Jump to content

Clemson lawsuit...where have we heard this before?


AU64

Recommended Posts





As I read this article, I notice the group is okay w/students leading Bible studies on campus but not non-students?

I believe very much in the separation between church and state, but I can find nothing amiss in voluntary religious activities, privately funded.

Wow, now I'm going to find myself defending Dabo. Who knew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If its voluntary there should be no problem IMO. I, too, believe in separation between church and state. Although, I don't particularly like when our football program is outward towards any particular religion rather than being outwardly open to all religions. Why favor one over another in a 2014 world?

We have a Jewish bball coach, will we see any emphasis on his faith during his time at Auburn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I read this article, I notice the group is okay w/students leading Bible studies on campus but not non-students?

I believe very much in the separation between church and state, but I can find nothing amiss in voluntary religious activities, privately funded.

Wow, now I'm going to find myself defending Dabo. Who knew.

Don't know any details but I expect AU has been a model for these type programs.....AU went through similar allegations and eventually was able to prove that university money was not paying salaries or expenses of Chet and that player involvement was voluntary.

As for favoring a particular religion....folks might want to consider where AU is located and what background these players are coming from. Not surprisingly, the majority of kids in the southeast are Protestants of one stripe or another and I can't imagine any fellowship program that is not in tune with the beliefs that the majority of kids bring with them to AU.

Yep, hate to defend Dabo...but guess despite his bama exposure he still has a good side :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder why they decided to go after Clemson? Auburn is FAR more active, religiously. Of course, if Clemson's chaplain is on the payroll, that might explain it. Brother Chette does not work for Auburn. He works for the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and his gig with Auburn is unpaid, thus stopping any state paying for religion talk in it's tracks. Still, I would bet that Brother Chette probably trained James Trapp, since that was one of the things he did after Tubberville established the chaplain position.

Of course, it would be nice if the Freedom From Religion Foundation would just mind their own business. All they are is another version of Westboro Baptist Church, except their "protests" about things that they have no business being involved with come in the form of nuisance lawsuits and paid advertising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dabo in apparent trouble because of his overt Christian behavior...

http://www.charlotte...ml#.U06wFVcVBMU

Dabo in apparent trouble because of his overt Christian behavior...

http://www.charlotte...ml#.U06wFVcVBMU

Dabo a Christian? Who new!?

I've been following him since the bowl game...not having a horse in Clemson's particular race. As much as I dislike what has gone down in the way of negative press between Clemson and Auburn, I found a horse that night. He has my support, and I am grateful to be an Auburn Tiger. Yes, context is everything where geography, faith, and "clientele preference" are concerned...it's one reason many players choose a particular university...or don't.

http://www.blufftontoday.com/bluffton-sports/2013-05-08/clemsons-swinney-discusses-faith-family-lowcountry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Tora...as is often the case, we really don't know much about well known coaches and players aside from whatever shows up in the papers which is limited in scope.

In fact, if Dabo were "our" guy, we would be proud of what he overcame to reach a major Div school as head coach. This also gives some insight on why Dabo is such a strong competitor for the Georgia kids that live in between AU and Clemson. He's probably using a similar message...but doesn't have the cache of the SEC on his side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dabo in apparent trouble because of his overt Christian behavior...

http://www.charlotte...ml#.U06wFVcVBMU

Dabo in apparent trouble because of his overt Christian behavior...

http://www.charlotte...ml#.U06wFVcVBMU

Dabo a Christian? Who new!?

I've been following him since the bowl game...not having a horse in Clemson's particular race. As much as I dislike what has gone down in the way of negative press between Clemson and Auburn, I found a horse that night. He has my support, and I am grateful to be an Auburn Tiger. Yes, context is everything where geography, faith, and "clientele preference" are concerned...it's one reason many players choose a particular university...or don't.

http://www.blufftont...mily-lowcountry

Nice read Tora. This article will be a reminder to me to not judge a person based solely on a trivial game called football, or on some stupid comment a coach or player makes in the aftermath of that trivial game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have all the facts, but a football coach of a public university shouldn't go into a kid's home and say "I'm a Christian, and if that bothers you, you don't have to come here."

