Is our athletic department "too religious"?

[homersapien 11,373]

I'm serious about my Christian faith, but I don't believe "Christian" talk correlates much with good character. And in a state university, defining a program in those terms is way out of line. I could do with less cheesiness.

On the other hand, I also believe people should have a right to be open about their faith.

So here is the OP delimma, which you authored...

In your opinion, what is the "acceptable" level of a coach/AD walking out their faith? Where is the standard? Who decides?... Al.com, Obama, congress, a nation-wide vote,???...

... this is not a relative issue, but is based upon absolute none changing standards as set and defined in the Bible... not open to being defined by personable preference... not based on a societal evolutionary sliding scale of morality or conduct...

And we are all probably at least a little intimidated by what this truth requires of each of us individually...

And yes, there is a great need for true Christian influence in every area of the market place today.

Look, I know a bit about the Bible. I teach New Testament in a denominational seminary (full professor, six academic books, national and international leadership responsibilities) and serve a local church p/t to boot. Doesn't mean my opinions are correct, but I'm informed.

The Bible doesn't say a thing about how a football coach should handle his job, how to do public relations, or even about how Christians should manage public roles. No such set of "standards" exists. You may interpret the Bible to address those contexts, and people should, but let's not pretend there's a "how-to" for coaches in there.

I've taught in secular contexts too. Students knew I was a Christian, as being a Christian informs my opinions. They could come to me for vocational or spiritual guidance, and some did. However, I did not -- I could not, ethically -- use that job as a platform to promote my faith. I could demonstrate that a reasonable, gracious person could excel as a scholar and a teacher. I could serve religious communities when invited. But I could not use my position, the stuff the state of South Carolina was paying me to do, to evangelize. Absolutely not.

My concern with the athletic department involves whether there's a culture that marginalizes unbelieving players and whether there's a bit of a good ole boy network that influences coaching decisions. I also believe it's wrong to project the image of a "Christian" program in a state university. Finally, there's the "cheesiness." There's no reason to tell the world you fired a coach after praying with him about it. And mercy, the "Satan" FB message last year was some moldy cheese.

As open as I am about my faith, I don't do "Christian" bumper stickers and the like. You know why? Because I make driving errors like everyone else, and I don't want my error to look like selfishness -- and then have someone associate it with my faith.

As a point of clarification:

Everyone is religious & has a personal theology... atheists=no god... christians = God ... agnostics = who knows... cosmic humanists = everything is god... each of these is a theological position in life.

As an agnostic, I feel compelled to point out you are expanding the meaning of religion and theology to include any personal philosophy, which can be secular (as you indicate above with "who knows?").

Some of us didn't get the "God gene".

Whether we realize it or not, whatever theology one adheres to, it leads directly to our ethical/moral system of thought, the psychology approach we use, etc... all based on Genesis 1:1 and how one interprets it... again, either God/no god/who knows/ everything god created creation...

The concept of morality doesn't necessarily emerge from theological belief. The scientific field of sociobiology makes a strong case for the natural evolution of morality.

and our culture is full of the failures of taking God out of the equation...

As a result, I am much more comfortable with a man coaching a team who instills the christian ethical system of honesty & integrity, personal sacrifice for a cause greater than selfish desires, putting the team ahead of self, accepting personal responsibity for actions (both good & bad), exercising personal discipline, etc.,

Nothing wrong with any of that, but once you start proselytizing the specific sectarian belief systems of Christianity you have really crossed the line into the inappropriate. Christianity is not the only way to promote honesty, integrity, personal sacrifice, personal responsibility, etc. And a football team is not the place to proselytize religious dogma, at least if you are in a position of leadership.

As an example, I am on the school board of a local high school which just won the state football championship in 2012. The coach is a man of strong christian integrity who held everyone to a high standard on the staff and on the team, including no cursing in practices and games. Yes, there was prayer and there was discipline as well. He also coached my son a few years ago and instilled character that supplimented what his mother and I had taught. This same coach has coached 2 national championship basketball teams @ our school over the years as well.

Was the prayer led by the coach or did the kids spontaneously do it on their own? Was it a sectarian prayer (to Jesus)? Were there any Unitarian, Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu kids on the team? What about kids who were being raised by agnostics and wanted their boy to reach his own conclusions without a coercive atmosphere?

