The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2005, 01:01pm
I drank what?
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Posts: 1,084
Send a message via MSN to w_sohl
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/news/story?id=2188313

Quote:
But school officials, who emphasized that they did not force Borden to resign, said some students felt uncomfortable with the prayer and their concerns should be treated with respect.


What about those kids that wanted the prayer, shouldn't their concerns be treated with respect? I guess you only get respect if you are godless.
__________________
"Contact does not mean a foul, a foul means contact." -Me
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2005, 01:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: N.D.
Posts: 1,829
This coach is hurting his team by resigning. If he was smart, he'd back off and let "student-led" prayers take place in a way that doesn't offend the players who don't want to take part. If you see players from both teams kneel in prayer after a game, that is ok. Just so a school official doesn't lead it. This could be done prior to the game and it would provide the opportunity for both teams to be involved. Just find the right time and place.

This coach is creating a major distraction for the team. Someone should inform him of ways to seek a solution with which both sides can live. This is not that big of a deal if you handle it right.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2005, 04:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 756
Even with a student-led prayer, he can't even participate in it. What happened to his rights? Can't he choose if he wants to listen to a prayer or not.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2005, 08:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 710
Would you feel the same way if he wanted to lead them in a Muslim prayer? Or Buddhist? or Jewish?

That's the sticky part to this whole thing. It's not just prayer - it's Christian prayer. And if it is one religion prayer, that's recognition of a religion by the state (he is an agent of the state when he is a school employee) and that's unconstitutional. Even in Texas and New Jersey.

There's plenty of time to pray on one's own time. Hell, pray all the way from home to school in the morning. Pray while you're taking a piss. Pray while you walk during the day. Pray during the car ride home. Pray over your dinner. Pray before you go to sleep. Pray in church on Sunday. Why does he have to pick that time and place? Because at the end of the day, it's not about the prayer - it's about him and what HE wants.

Why people feel that they have to shoe-horn their prayer sessions into everyone else's life is beyond me.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2005, 10:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 1,936
Send a message via Yahoo to waltjp
Well said, AB. Nobody is stopping any of the players from saying a prayer in front of their locker.
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2005, 11:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,144
The issue of the thread is the coach resigning. In my view, he doesn't really advance his position by resigning. He should make his thoughts known and move forward. We don't always get to do what we want, even if occassionally our rights get unconstitutionally violated.

As far as this nonsense about islamic or buddist prayer, we don't live in a society that is largly (or really, even remotely) of those religions. There is no "recognition" by the state of someone prayer, even if the coach or a teacher is involved. Even if there was, it doesn't trump the free exercise clause regardless of what idiotic decision the Supreme Court has made with respect to school prayers. If you look very closely at the decisions over the last 20 or so years, you will find the SC disallowing prayer in secondary (and below) schools while essentially allowing the same thing in colleges and other public settings. There is absolutely no constitutional basis for this. Further, the original basis of the establishment clause is NOT to keep religion out of schools, it is actually to keep the federal government from monkeying around in state established churches! Yes, you read that right: hence the phrase, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." It means no national religion establishment and no favoring of one state religion over another.

We don't have any state establishments anymore (Mass. had one until at least 1832), so the establishment clause basically doesn't have the meaning it did in the early years of our country. Essentially, virtually all arguments we have on school prayer, religious displays, etc., are POLITICAL and not constitutional. In other words, they should be left up to the people and not the courts. Even as a Christian, I've got zero problem with a Star of David or other Jewish symbol in a public display, and if a town really wants to put up a Budda statute, fine. Nobody will, of course. These arguments are theorectical nonsense. We don't shut down mosques or make it illegal to go there. Muslims have the same free exercise right we all do, but that doesn't mean they get to put a symbol of their religion in the town square if the city council doesn't want it there.

I wrote a law review-type article on this issue in law school. Drove my prof absolutely mad. Of course, he couldn't refute any of it, hated every word, and gave me an A in the course and high grade in the class.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 12, 2005, 11:08pm
I drank what?
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Posts: 1,084
Send a message via MSN to w_sohl
Noone is stopping anyone from saying whatever faith based prayer they want. I wouldn't care if anyone wanted to say a Jewish, Baptist, Muslim, etc. prayer in a group one single bit. I'm Catholic for the record.

If it is a christian prayer it includes a very wide scope of religions, may not include all, but neither does the varsity FB team. They can have their own prayer circle for their faith, they can say mulitiple prayers in the circle to cover anyone. You can choose to participate or you can choose not to participate.

This is the problem with this country, if millions of people have a problem with something we brush it under the rug, but as soon as five people have a problem with what 60 people are doing we need to change things. We/You will never be able to please everyone and this particular issue has gotten out of hand and quite honestly is getting way to much press and face time, it really isn't that big of a deal. If they want to pray let them, if they don't, don't participate.
__________________
"Contact does not mean a foul, a foul means contact." -Me
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 06:59am
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,557
Quote:
Originally posted by ABoselli
Why people feel that they have to shoe-horn their prayer sessions into everyone else's life is beyond me.
You are sooooooooooo far from the truth it isn't funny.

ANYTIME is the right time to talk to God.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 07:04am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,323
Quote:
Originally posted by Texas Aggie
The issue of the thread is the coach resigning. In my view, he doesn't really advance his position by resigning. He should make his thoughts known and move forward. We don't always get to do what we want, even if occassionally our rights get unconstitutionally violated.

