Separation Of Church and State takes a big hit

Page 4 of 7 [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,862
Location: Small Town From Hell

29 Jun 2022, 4:02 pm

“Some non-religious people can be just as unreasonable when they see people holding prayer circles as some religious people can be unreasonable when seeing gay couples holding hands.”

False equivalency.


_________________
Away.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 56,885
Location: Stendec

29 Jun 2022, 4:33 pm

Twilightprincess wrote:
“Some non-religious people can be just as unreasonable when they see people holding prayer circles as some religious people can be unreasonable when seeing gay couples holding hands.”

False equivalency.
Similar behaviors, similar effects.



SpiralingCrow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Apr 2022
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,558

29 Jun 2022, 5:40 pm

Kids remain under coaches supervision until after post game reviews or activities have ended and parents pick them up.

Kids CHOOSE to do things all the time due to peer pressure and and wanting to go along with the crowd. In this case a trusted adult starts something that parents of the children found objectionable. You may not have an issue with the prayer but the parents did and should be respected on this matter.

The school did deal with the issue by suspending the coach. He then terminated his contract with the school and took it court.

Perhaps the coach wasn't holding high Mass, but when you kneel on the 50 yard line at the end of the game in front of stands of spectators on public school property, you are trying to make a point. He should have known that this may be an issue for school and parents but he did CHOOSE to have his moment with God at that specific time. Why couldn't he wait until everyone went home?

Who said I'm not religious? You just assume I'm not because I hold a different view on this matter. I just see religion as more a private thing. If you want to get together with people of the same faith and share that together, then more power to you. But, not everyone shares the same beliefs and that should be respected by all.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 56,885
Location: Stendec

29 Jun 2022, 8:48 pm

The Supreme Court ruled that former Bremerton (Washington) High School assistant football coach Joseph Kennedy was protected by the First Amendment in praying with his players at the 50-yard line after games.

"Joseph Kennedy lost his job as a high school football coach because he knelt at midfield after games to offer a quiet prayer of thanks. Mr. Kennedy prayed during a period when school employees were free to speak with a friend, call for a reservation at a restaurant, check email, or attend to other personal matters," Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the opinion. "Both the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment protect expressions like Mr. Kennedy's. Nor does a proper understanding of the Amendment's Establishment Clause require the government to single out private religious speech for special disfavor. The Constitution and the best of our traditions counsel mutual respect and tolerance, not censorship and suppression, for religious and nonreligious views alike.”

"Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head. Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment," the Supreme Court added in its opinion. "Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his First Amendment claims."

There you have it. Unless yours is a higher power than the Supreme Court of The United States, all your claims against Coach Joseph Kennedy are both null and void.



Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,862
Location: Small Town From Hell

29 Jun 2022, 8:59 pm

Fnord wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
“Some non-religious people can be just as unreasonable when they see people holding prayer circles as some religious people can be unreasonable when seeing gay couples holding hands.”

False equivalency.
Similar behaviors, similar effects.


It’s really not the same thing at all. No one is saying that the teacher can’t pray or hold hands with his partner.

People are saying that he shouldn’t be leading students in a public school in prayer. It’s not appropriate. People also probably wouldn’t want him to lead the students when it comes to a “circle” regarding affectionate relationships. (Do you see why your comparison is not equivalent?)

Prayer circles are not appropriate in school. Teachers can still pray, but they should not be leading a group of children to do the same. That’s where it crosses a line.


_________________
Away.


Last edited by Twilightprincess on 29 Jun 2022, 9:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,862
Location: Small Town From Hell

29 Jun 2022, 9:00 pm

Fnord wrote:

There you have it. Unless yours is a higher power than the Supreme Court of The United States, all your claims against Coach Joseph Kennedy are both null and void.


So then we should all be completely fine with the current ruling of Roe vs. Wade? Got it! :roll:


_________________
Away.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 56,885
Location: Stendec

29 Jun 2022, 9:07 pm

Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
There you have it. Unless yours is a higher power than the Supreme Court of The United States, all your claims against Coach Joseph Kennedy are both null and void.
So then we should all be completely fine with the current ruling of Roe vs. Wade? Got it.
Whether you like it or not, judgement has been made, and the Law of The Land is established.



Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,862
Location: Small Town From Hell

29 Jun 2022, 9:08 pm

Fnord wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
There you have it. Unless yours is a higher power than the Supreme Court of The United States, all your claims against Coach Joseph Kennedy are both null and void.
So then we should all be completely fine with the current ruling of Roe vs. Wade? Got it.
Whether you like it or not, judgement has been made, and the Law of The Land is established.


Then we aren’t allowed to comment on it on WP? Noted. One learns something new every day.

It’s time to shut down the Roe vs. Wade threads.


_________________
Away.


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,057
Location: Long Island, New York

29 Jun 2022, 10:57 pm

I am sure SCOTUS would not agree that because they decided on an issue further discussion on the said issue should stop.