As a side note, I have coached, been a high school principal and been the commissioner of an athletic conference ... and have observed first-hand the best and the worst of what I am presenting here...

I know that a lot of you have already put me in the "anti-Christian" category, which I can assure you is not true. Christianity happens to be my heritage. I have the utmost respect for Christianity (if not necessarily Christians).

I see this first as a question of power and secondly, as a question of basic respect and courtesy. Anyone in a position of power who proselytizes any religious dogma to people he has authority over is abusing that power and trust. It is also disrespectful of alternative points of view.

[stealthyfan 124]

I really don't care which religion if any one chooses.

Just keep it real, personal and private

[CleCoTiger 1,957]

I really don't care which religion if any one chooses.

Just keep it real, personal and private

Matthew 6:1-6

[BeatBama1972 11]

I should start by saying that it hurts me to read some of the posts I have read. I have watched over the years as we have allowed society to redefine what we see as "acceptable behavior" and with a short statement I know that I will not change anyone's mind. First, Religion and Christianity are not one and the same....being a Muslim is being religious. No, I do not believe a Christian has to label himself or pat himself on the back becasue his actions will define him and others will label him.

I personally want everyone to have a close personal relationship with Jesus as their Savior. Being a Christian does not mean someone is too soft or lacking an edge.....if you believe this you are 100% wrong. Many of the greatest athletes in this country are strong men and women of Christian faith. It is easy to start letting society shift the real focus in life from salvation to winning a football game. I love winning as well; but personally would rather lose every game than compromise principles. That said, one of the most beloved Auburn teams 2004 (for those unimformed) had an internal revival which brought the team together like few others before or since....... do some research and speak with some of those players including Cadillac. They will tell you the same thing.

We need more men to speak out about their faith and expect criticism.......but in the long run we win. We win much more than a few ballgames.

Well said.

[walker77 0]

I'm serious about my Christian faith, but I don't believe "Christian" talk correlates much with good character. And in a state university, defining a program in those terms is way out of line. I could do with less cheesiness.

On the other hand, I also believe people should have a right to be open about their faith.

So here is the OP delimma, which you authored...

In your opinion, what is the "acceptable" level of a coach/AD walking out their faith? Where is the standard? Who decides?... Al.com, Obama, congress, a nation-wide vote,???...

... this is not a relative issue, but is based upon absolute none changing standards as set and defined in the Bible... not open to being defined by personable preference... not based on a societal evolutionary sliding scale of morality or conduct...

And we are all probably at least a little intimidated by what this truth requires of each of us individually...

And yes, there is a great need for true Christian influence in every area of the market place today.

Look, I know a bit about the Bible. I teach New Testament in a denominational seminary (full professor, six academic books, national and international leadership responsibilities) and serve a local church p/t to boot. Doesn't mean my opinions are correct, but I'm informed.

The Bible doesn't say a thing about how a football coach should handle his job, how to do public relations, or even about how Christians should manage public roles. No such set of "standards" exists. You may interpret the Bible to address those contexts, and people should, but let's not pretend there's a "how-to" for coaches in there.

I've taught in secular contexts too. Students knew I was a Christian, as being a Christian informs my opinions. They could come to me for vocational or spiritual guidance, and some did. However, I did not -- I could not, ethically -- use that job as a platform to promote my faith. I could demonstrate that a reasonable, gracious person could excel as a scholar and a teacher. I could serve religious communities when invited. But I could not use my position, the stuff the state of South Carolina was paying me to do, to evangelize. Absolutely not.

My concern with the athletic department involves whether there's a culture that marginalizes unbelieving players and whether there's a bit of a good ole boy network that influences coaching decisions. I also believe it's wrong to project the image of a "Christian" program in a state university. Finally, there's the "cheesiness." There's no reason to tell the world you fired a coach after praying with him about it. And mercy, the "Satan" FB message last year was some moldy cheese.

As open as I am about my faith, I don't do "Christian" bumper stickers and the like. You know why? Because I make driving errors like everyone else, and I don't want my error to look like selfishness -- and then have someone associate it with my faith.

As a point of clarification:

Everyone is religious & has a personal theology... atheists=no god... christians = God ... agnostics = who knows... cosmic humanists = everything is god... each of these is a theological position in life.