As far as this nonsense about islamic or buddist prayer, we don't live in a society that is largly (or really, even remotely) of those religions. There is no "recognition" by the state of someone prayer, even if the coach or a teacher is involved. Even if there was, it doesn't trump the free exercise clause regardless of what idiotic decision the Supreme Court has made with respect to school prayers. If you look very closely at the decisions over the last 20 or so years, you will find the SC disallowing prayer in secondary (and below) schools while essentially allowing the same thing in colleges and other public settings. There is absolutely no constitutional basis for this. Further, the original basis of the establishment clause is NOT to keep religion out of schools, it is actually to keep the federal government from monkeying around in state established churches! Yes, you read that right: hence the phrase, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." It means no national religion establishment and no favoring of one state religion over another.

We don't have any state establishments anymore (Mass. had one until at least 1832), so the establishment clause basically doesn't have the meaning it did in the early years of our country. Essentially, virtually all arguments we have on school prayer, religious displays, etc., are POLITICAL and not constitutional. In other words, they should be left up to the people and not the courts. Even as a Christian, I've got zero problem with a Star of David or other Jewish symbol in a public display, and if a town really wants to put up a Budda statute, fine. Nobody will, of course. These arguments are theorectical nonsense. We don't shut down mosques or make it illegal to go there. Muslims have the same free exercise right we all do, but that doesn't mean they get to put a symbol of their religion in the town square if the city council doesn't want it there.

I wrote a law review-type article on this issue in law school. Drove my prof absolutely mad. Of course, he couldn't refute any of it, hated every word, and gave me an A in the course and high grade in the class.
So what you are saying is that the majority wins. The majority of students are Christian, so the prayers should be that way too.

The founding fathers were smart enough to not set up the US as a direct democracy. Sometimes the majority isn't right -- sometimes the outnumbered minority's rights need to be protected, as well. Unfortunately, politicians are afraid to rule without polls (after all, their #1 priority is getting re-elected) so it leaves the (protected) courts to have to do the dirty work.

It's never about the prayer. In this case, it's about the coach taking his ball and going home because someone dared tell him what to do.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 10:39am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 379
Maybe there needs to be some silent reflection.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 05:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 710
ANYTIME is the right time to talk to God.

Talk to him all you want. Just do it on your time. I'll handle my business with him on my time.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 05:43pm
REQ REQ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 21
Our money says "In God we trust", We have all said in school (and they still do here) end the plege with One nation under God. When you go to court you are sworn in with so help your God. The founding fathers must not of had such a problem.

Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 05:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 531
Send a message via AIM to BoomerSooner
Quote:
Originally posted by ABoselli
That's the sticky part to this whole thing. It's not just prayer - it's Christian prayer. And if it is one religion prayer, that's recognition of a religion by the state (he is an agent of the state when he is a school employee) and that's unconstitutional. Even in Texas and New Jersey.
President Bush is always the President of the United States and as such is a "agent of the state", and he has frequently made reference to his religious beliefs, which by the way are Christian by his own words. Does that mean what he has done is unconstitutional?

The problem is that people somehow feel that if anybody in a position of authority believes anything, that they are being forced to believe the same thing. If in fact, they are being forced to believe something (i.e. they will be cut from the team if not Christians or your taxes will be increased if you aren't a Christian), then there would be some constitutional issues. Forced participation is also a constitutional issue, but simply having and expressing beliefs in any religion is not unconstitutional regardless of who you are or what title you hold. It is actually a right protected by the First Amendment, and being in a public office never eliminates a person's rights. It may increase his/her responsibilities, but never takes away rights.

All that aside, the coach maybe has hurt his team, but to any man or woman that would put his/her convictions before their career, before their team, before their family is a man of integrity and gets a tip of my hat. Tough situation to be in.
__________________
My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 09:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,144
>>So what you are saying is that the majority wins. The majority of students are Christian, so the prayers should be that way too.<<

Yep. That's pretty much how we solve political issues in this country: popular vote, or representative decision making. Why shouldn't it be the same here?

>>Sometimes the majority isn't right -- sometimes the outnumbered minority's rights need to be protected, as well.<<

Specifically what constitutional rights of mine are being violated when you say a prayer? When you as my coach lead a prayer? Further, what if you can only do one of two things, and either choice will violate some rights? Where is the constitutional provision that, under this thinking, the minority's rights trump over the majority's.

Folks, don't make this harder than it is. There is no right to protect us from not being offended, yet, that's exactly what the ACLU, and all the chuch/state separatists want. What they really want is the expansion of liberalism and the minimization of religion, especially in public.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 13, 2005, 10:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 1,936
Send a message via Yahoo to waltjp
I think the point should be whether a player on the team feels compelled to sit in on this prayer session or not. These are still kids. They look to the coach as an authority figure. The coach is asking (telling?) them it's time to pray. Is every kid in that locker room praying on his own volition or is he fearful that if he doesn't go along he'll lose his starting position?

Honestly, it doesn't make a difference to me what god you pray to or if you even pray at all. But when you're the leader of a group and you're asking your subordinates to gather together to pray some of them may feel too imtimidated to refuse.

Now, "In God We Trust" was added to our money during the Cold War. "Under God" was added to the Pledge of Alligence for the same reason. People are not compelled to pledge an oath to God when sworn in. Former President Jimmy Carter, a born again Christian rarely invoked the name of God during any of his speaches. Nor did Reagan.
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:02am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1