Texas bill requiring Ten Commandments in classrooms heads to governor’s desk

Anyone who reads my posts knows that I often quote Scripture, and I personally uphold Christian values, as is my right to do.  

But I am truly shocked that this is occurring, the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school rooms.  The kids in those classrooms are indeed, IMHO, a captive audience.  I'm all for prayer, and I'm sure many a silent prayer is prayed on finals day.  But I believe this is skirting too close to what was originally intended, which was to avoid MANDATORY religious activity including prayer.  I can't imagine that some fights will break out over it, eventually.

A 2022 Supreme Court decision affirmed a high school football coach's right to kneel on the field after every game and say a 30 second prayer of thanks between him and God, win or lose.  He had never asked anyone, students, other coaches, fans, not anyone to pray with him.  It was a personal thing.  He did this after he prayed a pledge thanking God for sparing his ailing wife from death.  Did it for several years until somebody brought it to the school's attention, actually complimenting the principal about it, after which it blew up into national attention, pros and cons.  He was told stop it or else, and eventually was fired for it.

A legal firm who specialized in religious liberty cases heard about it and helped the coach, pro bono, sue the school system for denying him his right to "freedom of religious expression", which the Constitution actually upholds.

For eight years Coach lost at every step, from local court through the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the strongest appeals court in the nation, to the SC, who found in his favor.  

As it happened the kids had begun to gravitate to him as he prayed, have him hold their helmets, even players from opposing teams.  Not mandatory, just happening because they felt it.

Individual religious expression, yes.  Mandatory in school, no. 

Schools can have voluntary prayer group activities outside of the classroom.   The 10 Commandments and other religious monuments can come back out of basements if someone wants to pursue it, thanks to that ruling.

Again, I pray often and sincerely, but what is happening in those states seems to me, again JMHO, to be skirting too close to Mandatory, which is partly why we broke from England to avoid religious persecution, right?

Candy

The trouble was, Candy, that the coach had authority over his players, and their reactions to his prayer moments could conceivably have affected whether they were favored by him--put into games for longer, given the positions they wanted, etc. Maybe, perhaps even probably, the coach wasn't going to show any kind of favoritism. But the power relationships were unequal. Surely, many of the players mulled over whether it would be politic to join him or not. And if I were on that team, I wouldn't want the pressure/distraction--I'd be there to play football, goddamnit.

To turn this on its head, would it be appropriate to break out into a football fight song in a church?

I would imagine that your last sentence has happened on occasion.  I wouldn't put it past a congregation to sing out the local school fight song as they were preparing for a state championship.  This is as conceivable as a coach praying on the field after a football game and NOT expecting anyone to join him, if they so decided.  

His action was upheld by the Supreme Court.  And we'll see what they say about the topic of this thread at some point. 

That is precisely why the school, and courts along the way, had trouble separating the coach's right to "religious expression" from mandating prayer.  So much depended on his convincing everybody that he had no intent, no intention to sway anyone's mind about what he was doing.  And that's why he waited until the games were over and nobody paying attention to what he was doing.  He did it for several years until an opposing coach called to congratulate the school principal about it.  That started the ball rolling to get everybody nervous and eventually "Do not rehire" stamped on his file, and an evaluation that went from glowing to sorry in one season (though the team had become notably successful).  Their sneaky way of not having to overtly "fire" him, but it had the same effect.

Kennedy v Bremerton Sch. Dist., 597 U.S.__(2022), https://www.supremecourt,gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf,2.  

A lot of previously older ruled-on decisions, based on Lemon vs something, which is now considered obsolete and not in accordance with wording in the Constitution, are vulnerable for rehearing and reversal, including those mandating removal of certain statues and monuments.  The Ten Commandments can come out of hiding.  This action by these states' governors might possibly be outcomes of this Kennedy case decision.  Personally I think they have mis-read the intent of the Kennedy decision, but that's JMHO. 

Hey, I'm no attorney nor expert in Constitutional religion freedoms.  Just what I read in Kennedy's very interesting book about it.

Candy

And, to put a finer point on it, Coach's SC hearing was first ruled against him.  In an unprecedented move, when the Court handed down the decision against, they also gave the law firm (First Liberty something) guidance on what could have been included the first time to potentially turn the vote for him, which it did.  As in the Court informed the firm about the Lemon case, which the judges were using to vote against Coach.  So, again, unprecedented, Coach's case was heard twice by the SC, and ruled favorably the second time.

If I am not mistaken after the fact it came out that the prayer sessions was not spontaneous but participation was expected as part of team building. Our current SC likes to take pretend cases filed by conservative groups. 

You have a reference for this, Mark? 

In 2022, 8000 petitioners appealed cases to the Supreme Court; only 66 were heard.  Surely the Court can distinguish between "pretend cases" and those not worthy of their attention, win or lose.

I sure do. Thanks for asking. They knew a recent case was a complete fabrication by a conservative activist and they ruled on it anyway. 

https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-gay-marriage-website-real-straight-man-supreme-court

Conservative justices really like liars if they are lying for a cause the justices support. In the prayer case, the Supreme Court agreed with a wink and nod that the prayers were spontaneous and infrequent. The trial judge as well as the evidence in the case showed they were not but the conservative justices wanted a loophole to  allow this kind of crap in the schools. 

Mark, what is your reference regarding the "prayer case"?  

Or is that your opinion?

What kind of "crap in the schools" is referred to?

You can read this

https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/fumbling-first-amendment

The coach was asking for an exception and said his prayers weren't public but rather private. There was volumes of evidence presented that these weren't private prayers including a photograph of the coach and team in the middle of the field on the 50 yard line surrounded by a crowd at a school event. The conservative justices ignored this and said yeah a prayer on the 50 yard-line in front of a crowd assembled for a school event  and lead by school employee wasn't a public event but rather a private one. 

The crap I am referring to is forcing a captive audience to participate in the faith of whichever school official is praying.