeking to be a test case would logically follow from his "march to midfield" conceit.
Good. Now imagine if Muslim students wanted to pray in the middle of the cafeteria in full view of others. Just cynically, I can’t see Christian parents being okay with that, even tho it’s the exact same principle.
it may be just me. But I’ve always felt prayer was something you did in private or at church. Praying in public always comes across as showing off to me, which imo isn’t the point.
Then you are seriously misreading what I wrote. I don't disagree with the decision, I just think he's a douche.
*sigh* his players are free to go to midfield and pray. He, however, is an authority figure under contract to the state. He represents the state. Not the same thing as a prayer room that is totally voluntary.
I have a bigger problem with a civics teacher leading your whole team in prayer (skipping the national anthem even) before taking the field. Never had the courage to say anything about it.
We already have that, they travel under the banner of the teachers union.
It’s hard to judge motive . Only God himself can read hearts.
it certainly is possible that people may do this just for attention. Hopefully he’s doing it because he is sincere in his motive. Whtever the case if one wants to argue the legality of it, the constitution does guarantee this freedom. If people don’t like it don’t watch .
Maybe you're correct and maybe some will try and coerce but that doesn't mean this or anyone else should lose their constitutional right simply because some might abuse it.
Why do you think you would? Do you really think a HS kid in a christian environment is going to testify against his coach? He's still got to live there, go to school there, maybe play football there. As I said, it's coercive on its face. You don't need "evidence" to understand that.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Iowa Football Signees and Recruits to Compete at 2024 State Track
- Latest: Eliot Clough