:thumb: Buy them hotdogs (Rev. 22:15). I won't even feed my dog :dog: hotdogs anymore. :granite:
Report: Human DNA found in hot dogs
Praying football coach creates a mess
- Thread starter Jose Fly
- Start date
Report: Human DNA found in hot dogs
That makes sense. :juggle:
Laws come from God (Ge 2:16). :dizzy:
:sozo: Bring Townsie into the discussion. It is my understanding that he is not leading the prayer. His students are. Don't you have a bat's head to bite off or something? :hammer:
Jose Fly
New member
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
oh trad - you know what drives this - the hairy tick
and just for the record - i call her bananahead
she comes back with this:
I think this simply is unreasonable. Nobody can be expected, even while on duty and while being paid, to "represent the company," whether the company be a private enterprise or the State, at every single moment and with respect to everything that they do.
The average worker says and does any number of things, throughout the average work day, which are in no way representative of the company or of the State.
I talked about how much I love coffee in one of my lectures. Is that representative of my school? I strongly implied that there would be no pizza party on the last day of class. Is that representative of some official policy?
If a janitor, say, at a private hospital, tells somebody how much he loves to eat oranges, should it be thereby construed that the hospital has an official position on oranges?
I'm sorry, but there's simply no reasonable expectation that an employee, regardless of his employer, is going to be representative of that employer in everything that he does while on the clock.
You understand this doesn't answer my question?
Argument from authority.
What I'm asking is whether or not the decisions of the court are reasonable. Do you have an argument for this?
I think that this is just wrong. In and of itself, simply expressing an opinion or making an argument doesn't involve coercion, even if there is a position of superior and inferior. There have to be other factors for the student to have a reasonable belief that expressing disagreement or failing to "conform," whatever that means, would be detrimental to his well being, academic success, etc.
You'll, of course, tell me that the courts disagree with me.
But so what? I'm talking about reality. In reality, for there to be actual coersion, implicit, indirect, or otherwise, it's not simply sufficient for me to express an opinion.
As an "authority" figure, if I say that I like coffee and that I have a coffee addiction, I'm not coercing you to agree with me, bring me coffee, etc. Even if I, in a joking way, say: "Whaaaat? You don't like coffee? For shaaaaaame," that's still not coersion, especially if my interlocutor is an adult.
[In point of fact, my students actually did bring coffee the next class period...but there was absolutely no insinuation on my part that they should do so.]
And, by the way, I'm talking about adults. My students are all over 18 years of age.
Your presupposition is that there's absolutely no reasonable "point of intersection" between faith and reason, between religion and what we can know naturally. I think that this is just plain wrong. Religious questions naturally arise in certain contexts. It would be unreasonable not to address them, at least in passing.
Especially at the academic/college level.
In a collegic, academic setting? You betcha. I mean, this is ultimately where I have to disagree with the courts.
Professors at federally and state funded colleges are sponsored by the government, no? But there's no reasonable expectation for their teaching or research to be representative of the government, or even of their own particular colleges.
This is the point of tenure.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Would you consider not doing that? I would be very much grateful if you did.
I agree, very much unreasonable. As I said: can we all try to be more polite? Yes?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Would you consider not doing that? I would be very much grateful if you did.
but it's such an apt descriptor, considering that lately the positions she takes indicates that her brain's been turned to mush
That's not how I would have initially taken it. [Right off hand, calling a girl "banana head" would strike me as cute and probably flirtatious...but then, that shows what I know.]
But, yes. Again, "Mrs. Benedetti" or "Anna" or "AnnaBenedetti" works just fine. There's no need to be rude. Just saying.
Who cares if he's leading the prayer--not leading prayer. :hammer: He's free to continue praying in Jesus name (Jn 8:36). :straight:
If the law says he cannot, time to break the law (Dan 6:10). :dizzy:
I understand that the opposing team began praying with them, as well.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
they should all be arrested and shot! :sibbie:
Jose Fly
New member
You may think that, but reality is otherwise. In both private and public settings, people are fired and disciplined all the time for doing and saying things that reflect poorly on their company or agency.
Does your employer have a policy on coffee or pizza?
If the hospital doesn't have a policy on oranges, then no. If they do and what he says goes against policy, he can be disciplined.
No, it's an argument from reality.
I have, several times. Then folks like you come in and say "I think you're wrong". That's why we have courts.
Case in point.
In a teacher/student or coach/athlete environment, it does.
"Other factors" such as......?
Um....not sure if you realize this, but reality includes court decisions.
Empty assertion.
If you spent class time extolling the virtues of coffee and talked about how many great things coffee has done for you, it's reasonable to conclude that some students may very well start to think to themselves "Maybe I should try coffee". That's coercion.
I've not said otherwise.
No, in a public K-12 school.
College students are not captive audiences. Their attendance is not at all mandatory.
Jose Fly
New member
We've always had restrictions on religious exercise.
Except, it isn't, as should be readily obvious to anyone. Have you been to a grocery store? Consider an occassion in which you purchased, say, a candy. The cashier makes a comment about the candy: "Oh, I've had those; they are really sour."
Are you going to take that as anything other than the personal opinion of the person in question?
Sure, but ultimately irrelevent to what I'm saying.
I'm unaware of any official coffee or pizza policy.
But that's basically what I'm saying. My saying, "on the clock," that I like coffee...that assertion in no way, shape or form involves me acting in some official capacity on behalf of my employer. That's just silly.
I agree with this. But again, it's irrelevent.
You are appealing to the court opinions. Do you have an argument in favor of the court opinions being correct or not?
Ok, then humor me. Present an argument that the court opinions to which you are appealing are correct.
Why? Again, there's any number of opinions that a teacher or coach might express to a student or anyone else that he has no reasonable expectation for the student or athlete to take in any kind of "official" capacity. "Oh man, I love beef jerky." In no way does this imply: "And as a school official I am COMMANDING YOU: EAT BEEF JERKY OR ELSE! :madmad:"
Tone of voice? Context? Body language? Subsequent actions and comments? Previous actions and comments?
If I say, in passing, that the dependence of the senses on bodily organs excludes a Muslim doctrine, but ask no questions on quizzes, final exams, or papers about it...I fail to see how there's an coersion involved.
Court decisions are the opinions of a certain number of people. Those people are not infallible.
It's not an empty assertion. It's a plain fact which should be readily evident. Think of any number of times in which you did or did not feel coerced.
No, it isn't. Coercion involves some kind of threat. The student very well might feel as though it would be a good idea to try coffee, but so long as he doesn't reasonably suspect that he'll be penalized if he doesn't, I fail to see how there's coercion involved.
Then what's your problem with what I've said to my students in my lectures?
And yet college professors, in State schools, are government employees who are on the clock.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
not all of them
just the ones who displayed ignoble fear or want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty
unless, anna, you can explain to me how sitting in the classroom and watching your classmates get slaughtered by an armed lunatic isn't showing a want of courage?
so far, nobody has
you could be the very first! :banana:
They have placed him on leave:
BREAKING: High school boots praying football coach
They not only told him that he couldn't lead others in prayer, but also that HE couldnt pray if anyone could see it.
Looks like the satanists wont get their chance.
BREAKING: High school boots praying football coach
They not only told him that he couldn't lead others in prayer, but also that HE couldnt pray if anyone could see it.
Looks like the satanists wont get their chance.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
apparently his only argument is "i agree with them because they redefine "establishment" in a way that i like"
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
maybe they'll burn an atheist for the homecoming celebration