Supreme Court Sides With HS Football Coach Who Prayed At Midfield After His Team's Games

GCLFan99 said:
What a reasoned response to this issue. Thank you. I share your sentiments as a Catholic parent. My son's played for a Catholic school so prayer after games was welcomed. This coach was free to stand quietly on the sidelines and express his faith. He chose to make a public display by heading to midfield and kneeling to pray right after the game. From everything I read I don't believe it unduly influenced players on the team. I think those that joined him did so of their own free will. The problem is that our country has accepted a clear separation of church and state and public schools fall under "state". This decision will make it much more difficult for school to restrict displays of faith by their employees. Who is to determine what is acceptable and what is not? I would venture to guess that there are a lot of school districts in this state, who's parents would be up in arms if teachers of Muslim faith actively practiced their faith on school grounds.
Click to expand...
The Supreme Court. The very people put in place to uphold these rules and they did NOT find a violation of the separation of church/state.
 
GCLFan99 said:
Lets start with your last point. When the clock hits 0.00 if the coaches talk to the team after the game, are they not doing so as coaches? When they head back to the locker room or board the bus are they doing so as private citizens and not in their capacity as a coach? Thought so.

Citizens do not lose their rights when they become a teacher. However school are allowed to impose specific rules on their employees. On the weekends you might like standing on a street corner spewing racial epithets (free speech) however I am pretty sure your employer will frown upon doing that at the workplace.

Employers are allowed to impose restrictions on their employees. I understand that this particular case was not as blatant as some expressions of religion however our country has had this divide between government (i.e public school) and religion. This decision will open up a can of worms as who is to decide what is an acceptable show of faith by school employees versus unacceptable? If a Muslim teacher has students taking a test would it be acceptable for them to lay down their prayer rug and begin quietly saying prayers?
Click to expand...
As you can see in my later post about the coach on Sunday at the supermarket - I was being facetious with the 0.00 comment. But the question still stands - if you see your high school coach out in public, is he still "Coach Doe" or is he "John Doe". Same goes for a teacher....is it "Mrs. Doe" or "Jane Doe"? If a teacher or coach does something off the clock that would not be against the law, but a black eye for the school....can they be fired? So I ask again....when is the coach officially off the clock? The answer is never. He's always on the clock.

That said, the point is....it does NOT matter if he was on the clock. He could have knelt and prayed with 5 mins left in the game - it is still within his right to do so. It's not debatable - it was literally just upheld in (say it with me) THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Furthermore, everyone out there that continues to use the "code of conduct" argument - you're just flat out wrong in THIS instance. An employer is not allowed to put something in their code of conduct that is a violation of someones rights. Period. End of story. The Supreme Court just ruled that it is within the coaches RIGHTs to pray. If the school wants to fire him for this reason and claim "violation of conduct" - they're getting sued for wrongful termination.
 
AllSports12 said:
He's ultimately responsible until every player leaves that locker room..... It comes with the territory.

If he's on the phone talking when something happens or is talking a reporter he's just as responsible as if he's kneeling at mid-field and saying short prayer....

Again..... nice try
Click to expand...
So you agree he was still "on the clock". That's all you had to say. Lol.

Thanks for agreeing with me.
 
utsherman said:
So you agree he was still "on the clock". That's all you had to say. Lol.

Thanks for agreeing with me.
Click to expand...

? You should really stop assuming.....I never disagreed with your statement.

It doesn't matter if he's kneeling at mid-field or talking to a reporter at mid-field, he's still responsible.
 
If I'm not mistaken, this whole matter started when the coach from an opponent called his school to compliment the coach for what he did.

As usual, the school admin (school board) decided to take steps that resulted in a big old rake handle right between the eyes.
 
CasualFan24 said:
As you can see in my later post about the coach on Sunday at the supermarket - I was being facetious with the 0.00 comment. But the question still stands - if you see your high school coach out in public, is he still "Coach Doe" or is he "John Doe". Same goes for a teacher....is it "Mrs. Doe" or "Jane Doe"? If a teacher or coach does something off the clock that would not be against the law, but a black eye for the school....can they be fired? So I ask again....when is the coach officially off the clock? The answer is never. He's always on the clock.

