Joseph Kennedy
was fired from his role as the assistant football coach of Bremerton high
school in Washington because of his refusal to stop praying after games. A
three judge panel, in August, had ruled that the school district was justified
for firing the coach due to him silently praying at the 50-yard line after
football games. Apparently the school district had warned Kennedy that public
displays of a religious exercise, praying in this instance, promotes certain
beliefs. And this promotion of beliefs would cause infringement upon the
Constitution’s Establishment Clause. After Kennedy’s attorneys requested a
rehearing by the full court, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected
Kennedy’s request to reconsider reinstating him to his job.
This three judge
panel, as mentioned, had stated that Joseph Kennedy had a duty to the district
as a teacher. Part of his job is to set an example for parents and students.
The appeals court saw Kennedy’s actions as a way of taking advantage
of influence of impressionable minds. Coach Kennedy does not have the right to
practice First Amendment rights as a private citizen when he was going against
the Bremerton school district’s orders as an employee of the district.
Kennedy’s
post-game ritual began in 2008, and no one complained until, in 2015, a member
of another district pointed it out to someone of the Bremerton district. The
district told Kennedy he could only continue under the circumstances that he
prays when the field is empty and the players have left. Joseph Kennedy did not
agree, and his 2015 contract was not renewed.
In an LA Times
article it is said that the Christian coach also led students and team staff in
prayers before and after most games in the locker-room. Students joined him in
prayer on the field eventually. In addition, he would give motivational
speeches with religious content.
Apparently
Kennedy’s actions gained media attention, and a Satanist group wanted to pray
on the field too.
Praying has been a
common ritual incorporated before/after football games and other sporting
events. However, a coach can be motivational without the addition of his
religious values. I do not believe that Coach Kennedy has the right as an
employee of a public school to share his religious beliefs and practices with
his players, students, and/or those attending the games. His prayers may be
silent on the field, but they have been on the 50-yard line where all can see.
This sends a message to everyone watching. Considering Kennedy is paid by the
school and an important figure of the football team, the message sent misleads
the audience on what the school/team believes in as a whole. It is simply
violating the separation of church and state. I think the school has a right to
ask Kennedy to pray once the field is empty and the players have left to avoid
any conflicts. He can exercise his religious freedom, but others do not need to
watch or participate. Also, as shown in Reynolds v. United States, the state
does not necessarily need to protect the practices of a religion.
In addition,
Kennedy leading the team in prayer during locker-room talks violates the team
members’ Establishment Clause. They would be swayed to participate in prayer
whether or not they are followers of the same religion. This is because their
coach is an influential figure in their lives, and if others follow along,
players would not want to feel ostracized if they did not.
Lastly, Joseph
Kennedy being able to pray on the public school’s field with students and
faculty watching would create this slippery slope effect. As members of other
religions, such as the Satanist group mentioned, would ask why they couldn’t
exercise religious practices in this public setting as well. The school
district would then be subject to the notion that they have to show neutrality
to all religious beliefs. It is best to maintain the separation of religion and
state schools.
11 comments:
I agree with you that Kennedy should not be allowed to incorporate religious content into speeches he gives to the players, as he is hired by a public school district and should not try to impose his religious views on the players. However, I believe he should be allowed to bow his head in prayer, if done silently from the sidelines. Although everyone may be able to see him, he is entitled to exercise his religion under the Free Exercise Clause as long as he is not coercing others into prayer. Praying in the locker room with the team may coerce individual into participating in prayer in fear of being ostracized, however silent prayer done by himself privately cannot justifiably be prohibited as he is not sharing the words of his prayers with others or attempting to get people to join him in this act.
Praying seems to be an integral part of pre and post-game activities for athletics and is regularly done by athletes of all different backgrounds. Kennedy has a right to pray, and he is merely using prayer as a motivational tool post game to pray for the injured during the game and as long as he doesn't force his players to take part he should be in no violation as Kennedy should be considered an outside hire for the school, not a faculty member who have more significant religious restrictions. While someone might not feel comfortable with Kennedy's actions, his actions should only be deemed coercive if he forces disinterested parties from taking part.