What surprised me was that SCOTUS did not consider the football field government property. I am surprised they did not understand or want to understand that a teacher/coach's job often does not stop when the school bell rings or at the end of the day or when the game ends.

I have no idea what these students' religious beliefs are or if they felt intimidated. I can say this. Sports teams are just that teams. They tend to be more loyal to each other than in most other groups. They are more likely than the general public to go along with and back up a teammate even when they disagree with the teammate. Do you think suddenly two years ago all of them became Black Lives Matter supporters and supported boycotting the games? No, some did it despite disagreeing out of team solidarity. Some were happy to do it, others felt intimidated into doing it by peer pressure. Those were adults.

Fnord knows what being a part of a small minority is all about. At that time he did not know he was even in a minority because nobody knew about autism back then. That was horrible. I do not know if Fnord knows what being part of a small recognized minority is like. I do. Out of 1800 students in my hight school, 52 of us were Jews. The Christmas season was just that Christmas season. Unlike today when they have overdone things back in the 60s, there was no recognition of Hanukkah, no days off for the Jewish High Holy days, we had to be conspicuous by taking the days off. December was intimidating. Because of bullying, I did see bad intent when none was there. Was my reaction immaturity, yes, I was immature, I was a teenager.

My problems were with my peers, not authority figures because they were hyperaware. SCOTUS had just banned school prayer as a result of a suit brought by a parent in the school district bordering ours.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


SpiralingCrow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Apr 2022
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,558

30 Jun 2022, 6:07 am

Fnord wrote:
The Supreme Court ruled that former Bremerton (Washington) High School assistant football coach Joseph Kennedy was protected by the First Amendment in praying with his players at the 50-yard line after games.

"Joseph Kennedy lost his job as a high school football coach because he knelt at midfield after games to offer a quiet prayer of thanks. Mr. Kennedy prayed during a period when school employees were free to speak with a friend, call for a reservation at a restaurant, check email, or attend to other personal matters," Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the opinion. "Both the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment protect expressions like Mr. Kennedy's. Nor does a proper understanding of the Amendment's Establishment Clause require the government to single out private religious speech for special disfavor. The Constitution and the best of our traditions counsel mutual respect and tolerance, not censorship and suppression, for religious and nonreligious views alike.”

"Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head. Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment," the Supreme Court added in its opinion. "Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his First Amendment claims."

There you have it. Unless yours is a higher power than the Supreme Court of The United States, all your claims against Coach Joseph Kennedy are both null and void.



Just because the Supreme Court ruled that way still doesn't mean it's appropriate, just as in Roe vs. Wade.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 56,885
Location: Stendec

30 Jun 2022, 8:27 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Fnord knows what being a part of a small minority is all about. At that time he did not know he was even in a minority because nobody knew about autism back then. That was horrible. I do not know if Fnord knows what being part of a small recognized minority is like.
Actually, I knew first-hand what being a minority was all about starting in the third grade (1965-1966), when I was so excited to learn some of my ancestors were Native American / First Nations people that I told the entire class about it.  Less than a week later, I was tied to a tree on the school playground while the other kids threw dirt in my face and spat on me for being a "dirty injun".  The teachers did nothing about it.  They also expected me to dress in a buckskin loincloth, feathered bonnet, and "warpaint" for a Thanksgiving play (I refused).

So yeah, I knew early on what being a minority is like.  The undiagnosed "aspieness" merely added to the problem.

As for this thread's subject, there is no point in railing against the Supreme Court's decisions.  People expecting the current SCOTUS to render decisions favoring atheists, LGBTQ+ people, minorities, and women should remember that it was Donald J. Trump who stacked the court with no less than 3 conservative justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.  These justices are part of the conservative majority that decides which of our laws shall stand, and which shall fall.  The fact that SCOTUS has rendered decisions favoring conservative points of view is only a reflection of Trump's own personal views on what this country should look like and how it should be run.

If people do not like SCOTUS's decisions, then they should vote against any candidate who supports Trump.  Eventually, SCOTUS will be back to normal, and everyone will once again enjoy freedom.



Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,862
Location: Small Town From Hell

30 Jun 2022, 9:42 am

Fnord wrote:
As for this thread's subject, there is no point in railing against the Supreme Court's decisions.  People expecting the current SCOTUS to render decisions favoring atheists, LGBTQ+ people, minorities, and women should remember that it was Donald J. Trump who stacked the court with no less than 3 conservative justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.  These justices are part of the conservative majority that decides which of our laws shall stand, and which shall fall.  The fact that SCOTUS has rendered decisions favoring conservative points of view is only a reflection of Trump's own personal views on what this country should look like and how it should be run.

If people do not like SCOTUS's decisions, then they should vote against any candidate who supports Trump.  Eventually, SCOTUS will be back to normal, and everyone will once again enjoy freedom.[/color]


But you still participate in Roe vs. Wade threads, so I’m not sure why people shouldn’t feel free to voice their opinions on this.

