Supreme Court ruling on prayer case

[Shaul]

The US Supreme Court ruled on Monday in favor for a football coach who lost his job for praying on the field after games.

Supreme Court rules for former coach in public school prayer case

 

[Snow White]

That may be good. I think the coach should only have been punished if there was a pre-existing and non-vague rule against it.

 

[Estro Felino]

First amendment.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

First amendment.

The First Amendment separates Church and State. It does not give the Church free reign to dictate the lives of others, and as schools are the State it is unconstitutional for them to promote religion.
This pushes us back 70 years ago when schools could force this garbage on all of us. Where was the First Amendment freedom for non-Christians then? It was denied and crapped on.

 

[sun rise]

There is going to be turmoil when, for example, a non-Christian does the same thing, someone sues because he or she feels coerced to join in the prayer etc.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

 

[Snow White]

There is going to be turmoil when, for example, a non-Christian does the same thing, someone sues because he or she feels coerced to join in the prayer etc.

Yeah. If Christian prayer is allowed, so should Satanist prayer, etc.

 

[Viker]

Honestly, I have no objection to the ruling or what the coach did. I don't think he pressured any players to join him. That would be crossing the line. However, I am curious and leary about what this really means. I have trust issues, alright . So I am concerned if this is good for religious freedom in general or if something negative is looming behind it all... that's just me. I believe a Wiccan or maybe a Muslim should test the water, so to speak, soon and open/lead a prayer at a highschool ball game. Let's see if the right is genuinely concerned about religious freedom. If they don't object, great! It's just me. I have trust issues.

 

[Viker]

View attachment 64050

And and .

 

[Aštra’el]

This is a good day.

There are many reasons I approve, but one stands out. There is a numinous euphoria that comes with ritual prayer before a battle. Even during. It is something that enhances and strengthens one’s performance, helping you exceed that 100% effort. It is only heightened when it becomes group ritual.

I have my preferred God(s), of course, but I welcome it, no matter the religion.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

This is a good day.

There are many reasons I approve, but one stands out. There is a numinous euphoria that comes with ritual prayer before a battle. Even during. It is something that enhances and strengthens one’s performance, helping you exceed that 100% effort. It is only heightened when it becomes group ritual.

I have my preferred God(s), of course, but I welcome it, no matter the religion.

I do agree with this, and I do hope this will extend to traditions beyond Christianity.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Honestly, I have no objection to the ruling or what the coach did. I don't think he pressured any players to join him. That would be crossing the line. However, I am curious and leary about what this really means. I have trust issues, alright . So I am concerned if this is good for religious freedom in general or if something negative is looming behind it all... that's just me. I believe a Wiccan or maybe a Muslim should test the water, so to speak, soon and open/lead a prayer at a highschool ball game. Let's see if the right is genuinely concerned about religious freedom. If they don't object, great! It's just me. I have trust issues.

If it's works like city hall prayers they'll do an about face and want the whole thing shut down rather than share society.

 

[Viker]

If it's works like city hall prayers they'll do an about face and want the whole thing shut down rather than share society.

They can do an about face and not participate, no problem. Calling for retributive action, shutting things down....very serious problem for me.

It would be the thing to have me call for total ban of anything religious on any public property. That's how you put a stop to it all.

There should be inclusive tolerance or zero tolerance for religious display/ceremony on public property. No partiality in between.

 

[Erebus]

View attachment 64050

Looking forward to seeing the Satanic Temple do exactly this.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

They can do an about face and not participate, no problem. Calling for retributive action, shutting things down....very serious problem for me.

It would be the thing to have me call for total ban of anything religious on any public property. That's how you put a stop to it all.

There should be inclusive tolerance or zero tolerance for religious display/ceremony on public property. No partiality in between.

That's why many go with none at all because it's vastly easier than all of them at once.

 

[Viker]

Looking forward to seeing the Satanic Temple do exactly this.

You know they will. It'll be hell-arious to behold.

 

[Estro Felino]

The First Amendment separates Church and State. It does not give the Church free reign to dictate the lives of others, and as schools are the State it is unconstitutional for them to promote religion.
This pushes us back 70 years ago when schools could force this garbage on all of us. Where was the First Amendment freedom for non-Christians then? It was denied and crapped on.

Does this mean that non-Christians can?

 

[Estro Felino]

I do agree with this, and I do hope this will extend to traditions beyond Christianity.

Bravo.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Does this mean that non-Christians can?

Can what? Have the same privileges? In legal theory yes, but in practice Christians are selfish and greedy about their rights and hate sharing them. As I mentioned, in the case of city hall meetings their response has been just to have no more prayer at the beginning rather than share the privileges and rights with others.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Have all of you supporters of this ruling considered the position of authority that this coach has over his students/players -- and that he is perfectly capable of noting which of them participates, and which don't. Also, unless they're idiots, those students/players know that he can observe, and know that he can make team decisions based upon his own feelings about their participation?

This is something Justice Sotomayor pointed out for the 3 dissenters on the Court. And it is one of the reasons for the Establishment clause of the first amendment, which the decision largely ignores, while giving almost total preference to the Free Exercise clause.

In this case, a power relationship between faculty and students, the Establishment clause really must take precedence.