As an agnostic, I feel compelled to point out you are expanding the meaning of religion and theology to include any personal philosophy, which can be secular (as you indicate above with "who knows?").

Some of us didn't get the "God gene".

Whether we realize it or not, whatever theology one adheres to, it leads directly to our ethical/moral system of thought, the psychology approach we use, etc... all based on Genesis 1:1 and how one interprets it... again, either God/no god/who knows/ everything god created creation...

The concept of morality doesn't necessarily emerge from theological belief. The scientific field of sociobiology makes a strong case for the natural evolution of morality.

and our culture is full of the failures of taking God out of the equation...

As a result, I am much more comfortable with a man coaching a team who instills the christian ethical system of honesty & integrity, personal sacrifice for a cause greater than selfish desires, putting the team ahead of self, accepting personal responsibity for actions (both good & bad), exercising personal discipline, etc.,

Nothing wrong with any of that, but once you start proselytizing the specific sectarian belief systems of Christianity you have really crossed the line into the inappropriate. Christianity is not the only way to promote honesty, integrity, personal sacrifice, personal responsibility, etc. And a football team is not the place to proselytize religious dogma, at least if you are in a position of leadership.

As an example, I am on the school board of a local high school which just won the state football championship in 2012. The coach is a man of strong christian integrity who held everyone to a high standard on the staff and on the team, including no cursing in practices and games. Yes, there was prayer and there was discipline as well. He also coached my son a few years ago and instilled character that supplimented what his mother and I had taught. This same coach has coached 2 national championship basketball teams @ our school over the years as well.

Was the prayer led by the coach or did the kids spontaneously do it on their own? Was it a sectarian prayer (to Jesus)? Were there any Unitarian, Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu kids on the team? What about kids who were being raised by agnostics and wanted their boy to reach his own conclusions without a coercive atmosphere?

As a side note, I have coached, been a high school principal and been the commissioner of an athletic conference ... and have observed first-hand the best and the worst of what I am presenting here...

I know that a lot of you have already put me in the "anti-Christian" category, which I can assure you is not true. Christianity happens to be my heritage. I have the utmost respect for Christianity (if not necessarily Christians).

I see this first as a question of power and secondly, as a question of basic respect and courtesy. Anyone in a position of power who proselytizes any religious dogma to people he has authority over is abusing that power and trust. It is also disrespectful of alternative points of view.

Please don't misconstrue my intent here, because I certainly respect your right to your religious freedom and everyone else's for that matter...

My point is that everyone is religious... even agnostics to a degree = which is the spring board from which one orders their life AND how they relate to others... and if an agnostic coaches he will talk/live/instill his dogma in his players...

No one will ever force anyone else to pray... not going to happen... and I didn't say a word about forced evangelism in this context, either...

In my opinion, a man or woman with a true growing relationship with Christ possesses the "goods" to help mold youth, especially single parent kids, in a profound way. I gave our coach as an example of those proven as a winner in athletic competition as well... which is really what this OP is about...

[gctiger 931]

And now it's a land-grant state college. Back then, it was a private liberal-arts school. At the time they were still teaching blood-letting as proper medical treatment and women weren't allowed in.

Things change, and frankly, things get better.

I guess you opinion of better and mine must differ. I certainly don't think that the world has become a better place in the years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to ban prayer in schools. We now have to regularly deal with school shootings. I can't understand why someone that disagrees with a prayer can't respectfully remain silent for a few minutes even if they chose not to pray.

[Mikey 16,598]

Holy canola bars, Batman! What a thread, eh?

"God is dead"~~~Nietzsche...."Nietzsche is dead"~~~God

Yet we are alive to argue about which one (if any) died laughing. Life's weird, right?

The idea that Christians hold some sort of moral high ground and are by default "better people" would be comical if so many didn't believe it.

[DANSBY 0]

And now it's a land-grant state college. Back then, it was a private liberal-arts school. At the time they were still teaching blood-letting as proper medical treatment and women weren't allowed in.

Things change, and frankly, things get better.

I guess you opinion of better and mine must differ. I certainly don't think that the world has become a better place in the years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to ban prayer in schools. We now have to regularly deal with school shootings. I can't understand why someone that disagrees with a prayer can't respectfully remain silent for a few minutes even if they chose not to pray.

