Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mahatmakanejeeves

(69,915 posts)
6. Ahh, you beat me to it. From the Washington Post:
Mon Apr 25, 2022, 07:37 AM
Apr 2022
COURTS & LAW

Supreme Court takes up case of a coach and his prayers on 50-yard line

Joseph Kennedy’s case brings questions about the ability of public employees to live out their faith while on duty and the government’s responsibility to protect schoolchildren from coercion

By Robert Barnes
April 21, 2022 at 7:08 p.m. EDT



Former Bremerton High School assistant football coach Joseph Kennedy at Bremerton Memorial Stadium in Washington on Nov. 5, 2015. (Larry Steagall/Kitsap Sun via AP)

BREMERTON, Wash. — Almost everyone agrees it should not require two trips to the U.S. Supreme Court to settle the case of a high school football coach who wants to pray at the 50-yard line. ... Maybe former Bremerton High School assistant coach Joseph Kennedy could have conceded that his postgame prayer of gratitude could take place somewhere other than midfield, or discouraged what one judge called a “spectacle” of stampeding supporters and politicians who rushed after one game to kneel beside him on the gridiron.

Maybe the school district could have offered an accommodation that didn’t require Kennedy to climb to the stadium press box, or retreat to a janitor’s office in the school, to offer his prayer. Instead, it prohibited him from any “demonstrative religious activity” that is “readily observable to (if not intended to be observed by) students and the attending public.”

Nonetheless, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District arrives before the justices Monday. It brings vexing questions about the ability of public employees to live out their faith while on duty and the government’s competing responsibility to protect schoolchildren from coercion and to remain neutral on the subject of religion.

{snip}

What the court must decide

The case calls for the Supreme Court once again to find the line between the First Amendment’s establishment clause, which forbids government endorsement of religion, and its free speech and free exercise clauses, which forbid restraints on the private observance of religion.

{snip}

The case is Kennedy v. Bremerton School District.

By Robert Barnes
Robert Barnes has been a Washington Post reporter and editor since 1987. He joined The Post to cover Maryland politics, and he has served in various editing positions, including metropolitan editor and national political editor. He has covered the Supreme Court since November 2006. Twitter https://twitter.com/scotusreporter

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

There are thousands of churches and they are tax-free. They still have to force prayers on children Walleye Apr 2022 #1
You can prayer in school just keep it to yourself Marthe48 Apr 2022 #24
They think God orders them to shove it down our throats Walleye Apr 2022 #25
We didn't have teacher led praying Marthe48 Apr 2022 #31
They'll change their mind when other religions start doing the same uponit7771 Apr 2022 #2
First, they should ponder Matthew 6: 16-18. GoCubsGo Apr 2022 #3
It's perfectly legal for a coach to pray on the 50-yard line. Saboburns Apr 2022 #4
He is an adult in a position of authority. He decides who makes Phoenix61 Apr 2022 #17
And none of that prohibits him from Constitutionally protected religious activity. Saboburns Apr 2022 #29
None of that changes what I said. Phoenix61 Apr 2022 #30
He stopped praying with the students forthemiddle Apr 2022 #32
One player did complain. Phoenix61 Apr 2022 #34
Thanks, I missed that forthemiddle Apr 2022 #37
It's also about a public school and using that platform to support religion. Cuthbert Allgood Apr 2022 #40
Who will protect and secure FraDon Apr 2022 #5
The best explanation of it all (and it's NOT Bill Maher): DFW Apr 2022 #18
Ahh, you beat me to it. From the Washington Post: mahatmakanejeeves Apr 2022 #6
'living their faith' doesn't have to be made into a spectacle rurallib Apr 2022 #9
Jesus would be horrified. GoCubsGo Apr 2022 #10
Thank you for the additional info. n/t sl8 Apr 2022 #26
I'll be honest. I learned the Lords Prayer from high school football underpants Apr 2022 #7
The fact that you felt coerced (and who wouldn't have felt that way?) is the Nay Apr 2022 #14
They've baked their prayers into cakes, into healthcare plans, now the 50 yard line?? bucolic_frolic Apr 2022 #8
Looks like it will come down to Justice Barret FBaggins Apr 2022 #11
Is that really the right location? How about the 5 yard line? Or the end zone? milestogo Apr 2022 #12
It must not be important to Judge Ginni or it would be... Hugin Apr 2022 #13
My God, do they kneel ? rickford66 Apr 2022 #15
Of course. They kneel and hold hands. It's considered team building. haele Apr 2022 #20
So why the fuss about Kaepernick kneeling ? rickford66 Apr 2022 #21
Kaepernick kneeling was not religious, but for "respect". haele Apr 2022 #22
these cases are not about the exercise of religion MissMillie Apr 2022 #16
Jeepers Karma13612 Apr 2022 #19
What the Court can't possibly determine DFW Apr 2022 #23
Separation of church and state - it's a fucking no-brainer Novara Apr 2022 #27
I've heard this saying; Religon is like a penis. It's okay to have one and it's okay to be Hotler Apr 2022 #28
A waste of tax payers money. Folks have been doing that for years now praying at the 50 rockfordfile Apr 2022 #33
A Catholic School can do it 24/7. maxsolomon Apr 2022 #35
+1 moondust Apr 2022 #38
Reread this story, replacing "praying" with "masturbating". Midnight Writer Apr 2022 #36
Who is it really who wants to indoctrinate children? Hmmmmmm, Who could it be? MagickMuffin Apr 2022 #39
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Supreme Court ponders...»Reply #6