• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Football team forced to remove crosses from helmets

Manc Skipper said:
Still a team, what was your point?
Click to expand...

His point is that it's a State University - therefore funded by the "state" and therefore such connection impinges on the separation of church and state ---- at least that's what I think he's saying.
 
Ockham said:
His point is that it's a State University - therefore funded by the "state" and therefore such connection impinges on the separation of church and state ---- at least that's what I think he's saying.
Click to expand...

Sorry, no. Risky seemed to think this was a high school team and went on about peer pressure. Had he read and understood the article, in the very first sentence we find out it is a university team.
 
clownboy said:
Sorry, no. Risky seemed to think this was a high school team and went on about peer pressure. Had he read and understood the article, in the very first sentence we find out it is a university team.
Click to expand...

TY for the correction!
 
clownboy said:
Read the article, first sentence:
Click to expand...

I realize that. Perhaps I should have been more concise. My point was that these kids are right out of high school and deeply influenced by peer pressure. It is ingrained in them. They barely adults, peer pressure is at it's greatest. Try rocking the boat with the powers that be when you are on scholarship to play a sport. I don't know that many of those kids have that much conviction.

Arguments have been made regarding the legality of the stickers in that the state owns the helmets, I concur. It is in essence a state sponsored entity tacitly supporting a specific faith. It is in essence forcing religious symbols on players via peer pressure unless it can be proved that it is not.
 
Visbek said:
From what I can tell, students adding crosses to the helmet should be protected speech. The speech would have to run afoul of some fairly specific constraints to be restricted -- e.g. too vulgar, imminently threatening etc.

It would be different if a school representative mandated it. That's not the case here.

I don't see any reason why students can decorate their football uniforms, as long as it is voluntarily and of their own accord.
Click to expand...
The school coaches were part of the decision to use the stickers. This is not just the players idea.
 
I'm surprised that there are colleges in Arkansas.
 
TobyOne said:
I'm surprised that there are colleges in Arkansas.
Click to expand...
That's the state where they invented the toothbrush.

Invented anywhere else and it'd have been called the teethbrush.
 
pinqy said:
By an individual...not by a government entity. And cannot be or appear to be endorsed by a government entity.
Click to expand...

False! The state is blocked from ESTABLiSHING a religion. If you removed endorsement of religion then Obama's ISIS speech would be 10 seconds long. He endorsed Islam all throughout that speech.
 
CanadaJohn said:
So you just use race and racism as a debating tool, is that it? That's a terrific way to minimize both the issue at hand and racism - well done.
Click to expand...

I really thought you were smart enough to get my point. Race had nothing to do with my post other than to suggest that things have changed for the better in 51 years. That was all. Surely you are capable of understanding that?
 
Risky Thicket said:
Oh, puhleeze! What would the reaction have been if the two men being honored were Jews or Buddhists or - the most hated of them all - MUSLIMS and the team was asked to put the appropriate religious symbol on their helmets?

Can you honestly tell me that you would have been just as supportive if it were a star and crescent decal the players were to wear to honor two Muslims?

moon.gif


Be honest:

Do you think the team would have readily agreed to wear it?

Would you have been as quick to bring it to our attention if some players or citizens had protested it?

Would have been as supportive to displaying that religious symbol?
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes I would. Provided that the one's being honored weren't terrorists or Islam extremists, I wouldn't care if they did.

After all, fair is fair.
 
CanadaJohn said:
It's religious in nature and related primarily to funeral rites/ceremonies conducted in many forms of religion. You can't get away from the fact that much of our history and culture owes itself to religious customs observed over centuries. The only religion under assault, however, it Christianity.

And to be clear, I'm not the slightest bit religious but I would never presume to invent offense simply for the purpose of
denying a religious person something they hold dear.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



No one was denied anything, they can wear as many crosses as they want on their own time.

Heck, they can have crosses tattooed all over their bodies, from head to toe.
 
Buck Ewer said:
The article clearly states: " that the players and coaches voluntarily decided to memorialize his son and Owens. "
If you don't want to believe the article and make up your own story ...go right ahead ... but you are not very convincing ... no matter how many times you say "yep".
Click to expand...

yep the players voluntarily thank you for finally admitting it. sure they asked their coach for permission who wouldn't.
i believe the article i don't believe you.

you even said it they voluntarily did it.
 
shrubnose said:
No one was denied anything, they can wear as many crosses as they want on their own time.
Click to expand...

wrong according to the constitution the SCOTUS. they can wear it anytime they want to in any manner they choose to.
 
shrubnose said:
No one was denied anything, they can wear as many crosses as they want on their own time.
Click to expand...

The concept of government property should be easier for a Canadian to grasp one would think.
 
Risky Thicket said:
John, I would remind you that peer pressure, especially in high school and even more especially as a member of a team, is significant. We don't know, no one does, how many players on the team would prefer not to wear the cross symbol. We do know from our own life experiences that those kids who disagree are highly unlikely to speak up. In addition, the act of placing a religious symbol on their helmets may discourage non-Christian kids from trying out for football. Lastly, unless people read about it in the press, anyone unfamiliar with the reason for the symbol and most opposing teams only see the cross and it is thus left up to interpretation.



The same can be said for religious martyrdom. Just this week I read where a teacher in Georgia is burning all his sick days to protest the fact that he can't talk about Jesus in the public school classroom. In an interview he admitted that he did do it and said that as Christ grows in him he talks more about Jesus in the classroom, but that it was his right to share Jesus's message with the class and that he was being punished for his religious views. :roll:

We do hear/read about this sort of self imposed religious martyrdom frequently. "They won't let God in the classroom", "They hate Jesus", "They want to silence the word of the Lord".
Click to expand...

yet teachers can have islam day and hindu day and etc etc etc ... and nothing is said or done unless parents speak up. no lawsuits no threats.
mention Christ or God and they come out of the wood work.
 
By the same logic as the OP the team were being "forced" to wear the crosses before the change, since the choice was not on offer.
 
clownboy said:
It was a STATE funeral, not a private one.
Click to expand...

And? No one could think that giveing him the funeral he wanted was government endorsed religion. Just like crosses or stars of David etc are fine on headstones.
 
ludin said:
yet teachers can have islam day and hindu day and etc etc etc ... and nothing is said or done unless parents speak up. no lawsuits no threats.
mention Christ or God and they come out of the wood work.
Click to expand...

More Christianist nonsense. Nobody is requiring students to practice these religions on such study days. Forcing participation in prayer is entirely different.
 
Manc Skipper said:
By the same logic as the OP the team were being "forced" to wear the crosses before the change, since the choice was not on offer.
Click to expand...

can you shows where they were forced? the article said they all volunteered to do it. so if you think they were forced please provide evidence to support this claim.
 
Manc Skipper said:
More Christianist nonsense. Nobody is requiring students to practice these religions on such study days. Forcing participation in prayer is entirely different.
Click to expand...

umm wrong.

there were plenty of news articles where teachers were doing this very thing all in the name of diversity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom