Bobble thy head in memory of Me. A high school assistant sportsball coach in Bremerton, Washington, had a nice chat with the Almighty, who told him that, despite orders to cut it out, he needs to keep praying on the 50-yard line following every game, because God is kind of weird about shit like that.
This>>Gosh, what a brave, brave man, praying in public in a majority-Christian community where Christians nonetheless feel oppressed by the founding document of their nation.
I didn't go away I wanted to make sure I understood what you were citing and not just give some diarrhea of the mouth response which I might regret later.
Looking at Lee v. Weisman specifically that was a case involving prayers during graduation ceremonies. Those are certainly - not so much compulsory events but - they are certainly....school sponsored and "relatively" captive audiences. I mean you "have to" go to graduation. Its cultural and expected. So to say, if prayer offends you don't have to attend graduation....that's not real. The Weisman opinion speaks to that specifically. While Weisman can be used to address this particular situation it does not address it specifically.
But with the football situation it's different, at least in the sense that Weisman applies. It is not a public speech at what is clearly a school event (as in Weisman), it is not declared or implied to be a required event. It is happening on that could reasonably considered the coaches own time. (see my previous posts) and while it may happen in view of the public, school employees are not banned from public displays of religious behavior on their own time.
The coercive argument might have some merit if there were not 100's of people (including players) walking away from the field and the prayer itself. I have a frame of reference for this - I participated in sports - football specifically - when I was in high school. Those same football players know that their coach goes to church, probably where. Some of them likely see that coach either traveling to and from church events and they don't feel coerced to participate in religion. So the coercion argument doesn't really apply here.
Actually he's not. Jesus himself prays in public many times. The point of the lesson that Jesus is teaching in this case is the condition of your heart personally not trying to establish some sort of proper behavior.
He mentions that some people pray in front of others as a means of making themselves look pious. They have no interest in actually communicating with God, but to LOOK like they are communicating with God so that others will think highly of them. Jesus is saying - don't have your heart in the wrong place when you pray. And then he makes a suggestion - not a command - about how you - the individual - can make sure that you don't act like that.
It's no more a command than when I tell my kids, "Don't play in the street. In fact you should stay on this side of the sidewalk to make sure you don't play in the street." I don't care if my kids play in the grass between the sidewalk and the street - just don't end up in the street. I tell him to stay on the other side of the sidewalk so he doesn't accidentally end up in the street. All it takes is one "accident" like that to be hit by a car and killed.
school employees are not banned from public displays of religious behavior on their own time
Yes, they are not banned from public displays of religious behavior on their own time. The problem here is that he was not yet "on his own time".
Contrary to the position you have taken, the coach is not off "school time" when the whistle blows at the end of the game. If the coach is being paid to be there (or is volunteering with the express permission of the school), until the students are released from his responsibility he is still on the clock - which means he is still at work until such time as the students have taken off their uniforms, showered, changed, and have either been released to their parents or have left the school premises (and thus left the coach's zone of responsibility).
You argue for a RFRA accommodation. However Washington State does not have a RFRA law, and the courts have restricted the Federal RFRA to actions taken by the Federal Government and its entities, therefore he can seek no relief there.
It is his own time. As I indicated before the school would likely have no issues with a trip to the 50 yard line for a non-religious personal moment for the coach. It's his own time. If the team is reasonably cared for my the other coaches or volunteers. Which they would accept for a personal trip. It is reasonable for an accommodation then.
The accommodation has nothing to do with the RFRA but with the Civil Rights Act. Employers are required to accommodate a sincere religious practice as long is it does not cause undue hardship to the company (the school). If they let the coach go to the 50 for a non-religious reason then clearly it's not a hardship and therefore are required to allow it for a religious reason.
The Founding Fathers prayed before opening Congress every day. They wrote the amendment and clearly didn't see that as a violation. The President still to this day talks about God in his speeches. Swears in by putting his had on a Bible (if they choose),
How can it be possible that all this can happen and it's not establishment but some public school employee does it and everyone goes bananas?
I disagree, based on my experience in education policy and legal training. And I'm done with this discussion, since it's clear neither of us is going to change the other's mind.
Someone explain to me how the Founding Fathers who wrote and passed the Bill of Rights and opened Congress every day in prayer, understanding what they meant by law and establishment, were not Establishment Claus-ing a religion. But because some football coach prays on the 50 yard-line everyone goes bananas on establishment?
And then there's this: https://vimeo.com/71847226 Pretty much doing this every day for roughly 225 years. Not establishment.
I'll give it a go. Because Congress people and the founding fathers are (were) adults are where they choose to be. While high school students are children basically, who at the top of their list of important things are to "fit in". And when this thumper, and all the other sheep head out to the 50 yard line to pray, make those who don't want to pray, feel like they have to, as if it is a school function. And as said before, they just want to fit in, so they feel they must join in to belong. Can Jesus not wait until the coach gets home? My Jesus can, it's a shame his needs so much public praise, and this coach needs to be seem praying by so many. Why is he so insecure in his faith. What is he covering?
