mat Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 The school district cannot constitutionally restrict him from taking a knee and praying with his team......The coach taking a knee with his team does not represent a school endorsement of religion....just as if that coach committed a violent crime while at that school is not an endorsement by that school of that particular crime. You are correct that him taking a knee does not endorse a religion. See my previous posts. I have clearly said that it is constitutional for him to pray in that manner. I have also said that I disagree with the district's stupid rules. The issue in court was, does the district have the right to make rules. The answer is, "yes". The coach's response is along the lines of, "Since it is about religion, the district cannot make me follow the rules". He is incorrect. It is the same as in the case from Texas of Daniels vs. City of Arlington that went to the 5th Circuit Court (next highest to the Supreme Court in this region). A police officer from Arlington, TX wanted to visibly wear a cross on his uniform. It was against the department policy to have individual pins. His argument was that since it was about his religious beliefs, he did not have to go by policy. Sgt Daniels was fired and then he sued in federal court. The trial court threw the case out. He appealed to the 5th Circuit. Same answer. When you are at work, the place you work for can set rules. You cannot say that you don't have to go by the rules if it is based on religion. Well, you can say it but in most cases you won't win according to the Constitution. What are your thoughts? If a district can prohibit an employee from taking a knee during student prayer, can they also make it a rule to prohibit the student led prayer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 What are your thoughts? If a district can prohibit an employee from taking a knee during student prayer, can they also make it a rule to prohibit the student led prayer? Yes, I think that they can but they would have to ban all such gatherings, not just religious ones. If a school district makes a rules that no more than three students can gather together between classes for example, I think they can uphold that. They cannot however say that students can gather as long as they don't pray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 If the constitution can be violated then there is no point in having one.......Just to clarify I took Constitutional Law in the fall of 2007........perhaps you should take it...... Constitutional rights are to protect people from certain intrusions by the government. It does not apply in most cases to your employer and the rules that are set. The Constitution is not criminal or civil laws but procedures and rights protected against or from the government. For example we have the right against unreasonable searches and seizures by the 4th Amendment. That is from government searches and seizures, not by companies or private citizens. So the cops can't come into your home without your permission or without a warrant (except in limited circumstances). That doesn't mean that your employer can't open up your private locker that you use at work. That means that your employer can require you to submit to searches on their property. Can the government enforce such rules on citizens? The answer is obiviously no. That is what the Constitution is for. Can a company that you work for set rules that the government cannot? Yes they can. Such is the same in this case we are discussing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetragichippy Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I bet tvc184 would be a blast to drink with.................of course we would all have designated drivers ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigWolf10 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 there's a Coworker of mine that is very religious. She doesn't hesitate to say," I'm blessed and heavily favored". Well, she once said this to one of my employers clients. The client was for some reason, offended. She reported the incident to my employer. My employer in response warned the employee to leave God out of the work place. I was stunned. This is just and example of our society lashing out at religious beliefs and acts. They feel its bad for business ??? ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BIG HOUSE Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 bcjag I wonder how they will respond on the day they stand before Jesus? Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess Jesus is Lord.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodyLB34 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Again, constitutional rights cannot be violated by government or employers. The actual constitution is extremely clear that these rights cannot be violated in any way.....................for those who do not actually know what it says check this out.............www.usconstitution.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Again, constitutional rights cannot be violated by government or employers. The actual constitution is extremely clear that these rights cannot be violated in any way.....................for those who do not actually know what it says check this out.............www.usconstitution.net : : I guess that you are at least somewhat correct. Rights cannot be violated.. and in this case they are not. Restrictions can be placed on conduct though. Just because someone doesn't like a ruling, that doesn't mean that any civil right is violated. The Constitution gives no complete freedom of speech, no complete freedom of religion, no complete freedom of the press, no complete right to bear arms, no complete right to no searches without warrants, etc. But I am sure that you learned that in Constitutional Law class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Again, constitutional rights cannot be violated by government or employers. The actual constitution is extremely clear that these rights cannot be violated in any way.....................for those who do not actually know what it says check this out.............www.usconstitution.net : : I guess that you are at least somewhat correct. Rights cannot be violated.. and in this case they are not. Restrictions can be placed on conduct though. Just because someone doesn't like a ruling, that doesn't mean that any civil right is violated. The Constitution gives no complete freedom of speech, no complete freedom of religion, no complete freedom of the press, no complete right to bear arms, no complete right to no searches without warrants, etc. But I am sure that you learned that in Constitutional Law class. I'm sure no expert, but it appears to me that over the many years the interpretation of our constitution has been severely warped to fit the liberal mindset. The constitution of today doesn't seem to be the same constitution of yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 bcjag I wonder how they will respond on the day they stand before Jesus? Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess Jesus is Lord.... Truely said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodyLB34 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion. Thats what this case is about, many feel any reference to God in public is a violation of their rights. It's not however, in fact its those who seek to strike it from the public arena who are suppressing religious Americans rights. Again, for those who do not know what the constitution says: Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullets13 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion. Thats what this case is about, many feel any reference to God in public is a violation of their rights. It's not however, in fact its those who seek to strike it from the public arena who are suppressing religious Americans rights. Again, for those who do not know what the constitution says: Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. another example of what tvc is trying to get through to you. you have the constitutional right to freedom of speech. still, if you're at work and call your boss an idiot, you'll be fired. the government may not be able to stop you from calling him an idiot, but your company can set policy that denies you the right to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Since you have it highlighted, did the US Congress prohibit this guy from kneeling ..... or was it his employer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodyLB34 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Religious Freedom for Employees - EEOC The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullets13 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Religious Freedom for Employees - EEOC The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. meaning they can't fire him for being a Christian. or a Muslim. or whatever. They can however restrict his right to openly tout his religion at the workplace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Religious Freedom for Employees - EEOC The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. And that has absolutely nothing to do with this case. The coach wasn't prohibited from being hired due to religion. He wasn't fired because he was a Christian. He isn't required to pray as a condition of his employment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 You agreed that the constitution couldn't be violated earlier............ You bet... and in this case it wasn't. I did not say that I agree with your opinion. An employer can ban you from doing things that the Constitution guarantees to be free from "government" restrictions. This very sports forum is a fine example of people misconception of "rights". We all know that there is freedom of speech. That means that the govenment cannot restrict political speech but all speech is not free. This site through the owners can and do set any rules that they wish. They can and do modify or delete posts without the consent of the person making the post. They can ban users and/or delete their accounts. Freedom of speech has nothing to do with a private enterprise. It is that way with all of the amendments. There is nothing in the Constitution, the amendments or court rulings that said all rights are complete with no restrictions or at each person's discretion. What it amounts to is this case is about religion and so it offends a lot of people. There is nothing that prohibits this guy from praying. The school apparently has a rule about overt public displays of any kind. As I have said, I disagree with that attitude but that doesn't mean that the district cannot do it. People are taking an argument over the law and trying to make it an argument about the endorsement of religion. If it was many of the other rights that we were discussing, a lot of the opinions would be different or many people simply wouldn't care. Mention religion and you would have thought the school district demanded that the coach sign a document saying that God did not exist or that Jesus Christ is not the Savior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodyLB34 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Religious Freedom for Employees - EEOC The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. And that has absolutely nothing to do with this case. The coach wasn't prohibited from being hired due to religion. He wasn't fired because he was a Christian. He isn't required to pray as a condition of his employment. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodyLB34 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Public schools are not private enterprises...........they are public government run institutions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hj_hawk_60 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Looks to me that in no way were the coaches constitutional rights violated... no one ever said that the coach couldn't pray by himself before games, or whenever he wanted... he just cannot lead his players in prayer because that would violate their constitutional rights because the employee of a PUBLIC school a GOVERNMENT run institution would be favoring one religion over an other... what if 95% of the team was christian but the coach was muslim, would you still support his desire to pray with his team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Public schools are not private enterprises...........they are public government run institutions From your previous post, that is not a term of his employment. For this post, it doesn't matter. They still have the right to set rules in the workplace. Their policy does not prohibit religion or praying. The coach can take his normal breaks and pray to his heart's content. Look, I know that I will never convince you of this court ruling. Well this Supreme Court is very conservative right now in the five person majority. They could not even get enough votes to bring it in from of the entire Court for a ruling. They applied the law as it has been in the past. As far as the Supreme Court's right to do so.... that is in the same Constitution that you claim has been violated. Well that very document says that the Supreme Court, when a dispute exists over the law, is the body that rules if the law is legal pursuant to the Constitution. That body has ruled and allowed the lower court to stand. You post stuff about the EEOC rules. If it is so clear, how come several courts have ruled against your opinion? If you don't like it, great. There are rulings that I don't like either. That doesn't make them wrong or unlawful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvc184 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Looks to me that in no way were the coaches constitutional rights violated... no one ever said that the coach couldn't pray by himself before games, or whenever he wanted... he just cannot lead his players in prayer because that would violate their constitutional rights because the employee of a PUBLIC school a GOVERNMENT run institution would be favoring one religion over an other... what if 95% of the team was christian but the coach was muslim, would you still support his desire to pray with his team? Therein lies the problem. Most people are making this an endorsement or criticism of the Christian religion. I am wondering if the coach wanted to throw a mat down and turn toward Mecca and start praying in Arabic if they would feel the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hj_hawk_60 Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Looks to me that in no way were the coaches constitutional rights violated... no one ever said that the coach couldn't pray by himself before games, or whenever he wanted... he just cannot lead his players in prayer because that would violate their constitutional rights because the employee of a PUBLIC school a GOVERNMENT run institution would be favoring one religion over an other... what if 95% of the team was christian but the coach was muslim, would you still support his desire to pray with his team? Therein lies the problem. Most people are making this an endorsement or criticism of the Christian religion. I am wondering if the coach wanted to throw a mat down and turn toward Mecca and start praying in Arabic if they would feel the same way. my point exactly... id be willing to bet that several people would argue that the supreme courts ruling was unconstitutional, until they found out that a muslim or buddist coach wanted to pray with his players... then they'd agree with the ruling 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodyLB34 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Simply because the Supreme Court rules a certain way doesn't mean its the correct ruling. Yes they have the final say however, they have over ridden similar Supreme Court rulings in the past. These things go back and forth throughout the history of this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigWolf10 Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 Prayer is a form of communication with whom ever your God is. It's meant for you and him, no one else. You can pray to God just standing at work. I pray while I'm working. That's what he tells you to do. Go to your private place and pray. When people pray in groups it should be when everyone is on the same accord. If anyone is offended it should not be resumed. God wants no one to be offended. He was totally aware of this mess from the beginning. This country in prints "In God we trust" on all of it's currency. The acknowledgment of God has been from the beginning. He'll be God re guardless. The coach could just close his eyes as the team prays, same thing. God will acknowledge him. GOD BLESS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts