Posted on 02/23/2022 6:27:49 AM PST by Kaslin
There are four minutes left in the third quarter of a public high school football game in the state of Washington.
A player tries to make a tackle with his head pointed down, and his helmet flies off. He falls to the ground and lies motionless.
An assistant coach runs out onto the field. He kneels beside the boy, and the boy says, "I'm seriously hurt. Please, pray for me."
The coach calls out, "Call an ambulance." Then he begins to pray as the boy had requested.
Did that coach just establish a religion for the state of Washington? Did he violate the First Amendment, which declares that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"?
Now, travel south to Alabama, where some people sometimes act as if football is the state religion.
Unlike the hypothetical example from Washington given above, Alabama provides a real-life example of a football coach getting publicly involved in religion.
Back in February 2016, the Crimson White, which is "the official student newspaper of the University of Alabama," ran a story with the headline "St. Francis of Assisi University Parish breaks ground for the Saban Catholic Student Center."
"On Monday, Feb. 1, St. Francis of Assisi University Parish hosted a groundbreaking ceremony for the Saban Catholic Student Center," said the first paragraph of the story.
"University of Alabama Head Football Coach Nick Saban and his wife, Terry, helped raise money to build the $1.9 million, 4,600-square-foot project on campus," AL.com reported.
"This is going to be something that is going to be a part of our legacy, Terry and I's legacy, that we're going to be as proud of as anything we'll ever accomplish," Saban said at the groundbreaking ceremony, according to the Crimson White.
"It really pleases us to get involved in a project like this where students who are going to be able to have an opportunity to have a place to gather and socialize, to really think about their faith and be affected by really positive leadership in our community and our church," Saban said.
Given that Saban is an employee of the University of Alabama, which is a public university, did his involvement in developing a specifically Catholic center for Alabama students violate the First Amendment ban on Congress making a "law respecting an establishment of religion"?
No. Saban is not only a great football coach; he is a great cultural hero in his support of the Catholic Church.
Now, move back to Washington.
On Oct. 16, 2015, the varsity football team at Bremerton High School took on the varsity team from Centralia High School. After the game, there was an all-American moment. It involved a longstanding postgame activity engaged in by Bremerton assistant coach Joseph Kennedy.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has provided a description of it.
"Kennedy is a practicing Christian," said the court. "Kennedy's religious beliefs required him to 'give thanks through prayer, at the end of each game, for what the players had accomplished and for the opportunity to be a part of their lives through football.
"Specifically," the court continued, "'(a)fter the game (was) over, and after the players and coaches from both teams ( ) met to shake hands at midfield,' Kennedy felt called to kneel at the 50-yard line and offer a brief, quiet prayer of thanksgiving for player safety, sportsmanship, and spirited competition.' Kennedy's prayer usually lasted about thirty seconds. Kennedy's religious beliefs required that his prayer occur on the field where the game was played, immediately after the game concluded. This necessarily meant that spectators -- students, parents, and community members -- would observe Kennedy's religious conduct."
The Bremerton School District had barred Kennedy from engaging in this postgame prayer.
"When BSD's superintendent became aware of Kennedy's religious observances on the 50-yard line with players immediately following a game, he wrote Kennedy informing him what he must avoid doing in order to protect BSD from an Establishment Clause claim," explained the 9th Circuit.
The 9th Circuit concluded that had the BSD allowed Kennedy to continue engaging in his quiet on-field prayer after football games, the school district would have violated the Constitution's ban on establishing a religion.
"We hold that BSD's allowance of Kennedy's conduct would violate the Establishment Clause," said the court, "consequently, BSD's efforts to prevent the conduct did not violate Kennedy's constitutional rights, nor his rights under Title VII."
In sum: This court claims that allowing a public high school assistant coach to quietly pray after a football game is effectively equivalent to establishing a government religion.
Now, go back to last Thursday morning in the chamber of the U.S. Senate. Dr. Barry C. Black, the long-time chaplain of that body, was the first person to speak that day, as he is on most days.
He started last Thursday with the same three words he virtually always uses to open a day in the Senate: "Let us pray."
"Oh God," he continued, speaking into a microphone, "You are our heavenly parent, and we thank You for every expression of Your love."
Did that establish a religion? Of course not.
The Supreme Court will decide this spring whether a public school football coach has a First Amendment right to say a quiet prayer on a public field after a game.
Of course he does.
Like it's somehow worse than when spectators "observe" a government employee's non-religious worldly "conduct". LOL Give me a break, thin-skinned worldly people.
There is no law against to people,having to witness someone praying. Seeing someone pray does force someone to become a Christian or join a religion. That is what the co situation is about, forcing people by way of penalty if they refuse, to join an “official religion” of any persuasion. A man praying for another in pub,it does not rise to force g anyone to do anything, and the left know this. Poli5icoans can even lay in public or read their Bible whike,while, job because it forces noone to become religious or join a religion
“First they got Dixie,
then they got whisky,
and now we can’t pray anymore”
L. Grizzard
So then a turban of a Sikh, a skull cap of a Jew, or a hijab of a Muslim would be just as offensive if worn on the field?
Do it anyway and make the “law” or “ruling” null and void.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
If you think they meant that a state paid coach can't pray at a football game, you've been drinking the Dim kool-aid. What it meant was, and is obvious from what was going on at the time, that the federal government won't force you to be part of a particular church to have freedom or be successful in life, nor will they punish you for being part of a particular church.
