Scotus

[bigfishguy85]

How would them not renewing his contract because of the national media circus he created be different than Kaepernick not getting a contract for the same reason?

Nobody told Kaepernick he couldn’t kneel. That’s the difference. He did it and continued to play. This guy prayed and then was told he couldn’t. It’s absolutely night and day.

[Bramaca]

Nobody told Kaepernick he couldn’t kneel. That’s the difference. He did it and continued to play. This guy prayed and then was told he couldn’t. It’s absolutely night and day.

Night and day would be zero similarities. There’s a lot of similarities here. The night and day is the right’s reaction to it. With the football coach it’s “how dare you take away his constitutional rights”. With Kaepernick it was “This man is a disgrace, he should be kicked out of the league, **** his constitutional rights”. That’s my biggest issue with this, the hypocrisy.

[bigfishguy85]

Night and day would be zero similarities. There’s a lot of similarities here. The night and day is the right’s reaction to it. With the football coach it’s “how dare you take away his constitutional rights”. With Kaepernick it was “This man is a disgrace, he should be kicked out of the league, **** his constitutional rights”. That’s my biggest issue with this, the hypocrisy.

The reaction of the right is irrelevant here. That’s just noise. There are severe differences in what actually happened, from a legal standpoint. Kaep was allowed to exercise his right while the football coach wasn’t.

[Bramaca]

The reaction of the right is irrelevant here. That’s just noise. There are severe differences in what actually happened, from a legal standpoint. Kaep was allowed to exercise his right while the football coach wasn’t.

I understand the difference between the legal standpoint and the reaction. The similarities though are close enough that the differing reactions from the right are relevant, especially from politicians. It shows a willingness to ignore/punish people for using their rights just because they don’t agree. It’s a scary thing to see.

[bigfishguy85]

I understand the difference between the legal standpoint and the reaction. The similarities though are close enough that the differing reactions from the right are relevant, especially from politicians. It shows a willingness to ignore/punish people for using their rights just because they don’t agree. It’s a scary thing to see.

Yeah but that’s no difference than how many liberals are responding to the court overturning the decision against the coach. CNN is saying that scotus “is eroding the separation between church and state. “ Please. No they didn’t.Again, if a Muslim had been told that they can’t pray at work, everyone would’ve gone ape **** about it. By and large, people didn’t care about this white Christian being told he couldn’t.

[Bramaca]

Yeah but that’s no difference than how many liberals are responding to the court overturning the decision against the coach. CNN is saying that scotus “is eroding the separation between church and state. “ Please. No they didn’t.Again, if a Muslim had been told that they can’t pray at work, everyone would’ve gone ape **** about it. By and large, people didn’t care about this white Christian being told he couldn’t.

Wasn’t it a large national news story when it happened? Obviously, you’re wrong that people didn’t care. And questioning whether this erodes the separation of church and state is different than ignoring peoples civil rights because you don’t like it

[bigfishguy85]

Wasn’t it a large national news story when it happened? Obviously, you’re wrong that people didn’t care. And questioning whether this erodes the separation of church and state is different than ignoring peoples civil rights because you don’t like it

Define “large news story.” Kaep was a big news story, and there was a big outcry about it. This was nothing like that.

[natepro]

Yeah but that’s no difference than how many liberals are responding to the court overturning the decision against the coach. CNN is saying that scotus “is eroding the separation between church and state. “ Please. No they didn’t.Again, if a Muslim had been told that they can’t pray at work, everyone would’ve gone ape **** about it. By and large, people didn’t care about this white Christian being told he couldn’t.

Muslims have been stopped from praying at the 50 yard line of a game they just finished coaching? And "liberals" were upset about it? When did this happen?

[dbroncos78087]

Define coercion. Was playing time links to whether they showed up at the prayer? If not, then there is no coercion. Like I originally, asked… what evidence is there? Clearly, you don’t have any.

A man led a bunch of boys in the prayer. Do you believe that what the players do when told to by a coach is a request or an order?

[valade16]

Define coercion. Was playing time links to whether they showed up at the prayer? If not, then there is no coercion. Like I originally, asked… what evidence is there? Clearly, you don’t have any.

Have you ever been on a sports team? I was told playing time was not dependent on whether I participated in voluntary workouts and film sessions. I was smart enough to know better.

[mngopher35]

Are people really upset bout the overturning by scotus with the high school football coach?

It sounds like based on what one supreme court justice has said and the facts that came out the majority opinion misrepresents what actually happened. This yet again seems to be an area where the supreme court pushes their religious beliefs onto the country despite it not being how the court is supposed to work at all (and in this case while not as obvious as Roe v Wade in extremism the way arguments are presented is troubling).

By most accounts outside of the majority opinion (including pictures and claims by at least one student/parent) this was not a man praying on his own. Players/athletes were joining in and one parent complained to the school that they felt it would affect playing time if there was no participation in prayer. He constantly invited others to join in despite being a representative of the school and even invited media etc. to make it more of a circus what he was doing. The school even said they didn't mind him praying but asked he did so away from students and offered him the chance to do it after everyone left. This is not a man quietly praying at the 50 yard line it is someone actively making a scene and potentially coercing others despite his position.

[ewing]

Define coercion. Was playing time links to whether they showed up at the prayer? If not, then there is no coercion. Like I originally, asked… what evidence is there? Clearly, you don’t have any.

You ever been on a team? Standing on the side during team activities isn’t the way you get minutes. If the coach leads the team in pray and you stand on the side it’s a bad look.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ewing]

Have you ever been on a sports team? I was told playing time was not dependent on whether I participated in voluntary workouts and film sessions. I was smart enough to know better.

Exactly lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dbroncos78087]

I just hope that any Muslim or Hindi teachers make sure to lead a prayer of students and they get the same protections that the assumed American religion coach got.

[dbroncos78087]

Wild ****!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abc11.c...eist/12001573/