Now It's Student Led Prayer at Football Games

[Muffled]

I think these types of things should be private. If a group of students want to pray before a game, that's fine. But, forcing it on the masses, isn't okay. Why are football games such a focus for prayer and the national anthem? lol

So it is OK for Homosexuals to blast their sinful agenda all over the place but Christians can't say a vocal prayer? I believe that is unfair.

 

[Muffled]

You can believe what you like, but until some future Supreme Court makes a different ruling, the law is what it is.

I believe we break laws so they will go to the supreme court for a new ruling.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

So it is OK for Homosexuals to blast their sinful agenda all over the place but Christians can't say a vocal prayer? I believe that is unfair.

Are homosexuals "blasting their sinful agenda" over school loudspeakers? Not really an apt comparison otherwise, is it?

 

[Faithofchristian]

You'd be happy for a Muslim student led prayer over the loudspeaker, would you?

Well the Thread is not about Muslim students. But about a Christian student praying over the loudspeaker system at a football game.
Nice try though, but try again.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I believe we break laws so they will go to the supreme court for a new ruling.

You can believe what you like, but until such a ruling occurs, the law is what it is. You can choose to disobey it, just don't cry foul if you don't like the consequences.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Well the Thread is not about Muslim students. But about a Christian student praying over the loudspeaker system at a football game.

The thread is about prayer over the loudspeakers. If you wouldn't want Muslims doing it, you shouldn't expect Christians to be able to do it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So what's so wrong in that?

It's illegal.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

It's illegal.

Inb4 "but laws don't count if we don't like them!"

 

[Faithofchristian]

So it is OK for Homosexuals to blast their sinful agenda all over the place but Christians can't say a vocal prayer? I believe that is unfair.

That's right, you know the 1st Amendment to the Constitution does say ( Congress shall not make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Now seeing the student was exercising their freedom of Religion. So how is that in violation.
The school had nothing to do with it, The student stood up on their own, and started praying.
Let's for say, the principal and vice principal and the teachers are all Christians, that means they have the right of free excercise of their Religion.

The 1st Amendment does say, free excercise thereof.So that student was in their right of free excercise thereof.
And so was the school free excercise thereof.

 

[Faithofchristian]

The thread is about prayer over the loudspeakers. If you wouldn't want Muslims doing it, you shouldn't expect Christians to be able to do it.

Go read the whole Thread and not just what you want, read it all.

 

[Faithofchristian]

It's illegal.

It's not illegal, free excercise thereof. That means, exactly what it means.

That student has free excercise thereof,
to express their Religion.
It has nothing to do with the school, the student stood up on their own and excercise thereof their Religion.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Go read the whole Thread and not just what you want, read it all.

I've read the whole thread. You asked "what's wrong with that?" and I answered your question. If the Socratic form of my response was too advanced for you, I'll simplify. The answer to your question is "the thing you would find wrong with Muslim stuudents saying prayers over the loadspeaker is exactly what other people find wrong with Christians saying prayers over the loudspeaker".

Plain and simple.

 

[Muffled]

That's right, you know the 1st Amendment to the Constitution does say ( Congress shall not make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Now seeing the student was exercising their freedom of Religion. So how is that in violation.
The school had nothing to do with it, The student stood up on their own, and started praying.
Let's for say, the principal and vice principal and the teachers are all Christians, that means they have the right of free excercise of their Religion.

The 1st Amendment does say, free excercise thereof.So that student was in their right of free excercise thereof.
And so was the school free excercise thereof.

I believe the supreme court unjustifiably restricted that freedom of religion.

I believe schools fall under the category of government which is forbidden to promote or forbid a religious practice. As long as they promote an open forum they are protecting the first amendment right of free speech.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

It's not illegal, free excercise thereof. That means, exactly what it means.

That student has free excercise thereof,
to express their Religion.
It has nothing to do with the school, the student stood up on their own and excercise thereof their Religion.

Not in a manner that implies government favoring of any particular religion. The students are free to religious expression in their own time with their own resources, not during school activities with school resources

 

[Muffled]

Inb4 "but laws don't count if we don't like them!"

I believe a constitutional ruling is not a law. The only way to get one changed is to do the contrary and get it before the supreme court for review.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I believe the supreme court unjustifiably restricted that freedom of religion.

I believe schools fall under the category of government which is forbidden to promote or forbid a religious practice. As long as they promote an open forum they are protecting the first amendment right of free speech.

Define "promote an open forum"?

 

[Muffled]

Not in a manner that implies government favoring of any particular religion. The students are free to religious expression in their own time with their own resources, not during school activities with school resources

I believe that is restrictive and contrary to the constitution.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I believe a constitutional ruling is not a law. The only way to get one changed is to do the contrary and get it before the supreme court for review.

And I said, you may choose to break the law, and try to defend it to the Supreme Court. Just don't complain if you don't like how it goes.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's not illegal, free excercise thereof. That means, exactly what it means.

"Free exercise" covers individual prayer, not school-facilitated public prayer.

That student has free excercise thereof,
to express their Religion.

And she still has that right. She can pray all she wants; the question is whether she should be allowed to pray over the sound system at a school football game.

It has nothing to do with the school, the student stood up on their own and excercise thereof their Religion.

The school was facilitating the prayer. People can't just walk up and grab the mic and say whatever they please at a school football game. What gets said over the loudspeakers is subject to the approval of the school, which means that what is said over the loudspeakers is endorsed by the school.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I believe that is restrictive and contrary to the constitution.

You are free to believe what you like. The Supreme Court disagrees with you, and they determine what the law means and if it's contrary to the Constitution.