4 ms·

No, what the ruling said was the government couldn’t treat him differently because of his religion. Are public employees not allowed to pray on the job? Same l

No, what the ruling said was the government couldn’t treat him differently because of his religion. Are public employees not allowed to pray on the job? Same logic applies elsewhere. Should governmental employees be banned from wearing hijabs(they’re a public form of religious expression)? Should we ban/fire a Muslim employee for praying in public(if there’s no available private space) while working as a member of TSA? Limited powers on governmental religious discrimination is a good thing.

atwood22 4y ago
> Are public employees not allowed to pray on the job? In this case, I would say yes, the coach should not be allowed to pray because the prayer was done as part of his role as a coach. Like if a social worker prays that a child is ok while driving to a home visit, then that’s ok. But if the social worker forces the family to pray then that’s different.
KerrAvon 4y ago
The problem is that he wasn’t praying on his own. He was coercing the players to pray with him. Thus is documented. The justices lied.
- kcplate 4y ago
  So where was it documented that he was coercing other people? It is certainly a fact that other people, players both on his team and other teams, did choose to join him. The schools argument for him to stop was that the administration felt that players might feel compelled to join him against their wishes, but is there literally anything that was entered in to evidence that he forced anyone to join or punished anyone for choosing not to join him? I don’t think so. He chose to pray and others chose to join him. Frankly, I think the argument to support Kennedy was pretty compelling. The first amendment allows for the free practice of any religion by the people. It makes no commentary on the government specifically censoring any religion. In fact it appears to be just the opposite. The text reads that the government has a duty to not act at all when religious expression is made by the people.
  - drewcoo 4y ago
    There's an inherent power imbalance in a teacher-student relationship. There is the constant threat of punishment used to establish authority. Teachers tell students what to do and students are expected to do it. And that's all in public schools!
    - kcplate 4y ago
      Seems to me you are not so much arguing against a first amendment case here but rather the eighth.
    - spoils19 4y ago
      Sure, but is it documented anywhere? Most free American students, mostly conservative, would stand for their rights, even with "inherent" power imbalances.
  - drewbug01 4y ago
    > The District Court found, in the evidentiary record, that some students reported joining Kennedy’s prayer because they felt social pressure to follow their coach and teammates. From Sotomayor's dissent, page 18: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf It's important to note that coercion doesn't have to be explicit with observed punishments and rewards, and Sotomayor explains this quite clearly (including how courts have previously held this to be true for many years). Like most SCOTUS opinions and dissents, these are technically well-written, accessible, and easy to read - I would encourage you to do so. They sometimes even border on enjoyable to read (although maybe I'm just weird). The case as laid out in the dissent is rather egregious, and it's shocking that the SCOTUS upheld such a clear violation of the establishment clause. It's shocking that they even heard the case to begin with.
jleyank 4y ago
See Quebec, Bill 21.
drewbug01 4y ago
> Are public employees not allowed to pray on the job? The school district practically begged the coach to work with them to find an avenue for him to express his religious beliefs through prayer, without creating a coercive environment for students. At every opportunity, the coach declined to find a way forward that didn't violate the establishment clause. It's important to know that "prayer in schools" is a rallying point for conservative christians, and the coach's behavior was intentionally provocative. Holding big, public prayers like this is a strategy designed to continually test the limits of the establishment clause, with the goal of ultimately breaking it. A piece of anecdotal evidence that I always think about when stuff like this comes up - I went to a very, very conservative christian school. Prayer was pervasive (as you might expect), but it was never used to make a public scene like this. Ever. Finally, his behavior is an affront to prayer itself, which Jesus himself makes clear in Matthew 6:5-6. > And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. It says a lot about his motives. That's not exactly an obscure passage of the Bible.

atwood22 4y ago

> Are public employees not allowed to pray on the job? In this case, I would say yes, the coach should not be allowed to pray because the prayer was done as part of his role as a coach. Like if a social worker prays that a child is ok while driving to a home visit, then that’s ok. But if the social worker forces the family to pray then that’s different.

KerrAvon 4y ago

The problem is that he wasn’t praying on his own. He was coercing the players to pray with him. Thus is documented. The justices lied.

kcplate 4y ago
So where was it documented that he was coercing other people? It is certainly a fact that other people, players both on his team and other teams, did choose to join him. The schools argument for him to stop was that the administration felt that players might feel compelled to join him against their wishes, but is there literally anything that was entered in to evidence that he forced anyone to join or punished anyone for choosing not to join him? I don’t think so. He chose to pray and others chose to join him. Frankly, I think the argument to support Kennedy was pretty compelling. The first amendment allows for the free practice of any religion by the people. It makes no commentary on the government specifically censoring any religion. In fact it appears to be just the opposite. The text reads that the government has a duty to not act at all when religious expression is made by the people.
- drewcoo 4y ago
  There's an inherent power imbalance in a teacher-student relationship. There is the constant threat of punishment used to establish authority. Teachers tell students what to do and students are expected to do it. And that's all in public schools!
  - kcplate 4y ago
    Seems to me you are not so much arguing against a first amendment case here but rather the eighth.
  - spoils19 4y ago
    Sure, but is it documented anywhere? Most free American students, mostly conservative, would stand for their rights, even with "inherent" power imbalances.
- drewbug01 4y ago
  > The District Court found, in the evidentiary record, that some students reported joining Kennedy’s prayer because they felt social pressure to follow their coach and teammates. From Sotomayor's dissent, page 18: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf It's important to note that coercion doesn't have to be explicit with observed punishments and rewards, and Sotomayor explains this quite clearly (including how courts have previously held this to be true for many years). Like most SCOTUS opinions and dissents, these are technically well-written, accessible, and easy to read - I would encourage you to do so. They sometimes even border on enjoyable to read (although maybe I'm just weird). The case as laid out in the dissent is rather egregious, and it's shocking that the SCOTUS upheld such a clear violation of the establishment clause. It's shocking that they even heard the case to begin with.

jleyank 4y ago

See Quebec, Bill 21.

drewbug01 4y ago

> Are public employees not allowed to pray on the job? The school district practically begged the coach to work with them to find an avenue for him to express his religious beliefs through prayer, without creating a coercive environment for students. At every opportunity, the coach declined to find a way forward that didn't violate the establishment clause. It's important to know that "prayer in schools" is a rallying point for conservative christians, and the coach's behavior was intentionally provocative. Holding big, public prayers like this is a strategy designed to continually test the limits of the establishment clause, with the goal of ultimately breaking it. A piece of anecdotal evidence that I always think about when stuff like this comes up - I went to a very, very conservative christian school. Prayer was pervasive (as you might expect), but it was never used to make a public scene like this. Ever. Finally, his behavior is an affront to prayer itself, which Jesus himself makes clear in Matthew 6:5-6. > And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. It says a lot about his motives. That's not exactly an obscure passage of the Bible.