I agree with Jill and Harrison in the sense that Coach Kennedy has every right to pray, granted to him by the free exercise clause. I would cation the school into looking further into if these actions that Coach Kennedy is undergoing is coercing individuals to be persuaded by religion, however that does not seem to be the case. I agree that because he is a faculty member of a public school, paid by the government and tax payers, that it could seem like a messy situation, but I really don't think Coach Kennedy is violating anyones personal freedoms by exercising his own religious beliefs.
After reading the above comments and blog post I would like to call our attention to the fact that perhaps the reason why people are more accepting of an athletic coach praying after games is because of tradition. As Harrison mentions, praying seems to be integral to many pre and post game rituals regardless of religions. Consider if Kennedy was a teacher and wished to pray directly after the class bell rung before the students had left the classroom. He would still be a employee of public school, but I would argue that we would be quicker to say that this violated the establishment clause. Is it okay for Coach Kennedy to pray simply because prayer is an American tradition in sporting games? I would argue that tradition does have some standing here. As the argument is sometimes employed by judges that there is a secular interest to protect traditions of our nation's history.
As the majority of the comments stated, athletes very commonly have pre and post game rituals, a lot of the time involving certain prayers. The fact that Coach Kennedy is keeping these prayers to himself and not forcing them on members of the team should not be an issue to others. In no way is he bringing his religion onto others, so I do not see a problem with him silently praying from the side lines during games.
I believe that the coach has a right to pray silently and without force onto others. It really does come down to the details of the case for me. If he is silently praying, then there is is no establishment of religion or forced religion. If he is doing it as a team ritual in the locker room and after, then there could be an issue because some kids would either feel left out if they did not wan to pray or they may be targeted for not praying for the team.
I believe based off the information that Kennedy should be allowed to take part in his prayer. Many coaches across the nation take part in delivering prayers before, during, or after the games. Also it doesn't seem that he forces his students to take part in the prayer, so that isn't an established reason in my eyes to fire him. It also can be a hinderance to his Free Exercise rights, therefore this could be a Free Exercise vs. Establishment issue, and I think the interest isn't enough for them to stop him.
I agree with what Grace said about this case becoming a slippery slope, potentially impacting the right of people to practice religion in public places. If the coach is not praying out loud, then this sets a dangerous precedent about assuming, speculating and judging the thoughts of people in their own minds. Are his silent thoughts religious? Are all prayers religious in nature? At any moment someone can think whatever religious thoughts they want and their occupation should not be taken away from them because of this. As long as he silently prays on the 50-yard line, he should be allowed to do so. With that said, if someone is practicing their religious beliefs they cannot force anyone else to practice their religion with them. In this case, since there are children who the coach can influence, they should not pray with him. Even if the children might practice the same religion as him, they should not pray with him because it runs the risk of influencing and possibly excluding other children.
I think that a optional prayer that is not overt and allowed by the administration is fine. That being said, the government (the school) has instructed this coach to halt his very overt use of government property as an employee of the government to practice his belief (which can and are regulated by the state). He is in a way establishing religion in a way that he wouldn't off to the side with his team. The state can have compelling interest to limit the use of its property for overt religious use, for the purpose of avoiding a violation of the establishment clause.
I agree with the comments posted above that Coach Kennedy has a constitutional right to be able to freely exercise his religion in the form of a silent and personal prayer on the field following the game. As long a Coach Kennedy is not coercing players to play with him or proselytizing to his players in the locker room, he is not in violation of the establishment clause. The idea that the school board would fire this man for silent and personal prayers in wrong. What the school board is essentially doing is outlawing any form of religious thought by its employees which would be an unconstitutional violation of the free exercise clause.
I disagree with those arguing the school has infringed upon Coach Kennedy's first amendment rights. As an employee of the state, one gives up certain rights while working. In the ACLU's Joint Statement of Current Law on Religion in Public Schools, point 4 state teachers may not engage in religious activities with their students. It does indicate they can participate in private religious activity in the faculty lounge. However, the football field is Coach Kennedy's classroom. As a result he cannot participate in even his own private prayers when he is coaching. If this were a random parent praying for the team in the bleachers, there would be no problem. However this individual was a state actor, he had already failed to keep religion out of his class room by praying with players in the lockers room and encouraging them with religiously influenced speeches, this public practice of prayer was a last straw. The BoE did the correct thing, they prevented actions would technically established religion.
Post a Comment