That's the kind of thing that had been going on at the time. That's what the Church of England had done (particularly with the king as the head of the church). That's what different states had already been doing. Basically, they wanted to ensure that the U.S. government was as open to different church memberships (or absence of church membership) as William Penn was when he set up Pennsylvania.
The 1st amendment doesn't guarantee you a right to not have to be around a Christian or someone expressing his Christian beliefs. Since this article is about a school employee, if anything the 1st amendment (combined with the 14th amendment extending this protections to the state level) protects Christians from having to answer biology tests where the only "right" answer is to believe that we all evolved from amoeba.
Thankfully America isn’t Canada ... yet ... where priests are arrested for preaching to Convoy truckers.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams
“ The 9th Circuit concluded that had the BSD allowed Kennedy to continue engaging in his quiet on-field prayer after football games, the school district would have violated the Constitution’s ban on establishing a religion.”
BS. Absolute BS.
How can a coach, who is not Congress, establish a state religion? Who gives these idiots power? And they seem so concerned with the “establishment clause”, but like with 2A “shall not be infringed” part, they omit the “or prevent the free exercise thereof” part.
That’s wgphat I said. Not sure why you thought I think coaches can’t pray on public school a field?
[[That’s what the Church of England had done]]
Exactly, and thatnismwhy we left England In the first place, to escape that kind of liberty destroying tyranny.
Our constitution was not created in order to protect people’s delicate easily offended feelings, it was created to correct people’s actusl rights. A person has a right Ina free and open society to pray, anywhere anytime the like. And if someone’s delicate easily,offended sense of feelings get offended, then too bad. What the person can’t do though, is as I mentioned, force his students to,pray with him, and to join his particular religion under risk of punishment if they refuse
Ginsburg i b.eeive it was bastardized the amendment to mean that anyone caught praying on public property is in violation of the co situation because it “forced peop,e to participate because they will feel left out if they dont”. She basically argued that a teacher or public figure praying was a coercive event because peop.e that chose not to participate would feel ostracized.
She turned out constitution on its head by asking it meant ot protect people’s delicate and easily,offended feelings,rather than being strictly a rights upholding documentsadly the majority of other sc judges went along with her bastardizing the constitution, as they a,so did o. Obama are and gay marriage, likening gay proclivities and their desire to pretend to be married to being black or a minority
The Supreme Court, despite its bastardizztion of the constitution on this issue, has ruled on over and over that trachers have a right pray, even on A public playing field, and still these lower courts violate the ru,ing of the Supreme Court by denying teachers and school officials their constitutionally protected rights
The sc has tried to argue that praying constitutes coercion, but I. The end they upheld the right for public officials to pray . Many times they’ve tried to,shut down congress praying before meetings, and have not succeeded so far. But only because the restrainer (the church, christians”) are here to make,sure ina,Ina, rights are not denied. As soon as the restrainer is removed, all hell is gonna ,iterally break loose, and people will lose their rights altogether. Thst is the irony of the whole thing
I know, I can’t be,eive what happend. He was arrested wasted and thrown I to solitary confinement simply because he embarrassed the Canadian authorities when he screamed at them at his church and made them retreat because they had no warrent to search his church.
We actually are experiencing that same kind of severe government revenge on our citizens. The polilitical prisoners of Jan 6, and also what comes to mind was the fella who made an Inter et video whi h the liberals in government accused hi. Of inciting benghazi attacks. The claim was fou d to be bull cookies, but they Imprisoned him anyways
Also llavoy finnacum (sp?] was murdered in a cold blooded ambush by the govenrment because he stood up to the government and em arrested them. The fellas inmthe bundy family and friends that had armed the standoff with the government also were punished severely for daring to defy the government over land that wasn’t the governments to take apparently.
There are likely many more cases too where our government has politically ruined people’s lives because the people stood up to them- it is happening here too. One government stooge just suggested that the freedom convoy that is set to go across america have their trucks confiscated and given to other people who are just starting their own trucking companies. That is how sick and tyranical some in government are these days. Pretty soon it may even become illegal to,even discuss issues like this. Canada is punishing people for criticis8ng the government. Our government has done the same
Our gov used to be “of the people,by the people, for the people. But no more whe the government is moving to ban free speech In the name of equality for all. Theymdont mean equality for all, they mean equality only for those that don’t criticism them. It’s not our governments duty to ‘protect people from misinformation’ (and by misinformation the ,eft means anythingmgheymddem to be information whether it is or not, a d in most cases of their censorship, the information was actuslly factual, but it conflicited with the leftist agenda, so it was censored, and the tyrannical private censors are calling on government to take over and censor people, and many on the left in government woild welcome this power based on their comments aobut the “need to crack down on ‘misinformstion’)
Do Madison or Hamilton address the question of prayers at football games in The Federalist Papers?
... or read their Bible whike,while, job because it forces noone to become religious or join a religion
= = =
They are so afraid of God that they think this will happen.
Yup. It’s amazing though that after 6000, despite massive attempts to annihilate God’s message, it still stands as strong today as ever. God has protected his word all down through the ages, so try as this new godless crowd might, God’s word Will still stand, and people will be fre to accept it no matter how severely it is restricted by any rogue constitution violating govenrment
The first amendment does not prohibit an individual citizen from doing anything. It prohibits the government from prohibiting the citizen from doing anything. We are so screwed up in this country.
Thread and comments of possible interest...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.