We had a great debate about this a few months ago. The question really becomes: can a student TRULY opt out, or is there "subtle coercion", meaning that though there is not a requirement to participate the student feels they must anyway, lest they be ostracized or affected negatively. Even the perceived threat of that runs afoul of the free exercise and establishment clauses. There's been several SCOTUS rulings on that.

I've got no problem with him being a Christian and leading by a Christian example, but if the demonstration of that religion has negatively affected any student, it's a problem. If the coach were a Muslim and were doing the same things everyone would be screaming for his head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have all the facts, but a football coach of a public university shouldn't go into a kid's home and say "I'm a Christian, and if that bothers you, you don't have to come here."

We had a great debate about this a few months ago. The question really becomes: can a student TRULY opt out, or is there "subtle coercion", meaning that though there is not a requirement to participate the student feels they must anyway, lest they be ostracized or affected negatively. Even the perceived threat of that runs afoul of the free exercise and establishment clauses. There's been several SCOTUS rulings on that.

I've got no problem with him being a Christian and leading by a Christian example, but if the demonstration of that religion has negatively affected any student, it's a problem. If the coach were a Muslim and were doing the same things everyone would be screaming for his head.

Yeah this reminds me of a school trip I took to Parris Island (voluntary) where we got to spend a few days as if we were Marine recruits. One thing I remember the DI saying was something along the lines of all recruits go to Sunday church or they get to PT with Gunny.

This seems something along the lines you are saying except way more direct. I find it odd that they can do that without repercussions but Dabo and CU is getting in trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with what has gone down. No one is forced to be a Christian in this country. This is complete BS. I believe in the separation of church and state, but this stuff isn't forced on these guys at Clemson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have all the facts, but a football coach of a public university shouldn't go into a kid's home and say "I'm a Christian, and if that bothers you, you don't have to come here."

We had a great debate about this a few months ago. The question really becomes: can a student TRULY opt out, or is there "subtle coercion", meaning that though there is not a requirement to participate the student feels they must anyway, lest they be ostracized or affected negatively. Even the perceived threat of that runs afoul of the free exercise and establishment clauses. There's been several SCOTUS rulings on that.

I've got no problem with him being a Christian and leading by a Christian example, but if the demonstration of that religion has negatively affected any student, it's a problem. If the coach were a Muslim and were doing the same things everyone would be screaming for his head.

Yeah this reminds me of a school trip I took to Parris Island (voluntary) where we got to spend a few days as if we were Marine recruits. One thing I remember the DI saying was something along the lines of all recruits go to Sunday church or they get to PT with Gunny.

This seems something along the lines you are saying except way more direct. I find it odd that they can do that without repercussions but Dabo and CU is getting in trouble.

I was told the same thing at Air Force basic. We were told "don't care where yougo, but you don't want to be here."

It's very close to the same, but I don't think that CU or Dabo are going that far. The better example is this: If the player feels like he has to participate or he will be singled out by his peers, then there is what SCOTUS termed "subtle coercion" - basically, the individual feels forced, even if there is no threat of the force - basically, it's left to the imagination. The student may ask themselves "If I do not do this, will my teammates treat me differently for not going along with it?"

I don't think there is a huge problem here, or there wasn't. I fear, though, that FFRF has done what they always do: stir the pot, and it's going to make Dabo act in a manner as to retaliate against them. We know he can show his rear end with the best of them, and I imagine that this is precisely the sort of thing where he'd try to make a real statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two other things:

This is not a lawsuit. This was a letter that the FFRF send to Clemson asking them to stop. They have not taken legal action, and as of right now they do not have standing to do so. So don't get your knickers in a twist.

If you are interested in the subtle coercion test, go look up the SCOTUS case Lee v Weisman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only surprise here is that it's taken so long for some school in the southeast to be subjected to a complaint. It had to come sooner or later and I thought it would be long before now. Look at the successful suits removing Christmas scenes from public places.

