Posted on 04/27/2022 7:57:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
Over the past 60 years, public schools have been scrubbed of religion, stripped bare in the name of the name of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which bars favoring one religion over others. Now the void is being filled by social justice ideology, the left's religion by another name.
Why should traditional religion be discriminated against, while teachers and coaches are allowed to proselytize their woke belief system, displaying Gay Pride symbols and BLM slogans in the classroom? Are children any less at risk of coercion or indoctrination by these ideas presented by authority figures whom they're eager to please?
That's the inflammatory context for a high school football coach's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which was heard Monday. Robert Kennedy, who coached for the Bremerton School District in Washington state, customarily took a knee and prayed quietly on the 50-yard line after games. Occasionally, some players and attendees joined him, though he didn't call for them to participate.
Bremerton officials told him praying within sight of students violated the Establishment Clause and asked him to go across campus and pray in the janitor's office. Kennedy refused, arguing that would send a message that prayer is bad and must be hidden. The refusal cost him his job.
Kennedy's lawyer told the justices on Monday that the firing violated the coach's right to freely practice his religion. Clarence Thomas asked whether Kennedy would have been fired had he taken a knee to protest racism. Samuel Alito queried whether a coach taking a knee to protest the invasion of Ukraine, or climate change, or another political issue would have been fired.
If the reason for the firing is religion, Alito said, that's unconstitutional discrimination.
Much of the back and forth was over whether the coach's barely audible prayer amounted to government speech, which can be regulated. Probably not. He was praying after the game, when his duties were over, and his words were barely audible even to people close by.
Bremerton School District's lawyer also tried to argue that students might feel compelled to join in the prayer because the coach is an authority figure and can determine who gets the most playing time. The case could turn on that, though the facts again seem to undermine the argument. Kennedy coached JV football, and both players who expressed personal reluctance to pray became captains of the JV team, nonetheless.
Monday's oral argument signals the Court is poised to welcome more religion in public life, including public schools. The question several justices posed again and again is, why should religion be singled out for disfavored treatment, compared to other ideas?
Some areas of Maine are so thinly populated that towns can't afford public high schools. Instead, the state of Maine offers tuition assistance for families in these rural areas to send their children to the private schools of their choice. The hitch is, state law says they must choose a secular school, not a religious one. Parents sued, challenging the religious school exclusion.
If schools that teach religion are ineligible for state money, Alito asked, are schools that teach critical race theory also ineligible? The lawyer for Maine's school system stammered and confessed he didn't know.
Alito's question was on the mark. The National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, the most powerful teachers unions, promote a curriculum that stresses transgenderism, white guilt, the 1619 Project and other progressive ideologies. But these unions want no part of traditional religion. They know religion is the kiss of death for their anti-family values agenda. The unions weighed in with a joint brief to the Court against coach Kennedy.
The educational bureaucrats are fast making public schools into temples of progressivism. Fortunately, the Court appears on the verge of striking a fairer balance, protecting the rights of teachers who practice traditional religion and the rights of students to be taught by them. Parents should be glad.
To the chagrin of the Left, Justice Thomas is back on the bench and throwing darts with amazing accuracy.
Biden up speaking at Sec of State funeral in a church. Head of the government and they are praying and singing hymns. Are Americans triggered.
Why should there be publik skools anyway?
My question would be if the coach praying was an instance of congress making a law.
[[Are children any less at risk of coercion or indoctrination]]
Better stated
Are children any less at risk of government sponsered coercion or indoctrination, with penalties if they refuse?
The left tried stating that schools mentioning God amounted to govenrment sanctioned and enforced religion but they are perfectly fine with govenrment sanctioned brainwashing and coercion whe it comes to,the religion of socialism.
Good Move in trying to get the Left admit that Woke is a religion which then can be banned.
[[My question would be if the coach praying was an instance of congress making a law.]]
Good question
The whole point of the constitution was to protect rights of individuals, not to deny rights of groups of individuals. It was to,protect the public from the govenrment forcing people to practice a government sanctioned religion under penalty of the law if they refused. I. England, one had tk be a part of the church of England or suffer the consequences if they weren’t, and this is what our nation tried to prevent.
A coach praying on tne field is NOT passing a law that says everyone must bow and pray to a govenrment sanctioned re,igion.
But, the left bastardized the constitutional protection by claiming that a coach praying or whatever amounted to causing some folks to “feel left out” a d thus it amounted to coercion because people who feel left out “feel pessured to join just to fit in”
Our constitution was not created to protect people’s delicate hypersensitive feelings, it was designed to prevent govenrment from forcing people to join a gov sanctioned, gov run religion or to pay a penalty of they refused.
A coach praying does not establish a law, nor does it coerce a yone to join under penalty of the law of they choose not to.
Well my own line of reasoning was much simpler than anything being discussed now. The 1st Amendment starts: “Congress shall make no law...”. Thus any violation of the 1st Amendment must at a minimum be congress making a law.
Former Seattle Seahawk Steve Largent were among those who filed “friend-of-the-court” briefs in support of Kennedy’s appeal to the Supreme Court.
“Six years away from the football field has been far too long,” Kennedy said in a Friday press release. “I am extremely grateful that the Supreme Court is going to hear my case and pray that I will soon be able to be back on the field coaching the game and players I love.”
As for whether Kennedy might prevail, former Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna has previously pointed out he may be operating on problematic legal grounds.
“Students can form Bible study groups, prayer groups. Muslim students can get together and organize prayers during the day,” McKenna told KIRO Radio in 2019. “As long as they are doing it on their own, it’s fine. It’s when staff gets involved, … as agents of the government, you get to a problem here.”
Agreed- I was just elaborating on what “making a law” entails. Noone made any law in congress when the coach prayed, therefore it is protected speech.
Well .... the religion of evolution has been taught in public schools for most of my lifetime.
But I do hope for a positive outcome for Christians in public schools in this case.
Well, how would we here feel if the coach was a Muslim. That’s my test.
If I wouldn’t want a school to let a Muslim do it then I’m hesitant to support letting a Christian do it.
You think this is only happening NOW?
Boy, have you NOT been paying attention.
At all.
You must have been sitting in a closet in the sub basement with your fingers in your ears and humming really loudly.
For about eighty years.
It's stunning how the first amendment has been so far twisted from its original intent. The founders wanted to ensure there could never be a "Church of England" equivalent that was used to influence and control the population as a governmental or quasi-governmental force, as it was in England. The founders had no problem with open display of faith, even in government proceedings.
I goody, it’s been two weeks since they used their scopes trial tactics against us.
Thomas & Alito, my hero’s!
Why wouldnt you want a Muslim to pray quietly there? On the other hand, is a town which allows a 6-times-a-day disturbance of the peace thru minarets establishing a religion?
Id say moreso than this coach.
Works with groomers as well, no?
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.