That said, the point is....it does NOT matter if he was on the clock. He could have knelt and prayed with 5 mins left in the game - it is still within his right to do so. It's not debatable - it was literally just upheld in (say it with me) THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Furthermore, everyone out there that continues to use the "code of conduct" argument - you're just flat out wrong in THIS instance. An employer is not allowed to put something in their code of conduct that is a violation of someones rights. Period. End of story. The Supreme Court just ruled that it is within the coaches RIGHTs to pray. If the school wants to fire him for this reason and claim "violation of conduct" - they're getting sued for wrongful termination.
Click to expand...
First of all this was up for debate which is why it was a case in front of the Supreme Court. That is the whole idea of why cases are brought into court, because their was a disagreement.

Employers can in fact restrict Constitutional rights. Here is an example: Freedom to assemble is a right under the First Amendment. However if you wanted to assemble a group of your friends in your workplace to protests over an issue, your employer could in fact restrict you right to do so.

The rights outline in the Constitution are regularly up for interpretation and debate. For example the 8th Amendment says a person cannot be subject to cruel and unusual punishment. There is a regular debate over whether solitary confinement is considered cruel and unusual.

The issue of this coach kneeling was subject to debate and the Supreme Court has ruled on it. My question for you is this: Does this ruling mean any public school employee can practice their religion while on school grounds? IF not, what would be considered inappropriate? Who decides?

This is far from a resolved issue.
 
CasualFan24 said:
The Supreme Court. The very people put in place to uphold these rules and they did NOT find a violation of the separation of church/state.
Click to expand...
So did the Supreme Court just rule that every expression of religious faith, while a public school employee is now on the clock is acceptable?
 
BlackandGold said:
As a Christian, Ima have to ask you to stop pushing your beliefs on people. When a disturbed lawmaker of another faith comes into power, I don't want them retaliating because of your actions and forcing their faith onto me. Don't tell someone else how to live their life. We can easily do the same to you with our beliefs.
Click to expand...
Saying a public prayer which you can join in with or ignore is not pushing anything on anyone.
 
MentorGrad2002 said:
Praying alone is not pushing beliefs on anyone else.
Click to expand...
He wasn't alone. He was in a stadium in school grounds at the 50 yard line. Even if the game had ended that's about the most public place you could visible pray without calling timeout in the actual game to do it.
 
Sykotyk said:
He wasn't alone. He was in a stadium in school grounds at the 50 yard line. Even if the game had ended that's about the most public place you could visible pray without calling timeout in the actual game to do it.
Click to expand...
Sorry you have an issue with a guy praying by himself. Same as the kneelers during the anthem. It's a freedom of expression. If nobody was forced to join him then he's in the clear. The supreme court was right
 
GCLFan99 said:
So did the Supreme Court just rule that every expression of religious faith, while a public school employee is now on the clock is acceptable?
Click to expand...
I mean why not ? People brag about who they have sex with in their email signatures at workplaces. Lets just put it all on the table
 
Last edited:
There's a solution for those of you who want a wall of separation and a ban on religious expression in public places. Amend the Constitution. Make the text so plain and clear that no one can be confused. It only takes 3/4 of the states to ratify. Good luck!
 
So let's review....one guy is afraid of retaliation against kids who didn't choose to pray... others wanting satanists and or Muslims to pray after a game.... another idiot bringing up Dred Scott lol.
Why are some of you so afraid that prayer is protected speech? Prayer is a good thing. Some of you should try it ?
 
my2sense said:
So let's review....one guy is afraid of retaliation against kids who didn't choose to pray... others wanting satanists and or Muslims to pray after a game.... another idiot bringing up Dred Scott lol.
Why are some of you so afraid that prayer is protected speech? Prayer is a good thing. Some of you should try it ?
Click to expand...
Says the extremist.
 
I would gladly pray publicly for you misguided souls on Yappi. Prayer is good. God says so and so does the SCOTUS.
 
James 1:2-4
Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.
 
Somehow I disagree with both sides as always. It must be comforting to live on the ends of the spectrum

My guess is the coach is a douchebag. I pray a lot and I never consider doing it so everyone can pay me on the back.