Would you feel the same way about Muslim prayer in school. Would you be okay with the Christian kids sitting silently while the Muslim children prayed? If so, then you and I are on the same page. I have no problem with prayer and/ or religion is school. The problem I have is when one religion is shared by the majority and given favorable treatment over that of the minority.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

The thing is, prayer was never banned in schools. Anyone can pray at any time, as long as it is not disruptive to the other students. What was struck down was administration-led, or administration-written prayers that give the appearance, or have the effect of the school preferring one religion.

[AUIH1 1,515]

My opinion - If our AD is making hiring decisions, personnel decisions, contract decisions, construction award decisions based primarily on religious reasons then yes it is too religious. If our AD is not hiring the best coaches, best AD personnel, hiring the best contractors, writing the best contracts etc using competency as by far the main qualification then the AD is doing AU a disservice. The job of the AD is to build athletic programs that are successful on the field of play first. Sports are played to win. I am a Christian and of course I would prefer all of our coaches, officials, players to be Christians and as a bonus act like Christians both on and off of the field, but the main quality I want in a coach is that they coach their teams to be successful on the field of play and keep AU off probation.

Some have posted that sometimes the AU AD goes cheesy with the religious aspect and I believe this to be true. Several of our athletic programs have been far from Christ-like since the current regime took over the AD.

wde

[Weegle777 78]

I should start by saying that it hurts me to read some of the posts I have read. I have watched over the years as we have allowed society to redefine what we see as "acceptable behavior" and with a short statement I know that I will not change anyone's mind. First, Religion and Christianity are not one and the same....being a Muslim is being religious. No, I do not believe a Christian has to label himself or pat himself on the back becasue his actions will define him and others will label him.

I personally want everyone to have a close personal relationship with Jesus as their Savior. Being a Christian does not mean someone is too soft or lacking an edge.....if you believe this you are 100% wrong. Many of the greatest athletes in this country are strong men and women of Christian faith. It is easy to start letting society shift the real focus in life from salvation to winning a football game. I love winning as well; but personally would rather lose every game than compromise principles. That said, one of the most beloved Auburn teams 2004 (for those unimformed) had an internal revival which brought the team together like few others before or since....... do some research and speak with some of those players including Cadillac. They will tell you the same thing.

We need more men to speak out about their faith and expect criticism.......but in the long run we win. We win much more than a few ballgames.

Best post in this thread. Exceptionally well said!

[IndianTiger 95]

The idea that Christians hold some sort of moral high ground and are by default "better people" would be comical if so many didn't believe it.

Good one...again this is a much needed discussion not just for the Athletic dept. but for the Auburn nation in my opinion. Thanks Dyehard for starting this and others who are voicing your opinion on both sides.

[AUpreacherman22 3,885]

When it comes to hiring any individual, but especially one who is going to be in a leadership position of some kind, there are 3 things you must consider:

1. Character

2. Competence

3. Camaraderie

Depending upon the specific occupational position the interpretation of those three elements will look a little different. When hiring someone on my staff a specific set of Christian beliefs is essential for all three of those elements. When hiring a football coach it is not.

Each person must develop his own life philosophy that drives his thinking, behaviors, relationships, etc. I call this a "worldview". I know a lot of people that see the world differently than me that I would consider to be a man of character and they are good friends of mine.

Being a Christian does not make someone a good football coach, nor does it make them a poor or soft coach either. However, a devoted Christian will have strong character and he should be able to "fit in" with the environment at AU. If he has great coaching ability along with the character and camaraderie, then he should be a good fit at AU. IMHO, based on what I have read and heard about CGM, he is a devoted Christian with strong character and a ton of coaching ability who is a great fit for AU.

I think the reason some people are upset about AU being "too Christian" is because JJ has a reputation for hiring "men of character" who can't coach a lick. Christian or not, that is poor leadership!

[AUpreacherman22 3,885]

The idea that Christians hold some sort of moral high ground and are by default "better people" would be comical if so many didn't believe it.

Good one...again this is a much needed discussion not just for the Athletic dept. but for the Auburn nation in my opinion. Thanks Dyehard for starting this and others who are voicing your opinion on both sides.

