Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court rules school district cannot prohibit football coach's on field prayer | Just The News
Just the news ^ | 27 jun 22

Posted on 06/27/2022 7:59:32 AM PDT by xzins

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last
To: xzins

Winning!


61 posted on 06/27/2022 9:56:43 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: peggybac

He was an assistant coach; not the head coach. Will still get his position back; and a big check.


62 posted on 06/27/2022 10:02:25 AM PDT by WASCWatch ( WASC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins
"This is a serious blow to the long-held principle that students have the religious liberty right to be free from school-sponsored prayer," the ACLU Tweeted.

"Free"? Wee they being forced to kneel on the 50 yard line?

63 posted on 06/27/2022 10:11:01 AM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
This is great news.

Additionally awesome news is seeing stories related to the REAL fix for these matters - getting govt out of education as much as humanly possible. Like the new AZ model for funding individuals to attend public/private schools of their choice.

It would require many state level constitutional amendments to get govt out of education funding altogether. But the more we can get gov't out of education administration, the better off will be our kids and individual freedom generally.

Even honest folks can argue all day about the legal aspects of what constitutionally can and can't go on in govt schools. But the definitions and ruling can change with the wind. Let's also work to make it as easy as possible for ALL parents to choose non-govt schools.

The fed level weed known as the Dept of Education was a mere sprout when Reagan took office and even he could not pull it out as many Rs had hoped. Now it is a monster with deep roots. But it still should be destroyed. With prejudice. Public prejudice. Public ex-Prez prejudice.

I hope populist Trump sees a popular wave of devolution on the horizon and chooses to surf it into victory over the authoritarian Left. All R candidates for prez in 2024 should be calling to throw off the commie/tranny shackles of the Dept of Ed.

The timing is more Right than ever. There is no excuse for R candidates to NOT endorse a ROE-like overturn of policy regarding education. Follow the fresh lead of the two great Bush cartel appointees who just schooled the world and overturned decades of seemingly settled but horribly bad law.

The notion that an ever-wiser-than-you central govt MUST have an Ed department to guide things was ALWAYS wrong, like ROE. The Dept of Ed was born only a few millions abortions after ROE - 1979. R candidates should very publicly blame the root of today's problems on prior misguided authoritarian turns from Carter - the 70's version of Biden.

Several fed level agencies / depts should be burned to the ground, of course. But starting with Dept of Ed would make sense right now. What libs are doing to our kids via indoctrination-based education has now undeniably become driven by the author of confusion's spirit working in the minds of those with no real moral foundation.

It it easy to make the constitutional case that feds SHOULDN'T attempt to help with education at all.

And we now have decades of proof that they COULDN'T manage to make anything better, only worse.

It is refreshing to have a SC that rules based thinking rather than on feeling. Let's push our admin and legislative candidates to do the same.

64 posted on 06/27/2022 10:13:11 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

This is a great question. Clearly a coach has a certain amount of power over the players. There certainly could be risk their playing time or position is impacted by a decision to ignore the coaches celebration. There would be no way to prove that was happening as coaching decisions are very personal. If a coach was out there praising his belief in the transgender grooming religion, would you still have such a high level of support? I struggle a bit with bringing every personal belief into the public school sphere. So now these groomers can make their belief an official religion (is there some registration?), and parents will have limited ability to shield their children if they want to participate in school activities? I think this question is different from a valedictorian, vs someone in the government employment with “power” over your child’s success.


65 posted on 06/27/2022 10:24:06 AM PDT by joedish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: xzins

The coach should be compensated a considerable sum of money by the libtard religious bigots šŸ¤Ŗ


66 posted on 06/27/2022 10:35:47 AM PDT by NWFree (Somebody has to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NWFree

They violated his civil rights - thatā€™s what libtards do šŸ‘ŽšŸ»


67 posted on 06/27/2022 10:37:38 AM PDT by NWFree (Somebody has to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

You can only put your knee on a football field if your girlfriend has converted you to Islam and you are co-opting the humble and charity-inspired symbolic actions of a coach and fellow players concerned about a downed teammate to further a decidedly anti-American political agenda. /s


68 posted on 06/27/2022 10:39:05 AM PDT by one guy in new jersey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: copaliscrossing

It was the Federalist Society that sent the suggested judges to President Trump.


69 posted on 06/27/2022 11:08:04 AM PDT by Republican in occupied CA (I will not give up on my native State! Here I was born, here I fight and die!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: joedish

Or if the religion and prayer in question was Islam or Satanist,


70 posted on 06/27/2022 11:10:32 AM PDT by Republican in occupied CA (I will not give up on my native State! Here I was born, here I fight and die!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: xzins

6-3 decision


71 posted on 06/27/2022 1:17:45 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fidelis
"Boom, boom! Down goes the false wall of ā€œSeparation between Church and Stateā€. The Constitution was intended to prevent the government from establishing a State religion, not infringe on the individuals practice of religion."

And it certainly did not mean government could not affirm religion in general, in particular the Christian faith, as founders overall did. And to allow secular atheism, a faith-based ideology, to be officially expressed and taught - which it at least implicitly is when government never expresses need for or gratitude to any deity - while forbidding general theistic-abased faith from being officially expressed, is bias. If the expressly non-theistic Satanic Temple of Salem can obtain religious exemption then might not secular communities of beliefs be considered a religion?

A key aspect here was allowing comparable secular speech: "A government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a personal religious observance, based on a mistaken view that it has a duty to suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion."

72 posted on 06/27/2022 6:39:46 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Turn to the Lord Jesus as a damned+destitute sinner, trust Him who saves, be baptized + follow Him!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Leftists are complaining he was forcing players to pray his prayer. I donā€™t think that a was a even argued, was it?


73 posted on 06/28/2022 5:45:23 PM PDT by TiGuy22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TiGuy22

I didn’t see it in the opinion. Evidently, some began to gather around him, but he never invited or required. I’m assuming scotus considered that still to be his private exercise.


74 posted on 06/29/2022 4:08:55 AM PDT by xzins (Retired US Army chaplain. Support our troops by praying for their victory. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson