(06-01-2015 03:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:20 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 02:42 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This is why, even when I was an atheist, I truly hated being grouped in with miserable pricks like this.

Yep. Most atheists just ignore religion entirely. I wouldn't really describe myself as atheist, just indifferent towards religion, and stuff like this doesn't bother me at all.

People that threaten / file lawsuits for people displaying their faith, however, bothers me a lot.

So are both of you guys really gonna tell me that if your boss decided to lead a group prayer that you wouldn't feel compelled to join in if you weren't religious?

No. You see I have these things called balls. These balls that I have allow me to stand up to people.

(06-02-2015 09:32 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  You accuse people of visceral reactions while calling this state-funded prayer without actually backing it up, you call what the coach is doing "proselytizing," and using a slippery slope argument. Pot, meet Kettle.

I'm not sure you've read this thread if your stance is that I haven't 'backed it up', when I explicitly have explained how it is a manner of state endorsement of religion. I don't know what else to say to this comment except, you're wrong, and that's par for the course for you. A coach, acting in his capacity as a coach, encouraging players to take part in his expression of his religious beliefs is unambiguously an unconstitutional breach in the establishment clause. It's really that simple.

Quote:If the coach is praying for the death of infidels or something like that then you might have something, but praying for safety or for help in being a good sport offends you, well then tough s***.

And no, if the coach was Muslim and 60% or 2% of the team were Muslims and they prayed together before games I wouldn't care if they have a prayer and I wouldn't say anything to anyone unless I thought they were actually dangerous or they were actively ostracizing or harassing players who don't participate.

Not at all a compelling legal or moral argument. As I've explained half a dozen times elsewhere in this thread, the fact that this isn't a huge encroachment of religion into public schools isn't a defense of it's morality or legality. It's fine that it doesn't bother you, and you think people are being babies for it bothering them, but that doesn't make it a rational argument nor would any objective or intelligent person find it compelling.

Brush up on your constitutional law, learn how to create a compelling argument, and let's try this again.

(06-02-2015 11:01 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:20 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 02:42 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This is why, even when I was an atheist, I truly hated being grouped in with miserable pricks like this.

Yep. Most atheists just ignore religion entirely. I wouldn't really describe myself as atheist, just indifferent towards religion, and stuff like this doesn't bother me at all.

People that threaten / file lawsuits for people displaying their faith, however, bothers me a lot.

So are both of you guys really gonna tell me that if your boss decided to lead a group prayer that you wouldn't feel compelled to join in if you weren't religious?

No. You see I have these things called balls. These balls that I have allow me to stand up to people.

Sure.

(06-02-2015 11:14 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:01 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:20 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 02:42 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This is why, even when I was an atheist, I truly hated being grouped in with miserable pricks like this.

Yep. Most atheists just ignore religion entirely. I wouldn't really describe myself as atheist, just indifferent towards religion, and stuff like this doesn't bother me at all.

People that threaten / file lawsuits for people displaying their faith, however, bothers me a lot.

So are both of you guys really gonna tell me that if your boss decided to lead a group prayer that you wouldn't feel compelled to join in if you weren't religious?

No. You see I have these things called balls. These balls that I have allow me to stand up to people.

Sure.

You would feel compelled to join in on a prayer at your workplace?

It's clearly your prerogative to decline such an invitation.

when I was in high school one of the players led a pre team meeting where we walked the field, and he led the prayer.

just stick with that, and problem solved. although then I'm guessing this group would go after the coaches for allowing it to happen.

(06-02-2015 11:16 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:14 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:01 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:20 PM)Niner National Wrote:  Yep. Most atheists just ignore religion entirely. I wouldn't really describe myself as atheist, just indifferent towards religion, and stuff like this doesn't bother me at all.

People that threaten / file lawsuits for people displaying their faith, however, bothers me a lot.

So are both of you guys really gonna tell me that if your boss decided to lead a group prayer that you wouldn't feel compelled to join in if you weren't religious?

No. You see I have these things called balls. These balls that I have allow me to stand up to people.

Sure.

You would feel compelled to join in on a prayer at your workplace?