I can't say who is right or wrong because I'm not on a team these days. Team chaplains and team prayers would have been fine decades ago but the times have been a' changin'.

And yes, freedom of religion also means freedom from religion if a person chooses that. You can't have one without the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clemson responds to group’s ‘too religious’ complaint

Posted by John Taylor on April 18, 2014, 2:32 PM EDT

cd0ymzcznguwzdbhnduynddiytjhm2yyzthlmtjjotqwyyznpwm1otvkowq1ztdimdawmwrinzvinza0ntawndlkztc2.jpeg?w=178 AP

It was reported earlier this week that a group of individuals with too much time on its hands and not nearly enough of a life had filed a formal complaint to Clemson alleging that Dabo Swinney‘s football program blurs the line between the separation of church and state as mandated in the U.S. Constitution.

An attorney for the Freedom From Religion Foundation stated that “the football coaching staff is doing a number of things to promote Christianity to their student-athletes” such as conducting Bible studies with their players. A school spokesperson subsequently fired back that “no one is required to participate in any religious activities related to the football program” and that any participation is strictly voluntary.

Thursday, the university released a lengthier rebuttal to the group’s accusations, stating that “the FFRF is mistaken in its assessment” of the religious atmosphere in and around the Tigers football program. Below is the school’s statement, in its entirety:

“We believe the practices of the football staff regarding religion are compliant with the Constitution and appropriately accommodate differing religious views. Participation in religious activities is purely voluntary, and there are no repercussions for students who decline to do so. We are not aware of any complaints from current or former student-athletes about feeling pressured or forced to participate in religious activities.

“Clemson takes very seriously its obligation to provide a comprehensive program for the development and welfare of our student-athletes ¬ which encompasses academic, athletic and personal support, including support for their spiritual needs.

“We will evaluate the complaints raised in the letter and will respond directly to the organization, but we believe FFRF is mistaken in its assessment. The Supreme Court has expressly upheld the right of public bodies to employ chaplains and has noted that the use of prayer is not in conflict with the principles of disestablishment and religious freedom.”

(Tip O’ the Cap: OrangeAndWhite.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good response from the school...almost makes me want to be a Clemson fan :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Tora...as is often the case, we really don't know much about well known coaches and players aside from whatever shows up in the papers which is limited in scope.

In fact, if Dabo were "our" guy, we would be proud of what he overcame to reach a major Div school as head coach. This also gives some insight on why Dabo is such a strong competitor for the Georgia kids that live in between AU and Clemson. He's probably using a similar message...but doesn't have the cache of the SEC on his side.

VERY insightful, 64...I believe you are right....and it explains Mark Richt's "draw", too. By "draw," I mean total sincerity...they are just being who they are. Should be more programs out there...friendly competition rather than cutthroat would restore college sports to my idealistic little impression of what they should be...

:jossun: :jossun: :jossun:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing how Christianity is the only "religion" that the freedom from "religion" nutjobs like to attack. That should be very telling to the astute people that are paying attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Tis, Weegs, 'tis indeed. HONTO!

:wareagle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing how Christianity is the only "religion" that the freedom from "religion" nutjobs like to attack. That should be very telling to the astute people that are paying attention.

Well, the next time a monk tries to shove Buddhism down the gullet of America, I'll be sure to speak up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WE have freedom of religion. Clemson Athletics does not. The problem with these cases arises IF (and ONLY IF) they are using it as what a reasonable observer would classify as an "official" religion. Clemson categorically denied it but did not provide evidence to back up that denial.

The interesting thing here is that they claim to be providing "reasonable accommodations" to people who do not want to participate. However, that implies that the majority religion (Christianity, in this case) IS the prevailing (read: one with power) religion of the athletic department.

If this were Notre Dame or Vanderbilt, it wouldn't be an issue - but Clemson is a state-sponsored school, and if it gives the appearance of favoring one religion over another then it runs afoul of the Lemon test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...