Well, "Establishment", which was the point of the article, has nothing to do with age or maturity. The "unlawful promotion of religion" seems to be the emphasis of the article above. In this case it takes place in a school but the sentiment is larger than that. If the people who wrote the document didn't see praying before Congressional sessions or people attending church services in federal buildings - like The Capitol - as "establishing a religion" by those who are seen by everyone- including high school students. Why should the good Doktor? Should public employees not be able to put a bible on their desk? You are putting a lot on teachers and school administrators.
In this argument regarding these children being influenced by this coach, were is the role of parenting? Can parents not know who this coach is and what he is about and then not "un-teach" their kid about religion? As a Christian that is exactly the standard I am held to regarding the public schools teaching that sex is natural and OK to do whenever my kid feels that the time is right, just use protection. And by the way, here's how that works. Complete with visual aids. I am responsible for knowing that those subjects are taught and when so I can "un-teach" that to my kid on my time.
Besides when we think about these impressionable kids. Everyone of those players knows who the coach is. They know that he goes to church. They likely know which one. If he allows his faith to permeate his life then there can be no mistake about his faith in his coaching in the eyes of his players. All of this is OK and doesn't influence these impressionable kids to much. None of those things put undue pressure on the kid to act a certain way to get the starting job. Or just to be liked by the coach and those other players that go to the same church as the coach. But somehow praying on the 50 is too much??
Yes, it is. Let me guess, when you do something nice for something, or give money to charity, you make sure you let everyone know, cause it's all about letting everyone know what a good Christian you are, isn't it. I also have issue with your contention that all the kids know that the coach attend church, unless of course what I said above, but why should it be up to the parents to unteach something, simply because the coach is self righteous.
I do not. But giving money to charity isn't what is at issue here. In fact, WHY the coach did what he did is not what is at issue in this article, it's if he is allowed to do it. Self-righteousness isn't against the law. What's at issue here is the legality of his actions. You may disagree with his choice but that is about personal opinion on how one should behave not the law.
There is nothing in the Christian Bible that prohibits praying in public. Jesus does it himself. There is nothing in the Bible that prohibits public displays of ones faith in God, again Jesus does this himself.
You said, "why should it be up to the parents to unteach something" but that is EXACTLY what many Christian parents face from a school system that teaches children that sex is simply a biological process and they should feel free to do it when they are ready. I don't believe that. I have to unteach that to my kids when the entire school system is being self-righteous.
wow, i didn't know that the only football game I ever saw had a fancy name, and all. Also, it rained during the whole stupid game.
This ass t coach needs to be fired.
Well, I had some History Professor angrily tell the class that California is NOT the center of the universe. And they let him teach...
Christian Oppression!
This>>Gosh, what a brave, brave man, praying in public in a majority-Christian community where Christians nonetheless feel oppressed by the founding document of their nation.
I didn't go away I wanted to make sure I understood what you were citing and not just give some diarrhea of the mouth response which I might regret later.
Looking at Lee v. Weisman specifically that was a case involving prayers during graduation ceremonies. Those are certainly - not so much compulsory events but - they are certainly....school sponsored and "relatively" captive audiences. I mean you "have to" go to graduation. Its cultural and expected. So to say, if prayer offends you don't have to attend graduation....that's not real. The Weisman opinion speaks to that specifically. While Weisman can be used to address this particular situation it does not address it specifically.
But with the football situation it's different, at least in the sense that Weisman applies. It is not a public speech at what is clearly a school event (as in Weisman), it is not declared or implied to be a required event. It is happening on that could reasonably considered the coaches own time. (see my previous posts) and while it may happen in view of the public, school employees are not banned from public displays of religious behavior on their own time.
The coercive argument might have some merit if there were not 100's of people (including players) walking away from the field and the prayer itself. I have a frame of reference for this - I participated in sports - football specifically - when I was in high school. Those same football players know that their coach goes to church, probably where. Some of them likely see that coach either traveling to and from church events and they don't feel coerced to participate in religion. So the coercion argument doesn't really apply here.
Actually he's not. Jesus himself prays in public many times. The point of the lesson that Jesus is teaching in this case is the condition of your heart personally not trying to establish some sort of proper behavior.
He mentions that some people pray in front of others as a means of making themselves look pious. They have no interest in actually communicating with God, but to LOOK like they are communicating with God so that others will think highly of them. Jesus is saying - don't have your heart in the wrong place when you pray. And then he makes a suggestion - not a command - about how you - the individual - can make sure that you don't act like that.
It's no more a command than when I tell my kids, "Don't play in the street. In fact you should stay on this side of the sidewalk to make sure you don't play in the street." I don't care if my kids play in the grass between the sidewalk and the street - just don't end up in the street. I tell him to stay on the other side of the sidewalk so he doesn't accidentally end up in the street. All it takes is one "accident" like that to be hit by a car and killed.
school employees are not banned from public displays of religious behavior on their own time
Yes, they are not banned from public displays of religious behavior on their own time. The problem here is that he was not yet "on his own time".
