Started By
Message
re: Will "the God thing" start to get challenged on legal grounds?
Posted on 4/17/14 at 3:29 pm to Crimson Legend
Posted on 4/17/14 at 3:29 pm to Crimson Legend
quote:
I have to admit it - she's so crazy I have a strange infatuation with her.
Same. I would go fricking nuts.
0
Posted on 4/17/14 at 3:40 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
These are legitimate points. Theater? Really? I wasn't aware of that...not saying you are wrong. Simply I find it odd.
The hookers are probably more wife/woman driven, though.
The main issue is that certain laws are meant to protect society as a whole while others are meant to protect the sensibilities of a given ethos. Murder, rape, insider trading, jaywalking -- these address quantifiable social ills that can result in measurable harm to others. Issues like gay marriage, flag desecration, liquor laws, pornography...the societal effect of these is nebulous at the very least, and certainly arguable. So passing a law prohibiting murder because, hey, someone dies isn't the same as passing a law prohibiting gay marriage because, hey, you disapprove of it in concept. That's the problem with imposition of religion (or logical positivism or neo-Platonism) on a set of laws that affect a considerable number of people who don't share your personal ethos in that regard. If they think rape is fine and dandy, you can argue social repercussions. If they think hardcore porn is fine and dandy, your argumentative options are far more limited and more ad hominem. This is why the question of whether a coach has a right to impose his religion on his players is a pressing point. He certainly has the right to believe, and freely share his belief (though not the right to freedom from public sentiment.) But he doesn't have the right to coerce his players to share his morality or, for that matter, advocate for societal ills like murder, rape, insider trading, etc without being dismissed from his job.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 4:00 pm to randomways
quote:
So passing a law prohibiting murder because, hey, someone dies isn't the same as passing a law prohibiting gay marriage because, hey, you disapprove of it in concept.
I understand what you are saying. but there are plenty of laws that do not necessarily do direct easily measurable harm that is not religion based. Such as flag desecration. Some may, or may not be religion based. however, to say the religious people impose their will on others is to ignore the many other laws that are not religion based but imposed by non-religious entities. In short, while Religious people get chastised for being legislatively active, so are almost every other group out there.
It would appear as if this thread has run out of steam. I'll give you guys last word, then we can let the thread die an honorable death!
This post was edited on 4/17/14 at 4:02 pm
Posted on 4/17/14 at 4:29 pm to MIZ_COU
quote:I would be OK with it in the sense that they are free to worship as they wish, just as I am.
If 2/3 of the team was voluntarily bowing and praying to mecca before practice would you be ok with it?
And when coaches are involved the whole voluntary thing is dubious at best.
And I don't think that it is dubious to say the exercise is voluntary. It depends on the activities, the coaches, and the players. Does the coach really bench the star RB because he doesn't participate in the Bible study? I haven't heard of such a thing. Yet, do all players attend? Of course not.
I don't think we're talking about reality here. There will always be peer pressure and pressure to fit in with any group you belong to (football team, in this case), but the question is whether or not those kids are actually punished for not participating in the voluntary activities. If they are being punished, then it really isn't voluntary, and it should be addressed. But if there isn't an issue, there's no need to make one.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 4:34 pm to FooManChoo
The kids aren't punished or chastised for not participating. Clemson held 87 prayer/bible sessions in a year. That's alot if you consider the time school is out of session (holidays/summer.) There is no way possible for a student-athlete to attend that many prayer meeting and bible studies with their athletic and academic workload. That many sessions couldn't be anything but voluntary for the players that choose to attend. And i guarantee you Dabo isn't taking attendance at those functions.
Posted on 4/17/14 at 6:10 pm to RT1941
All this at Clemson was actually started by Tommy Bowden, and he got it from daddy Bowden. It's always been voluntary and the only complaints have come from outside groups trying to change the laws, kick out chaplains etc. Aaron Kelly started 2 or 3 years for Clemson at wr and was a Jehovas witness and never participated (around the time of Spiller)...so kids w different beliefs play and aren't treated any different..the whole thing is voluntary, sort of like at my high school the coach was in FCA,..
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News