Supreme Court rules for former coach in public school prayer case

You are ignoring the fact he was doing this at the 50 yard line and wanted his players to do the same.

This is nothing like holding a prayer meeting among like-minded folks or praying alone.

It's actually not a fine line.

 

I had no idea about what the school did to accommodate the coach.

It seems the coach was looking for a fight.

 

Well, he's obviously not just kneeling at the 50 yard line and praying to himself. Check out short clips of him praying.



According to the dissent, in 2015 Coach Kennedy asked another school's coach for him and his team to join in prayer. So he's not just praying for himself anymore. The school district had no problems with him praying by himself in the stadium after the students had left, but the coach was not okay with that. He wanted to pray immediately after the game while all the students are still present.

 

What particularly revolting about this opinion is that Gorsuch falsified the facts that inform his opinion. He characterizes this as short quiet and private when it was anything but.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...h-flubbed-prayer-case-facts-s-right-rcna35644

Sotamayor called this out in her dissent and the article points out that there is no recourse if the SC chooses to falsify the facts. In this case, the coach wasn’t just praying - he was holding a mini mass and that is as clear a violation as anything.

Best thing that can happen going forward is that these grotesque displays of evangelism are rudely and loudly disrupted by the non-Christians.

 

Alternative facts live on. If you're an atheist on that football team, that is going to be a huge amount of pressure to join the prayer huddle. Evidently the founders were just kidding about separation of church/state.

 

As stated before yes if the game is over and it's non official function yes he can do it on the 50 yard. Line. We've seen pro players having prayer circles all the time on fields after games.

Whether he wanted players to join him is fine as long as he doesn't force them to and there is no evidence that any player was forced to.

 

So should NFL players and coaches also be banned from having a prayer circle post game in a publicly funded stadium?

 

Is there any evidence that there was retribution from the coach if players didn't participate?

They might but if he was Muslim, Jewish or Zorastrian I would say they shoudl be allowed to pray in similar situation.

 

In a related example. This a high school in Hawaii performing a Haka dance before the game. The Haka has it's roots in Polynesian culture often called "a war dance" but according to Maori custom it is a dance for the Sun God and the movements represent the shimmering of heat.


So given the religious origin of this dance and that it's being done not even at the end of the game but leading into a game which is an official function should this be banned?

 

It's not easy to measure, but the fact that students participated out of fear of retribution shows that this is more than a personal prayer being performed. There's no reason he had to go to the 50 yard line. He could easily go anywhere and pray. He's doing it there to create a spectacle.

 

This isn’t remotely the same and you know it.

This is a clearly secular activity and is no different than schools having Easter Egg hunts on Easter or Secret Santa at Christmas. The origins may lie in religion, but the activity is not a religious practice the way prayer is.

 

Is the coach off duty the moment the game is over even though the players haven't gone back to the locker room yet and the coach and players are still wearing their uniforms? If a player starts getting into a fight with the other team's player after the final whistle, does the coach have a duty to stop the fight or is he off the clock?

Multiple students said they felt pressured into joining the prayer circle so they're not separated from the team.

NFL players and coaches aren't public employees so I don't see how that matters. The crux of the Bremerton issue isn't that he isn't allowed to pray on school property. He was allowed to pray on the sidelines quietly or pray on the 50 yard line if he waits until the students are gone. But he only wanted to pray out loud at a extremely prominent location where there is an audience.

Is this haka led by a school official? I'll give you that there are some gray areas between culture and religion. Haka falls much more on the culture side, but I can see an argument on how it can be seen as violating the establishment clause if the haka was led by a school official.

 

That clearly isn't an act of prayer or religion. It's a school's war dance. A better example would be everyone screaming "Allahu Akbar"

 

I haven't read all the arguments or read everything about this case but is there evidence that students participated out of fear of retribution? Note just peer pressure isn't retribution. Did the coach not give starting positions, playing time or treat players who didn't join the prayer differently?

There's no reason he had to pray on the 50 yard line and yes I will agree he was seeking attention. Seeking attention though isn't Unconstitutional as long as it doesn't impenge on others' rights. Freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion and individual displays of religion in public are protected.

 

I have no doubt there is peer pressure but as noted if we consider peer pressure to be retribution then we should be regulating what kids wear, slang they use and music they listen to far more than we do now. Just because some others say "do this becaue all the cool kids are" isn't a violation of people's rights or retribution.

They are not but many stadiums are publicly funded and owned publicly. NFL teams have also frequently played on school property such as The Vikings played two seasons at the University of Minnesota while their currernt stadium was built. Right after games players would have prayer circles on the field.

To answer you and other posters. I don't know if the Haka is led by a school official but from the video it is clear that school officials support it and encourage it. While the Haka is a cultural tradition it's origins come from a religious basis so there is still that tie. And if the argument is that well this is primarily cultural and not religious, what's to stop claiming that reciting the Lord's Prayer before, during or after a game is a cultural thing and not religious?

If anything things like the Haka, Christmas Trees, and Easter Eggs show that it is possible to have religion on public property without being an encouragement of religion.

 

Students have stated they participated out of fear of retribution. Whether there was actual retribution is immaterial. Peer pressure is enough to violate the establishment clause as ruled in prior cases. The fact that another school believed it was a school sanctioned event demonstrates that indeed, the school can be argued to be establishing prayer as part of its post-game ritual.

 

@rocketsjudoka you're giving the coach (and pro prayer) folks way too much credit and faith here. the kind of which that side would never give you. separation of church and state isn't a suggestion.

 

Its also not peer pressure if its the Coach. He has undue influence as an adult who determines play time, and in turn is probably writing rec letters and determining a kids college chances.

 

I think the ruling is bad for the church. It just reinforces Christianity's reputation of using coercion to gain converts and to influence the culture. I think the coach reflects a very common ailment of entitlement Christianity has suffered from in the West - relying on its prevalence and social power as the de facto religion instead of going in humility as a missionary into a godless world and persuading people by being a reflection of God's love. If he wants to expand God's Kingdom, he won't convince anyone by pressuring them into joining his prayer circle. They'll join now and hope for praying time, and later regard with suspicion anyone who invites them to church. So many people carry old wounds from Christians who presumed on them too much, and now see believers as two-faced or hypocrites. Separation of church and state is as good for the church as it is for the state, and it's suffered a defeat here.

 

Is it really all that different from other pseudo-religious rituals like standing for the Pledge of Allegiance or the National Anthem?

If you're an atheist, you could just not join, and if that makes you feel uncomfortable you could join and use the time to focus on something else. It really doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me, unless one is being forced to do something other than stand quietly and respectfully.