It's clearly your prerogative to decline such an invitation.

and he also has the option to join.

(06-02-2015 11:16 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:14 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:01 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:20 PM)Niner National Wrote:  Yep. Most atheists just ignore religion entirely. I wouldn't really describe myself as atheist, just indifferent towards religion, and stuff like this doesn't bother me at all.

People that threaten / file lawsuits for people displaying their faith, however, bothers me a lot.

So are both of you guys really gonna tell me that if your boss decided to lead a group prayer that you wouldn't feel compelled to join in if you weren't religious?

No. You see I have these things called balls. These balls that I have allow me to stand up to people.

Sure.

You would feel compelled to join in on a prayer at your workplace?

It's clearly your prerogative to decline such an invitation.

It depends on the boss, and the workplace environment. Regardless, it shouldn't ever come up as an issue in a respectful working environment. That being said, this example doesn't really fit in in this thread. A private workplace is far different than a state funded school constitutionally speaking, and this topic is about the latter and not the former.

(06-02-2015 11:17 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  when I was in high school one of the players led a pre team meeting where we walked the field, and he led the prayer.

just stick with that, and problem solved. although then I'm guessing this group would go after the coaches for allowing it to happen.

No, they wouldn't, because they wouldn't have standing if it was truly student led. That's what's so insane about this issue, those who agree with christian prayers in schools want to frame this as removing prayer from school when it isn't that in the least. It's about removing teachers or educators impressing their religious beliefs onto their students, it's not at all about students choosing to pray themselves.

(06-02-2015 11:18 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:16 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:14 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:01 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  So are both of you guys really gonna tell me that if your boss decided to lead a group prayer that you wouldn't feel compelled to join in if you weren't religious?

No. You see I have these things called balls. These balls that I have allow me to stand up to people.

Sure.

You would feel compelled to join in on a prayer at your workplace?

It's clearly your prerogative to decline such an invitation.

It depends on the boss, and the workplace environment. Regardless, it shouldn't ever come up as an issue in a respectful working environment. That being said, this example doesn't really fit in in this thread. A private workplace is far different than a state funded school constitutionally speaking, and this topic is about the latter and not the former.

I didn't specify private or public workplaces, just a general question to you.

I really wish folks would stop going around looking for ways to be offended.

Just opt out of it. Exercise freedom to choose.

Opting out without any negative repercussions is fine, just doesn't tend to happen in reality.

(06-02-2015 08:36 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 03:20 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 02:42 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This is why, even when I was an atheist, I truly hated being grouped in with miserable pricks like this.

Yep. Most atheists just ignore religion entirely. I wouldn't really describe myself as atheist, just indifferent towards religion, and stuff like this doesn't bother me at all.

People that threaten / file lawsuits for people displaying their faith, however, bothers me a lot.

So are both of you guys really gonna tell me that if your boss decided to lead a group prayer that you wouldn't feel compelled to join in if you weren't religious?

No, because I don't expect the whole to adjust because on only one me. I'd just go along and then play my football game. Besides, them praying doesn't impact me at all, unless I just want to draw attention to myself and make a big fuss about it.

That's "Tyranny of the Majority". Just because the majority wants to do something that technically is a violation, it doesn't mean that the action should be condoned.

(06-02-2015 11:11 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 09:32 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  You accuse people of visceral reactions while calling this state-funded prayer without actually backing it up, you call what the coach is doing "proselytizing," and using a slippery slope argument. Pot, meet Kettle.

I'm not sure you've read this thread if your stance is that I haven't 'backed it up', when I explicitly have explained how it is a manner of state endorsement of religion. I don't know what else to say to this comment except, you're wrong, and that's par for the course for you. A coach, acting in his capacity as a coach, encouraging players to take part in his expression of his religious beliefs is unambiguously an unconstitutional breach in the establishment clause. It's really that simple.

Quote:If the coach is praying for the death of infidels or something like that then you might have something, but praying for safety or for help in being a good sport offends you, well then tough s***.