Contrary to the position you have taken, the coach is not off "school time" when the whistle blows at the end of the game. If the coach is being paid to be there (or is volunteering with the express permission of the school), until the students are released from his responsibility he is still on the clock - which means he is still at work until such time as the students have taken off their uniforms, showered, changed, and have either been released to their parents or have left the school premises (and thus left the coach's zone of responsibility).
You argue for a RFRA accommodation. However Washington State does not have a RFRA law, and the courts have restricted the Federal RFRA to actions taken by the Federal Government and its entities, therefore he can seek no relief there.
It is his own time. As I indicated before the school would likely have no issues with a trip to the 50 yard line for a non-religious personal moment for the coach. It's his own time. If the team is reasonably cared for my the other coaches or volunteers. Which they would accept for a personal trip. It is reasonable for an accommodation then.
The accommodation has nothing to do with the RFRA but with the Civil Rights Act. Employers are required to accommodate a sincere religious practice as long is it does not cause undue hardship to the company (the school). If they let the coach go to the 50 for a non-religious reason then clearly it's not a hardship and therefore are required to allow it for a religious reason.
The Founding Fathers prayed before opening Congress every day. They wrote the amendment and clearly didn't see that as a violation. The President still to this day talks about God in his speeches. Swears in by putting his had on a Bible (if they choose),
How can it be possible that all this can happen and it's not establishment but some public school employee does it and everyone goes bananas?
I disagree, based on my experience in education policy and legal training. And I'm done with this discussion, since it's clear neither of us is going to change the other's mind.
Someone explain to me how the Founding Fathers who wrote and passed the Bill of Rights and opened Congress every day in prayer, understanding what they meant by law and establishment, were not Establishment Claus-ing a religion. But because some football coach prays on the 50 yard-line everyone goes bananas on establishment?
And then there's this: https://vimeo.com/71847226 Pretty much doing this every day for roughly 225 years. Not establishment.
I'll give it a go. Because Congress people and the founding fathers are (were) adults are where they choose to be. While high school students are children basically, who at the top of their list of important things are to "fit in". And when this thumper, and all the other sheep head out to the 50 yard line to pray, make those who don't want to pray, feel like they have to, as if it is a school function. And as said before, they just want to fit in, so they feel they must join in to belong. Can Jesus not wait until the coach gets home? My Jesus can, it's a shame his needs so much public praise, and this coach needs to be seem praying by so many. Why is he so insecure in his faith. What is he covering?
Well, "Establishment", which was the point of the article, has nothing to do with age or maturity. The "unlawful promotion of religion" seems to be the emphasis of the article above. In this case it takes place in a school but the sentiment is larger than that. If the people who wrote the document didn't see praying before Congressional sessions or people attending church services in federal buildings - like The Capitol - as "establishing a religion" by those who are seen by everyone- including high school students. Why should the good Doktor? Should public employees not be able to put a bible on their desk? You are putting a lot on teachers and school administrators.
In this argument regarding these children being influenced by this coach, were is the role of parenting? Can parents not know who this coach is and what he is about and then not "un-teach" their kid about religion? As a Christian that is exactly the standard I am held to regarding the public schools teaching that sex is natural and OK to do whenever my kid feels that the time is right, just use protection. And by the way, here's how that works. Complete with visual aids. I am responsible for knowing that those subjects are taught and when so I can "un-teach" that to my kid on my time.
Besides when we think about these impressionable kids. Everyone of those players knows who the coach is. They know that he goes to church. They likely know which one. If he allows his faith to permeate his life then there can be no mistake about his faith in his coaching in the eyes of his players. All of this is OK and doesn't influence these impressionable kids to much. None of those things put undue pressure on the kid to act a certain way to get the starting job. Or just to be liked by the coach and those other players that go to the same church as the coach. But somehow praying on the 50 is too much??
Yes, it is. Let me guess, when you do something nice for something, or give money to charity, you make sure you let everyone know, cause it's all about letting everyone know what a good Christian you are, isn't it. I also have issue with your contention that all the kids know that the coach attend church, unless of course what I said above, but why should it be up to the parents to unteach something, simply because the coach is self righteous.
I do not. But giving money to charity isn't what is at issue here. In fact, WHY the coach did what he did is not what is at issue in this article, it's if he is allowed to do it. Self-righteousness isn't against the law. What's at issue here is the legality of his actions. You may disagree with his choice but that is about personal opinion on how one should behave not the law.
There is nothing in the Christian Bible that prohibits praying in public. Jesus does it himself. There is nothing in the Bible that prohibits public displays of ones faith in God, again Jesus does this himself.
You said, "why should it be up to the parents to unteach something" but that is EXACTLY what many Christian parents face from a school system that teaches children that sex is simply a biological process and they should feel free to do it when they are ready. I don't believe that. I have to unteach that to my kids when the entire school system is being self-righteous.