I do agree that the left fights like hell to have all kinds of speech and expression accepted. This is the logical conclusion.

We’re screwed
 
My2Sense, You’re an awful example of Christ. You and your peoples antics have done real harm. You use Christ as your personal weapon.
 
CasualFan24 said:
Your argument is literally not even apples to oranges - its apples to hamburger. The point I was posting about was the coaches right to pray in a public space. And his maintaining of rights as a citizen even though he's a government employee. But sure, I'll run with it anyways. Please show me in a code of conduct for teachers where it says they are not allowed to pray. I'll wait. Mind you, again, he's not leading a prayer - he knelt, prayed, and got up. He didn't gather everyone around, didn't encourage people to hold hands...none of that. He did NOT lead a prayer.

Guys/Gals/Whatever you identify as - this is NOT hard. Its VERY VERY SIMPLE. Everyone on this thread arguing that it violates the separation of school and religion. Listen very closely.....THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, not your local podunk civil court....I'll say it again...THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ruled in his favor. Ruled that he was NOT in violation. I'm pretty sure they're more qualified to rule on something like this than any of us....

Last thing and this is really just for fun because my previous statement pretty much ends all arguments - You tell me when his job responsibilities are complete!? When you run into him at the supermarket on Sunday afternoon....you still call him "Coach ______" ????? So, is he still under work order/control on Sunday afternoon too???
Click to expand...
You are ignoring one basic factor and that is the current composition of the current Supreme Court. True they are supposed to be bound by the constitution but clearly this court is not. This court majority was constructed to be aligned with the conservative causes and they have been fulfilling their mission to the previous president very well. Clarence Thomas put the seal on this deal with his recent statements about overturning cases he considers to be liberal ideas. This court is clearly not trying to be constitutionalists but rather an arm to the right wing agendas. To argue that they are more knowledgeable than any citizen is irrelevant because they are not focused on what they know to constitutional law but rather the arm of the right wing.
 
WingTFan said:
Somehow I disagree with both sides as always. It must be comforting to live on the ends of the spectrum

My guess is the coach is a douchebag. I pray a lot and I never consider doing it so everyone can pay me on the back.

I do agree that the left fights like hell to have all kinds of speech and expression accepted. This is the logical conclusion.

We’re screwed
Click to expand...
It's clear that the coach was seeking Kaepernick-like attention here. If he wasn't, he'd have stopped after one of the multiple warnings the school district gave him.
 
Starkbuck said:
The issue at play here is not the prayer itself, but praying as a coach who is actively serving in his duty as the mentor/leader of the children of that assigned public school. His actions as a leader can and will be, representative of the school district and in this case serving as an endorsement of a religion which is a violation of the educator code of conduct (at least in Ohio). I've not read the entirety of the opinion, but I believe they ruled in favor of the coach as it pertains to his termination as a result of his religious belief. That would be the only justification in which the first amendment could and would apply to this situation.

For those comparing this to kneeling, you're correct that the actions are similar in that his position as a leader directly and indirectly influences the youth under his supervision. The distinction however, is that the act of protesting is protected and promoting faith as a public employee is not. I think this situation is different than some of the others that have come up, but my fear is that these "optional" prayers will become more prominent and ultimately we all know how "optional" things work in sports.

I struggle with this as a Catholic parent, not because another man is talking about god and praying. My issue is that prayer is taught to be a private conversation with god, and this bastardizes the importance of prayer in my opinion. I also think it is inconsiderate for me to expect others to view societal norms and what is appropriate based upon my beliefs and vice versa. However, I expect leaders i.e. coaches to be role models for our youth, and indirect or direct religious influence is not his or her responsibility. That responsibility is the job of the parent(s) and while we can agree that not every parent is active in this way, it isn't your right or job to fix those things.
Click to expand...
THIS!!! Thank you for this response; it's what I tried to express back on page 2, only better-written.
 
my2sense said:
James 1:2-4
Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.
Click to expand...
Here’s the thing…no one is testing anyone’s faith, if you are strong in your faith.

What people are saying is, don’t push your faith on others. You’re proof texting from an ancient, heavily edited book, doesn’t justify anything. If anything, it is exactly what the court is doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top