And no, if the coach was Muslim and 60% or 2% of the team were Muslims and they prayed together before games I wouldn't care if they have a prayer and I wouldn't say anything to anyone unless I thought they were actually dangerous or they were actively ostracizing or harassing players who don't participate.

Not at all a compelling legal or moral argument. As I've explained half a dozen times elsewhere in this thread, the fact that this isn't a huge encroachment of religion into public schools isn't a defense of it's morality or legality. It's fine that it doesn't bother you, and you think people are being babies for it bothering them, but that doesn't make it a rational argument nor would any objective or intelligent person find it compelling.

Brush up on your constitutional law, learn how to create a compelling argument, and let's try this again.

"You're wrong!"

*stomps feet*

"You're just wrong and that's all there is to it!"

Wonder what the atheist loons would do if a player decided to lead the prayer and the coach simply bowed his head joined in.

It sure is easier to make a silly post like that than to actually address my points I clearly laid out above, but no one expected anything but that from you.

EDIT: this is directed at eigeneagle

(06-02-2015 11:40 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Wonder what the atheist loons would do if a player decided to lead the prayer and the coach simply bowed his head joined in.

It's weird that you characterize the people who don't believe in an imaginary man in the sky as the 'loons'.

(06-02-2015 11:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:40 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Wonder what the atheist loons would do if a player decided to lead the prayer and the coach simply bowed his head joined in.

It's weird that you characterize the people who don't believe in an imaginary man in the sky as the 'loons'.

Why do atheist so fear this "imaginary man in the sky" that they go to absurb lengths as illustrated in this thread?

(06-02-2015 11:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:40 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Wonder what the atheist loons would do if a player decided to lead the prayer and the coach simply bowed his head joined in.

It's weird that you characterize the people who don't believe in an imaginary man in the sky as the 'loons'.

No it isn't. Their lunacy and subsequent existential misery are (obviously) independent of religious belief or affiliation.

(06-02-2015 11:40 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  It sure is easier to make a silly post like that than to actually address my points I clearly laid out above, but no one expected anything but that from you.

And it's easier to just tell someone they are wrong than it is to address questions laid out for you.

On the constitutional end you may have a point, but even though that's obviously important that's not what I'm concerned with here. The Supreme Court can say or that there's a right to an abortion and no right to bear arms in the constitution or that up is down or night is day but that won't change reality.

I have a hard time fathoming why anyone cares if a coach and players have a prayer asking for safety and for good sportsmanship and such. It makes the FFRF douchebags come off as petty and vindictive when no public money is spent and no one is being coerced.

(06-02-2015 11:44 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-02-2015 11:40 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Wonder what the atheist loons would do if a player decided to lead the prayer and the coach simply bowed his head joined in.

It's weird that you characterize the people who don't believe in an imaginary man in the sky as the 'loons'.

Why do atheist so fear this "imaginary man in the sky" that they go to absurb lengths as illustrated in this thread?

Atheists don't fear god, what ludicrous notion to even insinuate, they're concerned over the people who believe in the imaginary man in the sky. It's like saying those worried about Islamic terrorism are worried about Allah, which is just hilariously idiotic.

(06-02-2015 11:40 AM)MemphisTiger15 Wrote:  Wonder what the atheist loons would do if a player decided to lead the prayer and the coach simply bowed his head joined in.

Nothing, because most wouldn't care. Technically, this is a constitutional matter. A representative of the government - be it federal, state or local - should not be leading a prayer at a school function. While people may be offended by that because the majority of the country associates and these prayers are generally Christian prayers, it's actually a safeguard for all of us. If it's a prohibition in the constitution, then I'm against it. Does it mean that I seethe with rage over prayer in school? Of course not. No matter how much I may even agree with the prayers themselves, on principle it should not be led by anyone who is a representative of the government.

I am also staunchly in support of the opposite case and that religious expression should also be safeguarded so that the government cannot repress certain religions from being practiced in favor of a preferred religion or denomination. The vast majority of atheists/agnostics would be in favor of this too. This is why a lot of people don't get people who do not affiliate with any religion, have agnostic or atheist views. The bottom line is that our constitution will provide protections for all - IF we follow it.