People can state their opinions here AND vote for sensible candidates.


_________________
Away.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 56,885
Location: Stendec

30 Jun 2022, 9:57 am

Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
As for this thread's subject, there is no point in railing against the Supreme Court's decisions.  People expecting the current SCOTUS to render decisions favoring atheists, LGBTQ+ people, minorities, and women should remember that it was Donald J. Trump who stacked the court with no less than 3 conservative justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.  These justices are part of the conservative majority that decides which of our laws shall stand, and which shall fall.  The fact that SCOTUS has rendered decisions favoring conservative points of view is only a reflection of Trump's own personal views on what this country should look like and how it should be run.

If people do not like SCOTUS's decisions, then they should vote against any candidate who supports Trump.  Eventually, SCOTUS will be back to normal, and everyone will once again enjoy freedom.
But you still participate in Roe vs. Wade threads, so I’m not sure why people shouldn’t feel free to voice their opinions on this.  People can state their opinions here AND vote for sensible candidates.
I did not say that people should not participate in threads like this.  I pointed out that there are more effective ways to deal with the situation.  And while I do participate in this thread, it is not out of misplaced anger -- I am not looking for someone with whom to argue just because I do not like SCOTUS's decisions.



Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,862
Location: Small Town From Hell

30 Jun 2022, 10:00 am

Fnord wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
As for this thread's subject, there is no point in railing against the Supreme Court's decisions.  People expecting the current SCOTUS to render decisions favoring atheists, LGBTQ+ people, minorities, and women should remember that it was Donald J. Trump who stacked the court with no less than 3 conservative justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.  These justices are part of the conservative majority that decides which of our laws shall stand, and which shall fall.  The fact that SCOTUS has rendered decisions favoring conservative points of view is only a reflection of Trump's own personal views on what this country should look like and how it should be run.

If people do not like SCOTUS's decisions, then they should vote against any candidate who supports Trump.  Eventually, SCOTUS will be back to normal, and everyone will once again enjoy freedom.
But you still participate in Roe vs. Wade threads, so I’m not sure why people shouldn’t feel free to voice their opinions on this.  People can state their opinions here AND vote for sensible candidates.
And while I do participate in this thread, it is not out of misplaced anger -- I am not looking for someone with whom to argue just because I do not like SCOTUS's decisions.


Are you implying that people, apart from yourself, are participating due to “misplaced anger?”


_________________
Away.


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 56,885
Location: Stendec

30 Jun 2022, 10:05 am

Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
As for this thread's subject, there is no point in railing against the Supreme Court's decisions.  People expecting the current SCOTUS to render decisions favoring atheists, LGBTQ+ people, minorities, and women should remember that it was Donald J. Trump who stacked the court with no less than 3 conservative justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.  These justices are part of the conservative majority that decides which of our laws shall stand, and which shall fall.  The fact that SCOTUS has rendered decisions favoring conservative points of view is only a reflection of Trump's own personal views on what this country should look like and how it should be run.

If people do not like SCOTUS's decisions, then they should vote against any candidate who supports Trump.  Eventually, SCOTUS will be back to normal, and everyone will once again enjoy freedom.
But you still participate in Roe vs. Wade threads, so I’m not sure why people shouldn’t feel free to voice their opinions on this.  People can state their opinions here AND vote for sensible candidates.
And while I do participate in this thread, it is not out of misplaced anger -- I am not looking for someone with whom to argue just because I do not like SCOTUS's decisions.
Are you implying that people, apart from yourself, are participating due to “misplaced anger?”
Are you implying that I am?



Twilightprincess
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,862
Location: Small Town From Hell

30 Jun 2022, 10:08 am

Fnord wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
Fnord wrote:
As for this thread's subject, there is no point in railing against the Supreme Court's decisions.  People expecting the current SCOTUS to render decisions favoring atheists, LGBTQ+ people, minorities, and women should remember that it was Donald J. Trump who stacked the court with no less than 3 conservative justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett.  These justices are part of the conservative majority that decides which of our laws shall stand, and which shall fall.  The fact that SCOTUS has rendered decisions favoring conservative points of view is only a reflection of Trump's own personal views on what this country should look like and how it should be run.

If people do not like SCOTUS's decisions, then they should vote against any candidate who supports Trump.  Eventually, SCOTUS will be back to normal, and everyone will once again enjoy freedom.
But you still participate in Roe vs. Wade threads, so I’m not sure why people shouldn’t feel free to voice their opinions on this.  People can state their opinions here AND vote for sensible candidates.
And while I do participate in this thread, it is not out of misplaced anger -- I am not looking for someone with whom to argue just because I do not like SCOTUS's decisions.
Are you implying that people, apart from yourself, are participating due to “misplaced anger?”
Are you implying that I am?


Dodging the question.


_________________
Away.