Mikey, you are correct. There are a lot of people who claim to be Christians who have a "holier than thou" attitude. Please understand that that attitude does not reflect the teachings of Jesus. He said "the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve" and "Anyone who wants to become great must become servant to all." Arrogance is the exact opposite of what a Christian should demonstrate. It was Ghandi who said something to the effect of "It's not the Christ I have a problem with, it's Christians." (not an exact quote) The problem is not with Christianity, but with many people who claim to be Christians.

Indian Tiger, I agree. This is a fun topic. I want to thank our posters for being civil throughout the discussion (I haven't read all 19 pages, but what I have read has been very civil) and I want to thank our Mods for letting us have this discussion and not shutting it down.

[AUIH1 1,515]

When it comes to hiring any individual, but especially one who is going to be in a leadership position of some kind, there are 3 things you must consider:

1. Character

2. Competence

3. Camaraderie

Depending upon the specific occupational position the interpretation of those three elements will look a little different. When hiring someone on my staff a specific set of Christian beliefs is essential for all three of those elements. When hiring a football coach it is not.

Each person must develop his own life philosophy that drives his thinking, behaviors, relationships, etc. I call this a "worldview". I know a lot of people that see the world differently than me that I would consider to be a man of character and they are good friends of mine.

Being a Christian does not make someone a good football coach, nor does it make them a poor or soft coach either. However, a devoted Christian will have strong character and he should be able to "fit in" with the environment at AU. If he has great coaching ability along with the character and camaraderie, then he should be a good fit at AU. IMHO, based on what I have read and heard about CGM, he is a devoted Christian with strong character and a ton of coaching ability who is a great fit for AU.

I think the reason some people are upset about AU being "too Christian" is because JJ has a reputation for hiring "men of character" who can't coach a lick. Christian or not, that is poor leadership!

Totally agree with everything you just posted.

wde

[Auctoritas 2,828]

I agree, Preacher. This thread could have gone sideways in a hurry, and to the credit of the AUFamily...er..family...It didn't. I've been in a lot of heated debates over stuff like this, and this is by far the cleanest and most pleasant. Good job all around.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

IMHO, the best way to represent your faith is to live a life that is an example of what that faith is about. Preaching to, imposing on, or indoctrinating others is often hollow since we are all, at times, sinners, liers, hypocrits, etc. As Christians, I believe we should think about what Christ's perfect love means. I believe we should consider the fact that Christ never compromises our freewill or forces us to follow. We should follow out of love, not out of fear or guilt. Shouldn't we try to emulate Christ and show others love and never attempt to control or coerce them? IMHO, the biggest mistake we make as Christians is trying help God too much. Again, God doesn't impose his will on us. Should we try to impose our will on others, even if our intentions are good? Are we here to save souls or is that something only Christ can do? Are we here to be God's enforcers? I think we are here to understand and accept God's perfect love, to love Him back, and to project that love to one another to the best of our ability. If we can do that, I believe we will never offend or impose upon anyone and, we will be part of a better world. I truly believe that if we are following the example of Christ, the question asked by the title of this thread would never be asked.

[keesler 5,924]

I agree, Preacher. This thread could have gone sideways in a hurry, and to the credit of the AUFamily...er..family...It didn't. I've been in a lot of heated debates over stuff like this, and this is by far the cleanest and most pleasant. Good job all around.

I enjoy your posts Auctoritas. While I have my own opinion on the topic, which I don't feel compelled to bring to this discussion, you've enlightened me and I appreciate your input.

Thanks mods for allowing the discussion.

[IndianTiger 95]

Preacher, Icanthearyou, Auctoritas...great points you are all making.

For all those who need a spiritual experience, I recommend visiting India - country with many religions co-existing (yes its not perfect) ,but you will see a Hindu temple close to a Church to a Mosque a Sikh temple or Buddhist shrine and for the most part living in harmony. In fact there are some holy places where people of couple of religions worship at the same place and people participating in each others religious activities.

(Life of Pi the movie touches upon this a little)

[keesler 5,924]

IMHO, the best way to represent your faith is to live a life that is an example of what that faith is about. Preaching to, imposing on, or indoctrinating others is often hollow since we are all, at times, sinners, liers, hypocrits, etc. As Christians, I believe we should think about what Christ's perfect love means. I believe we should consider the fact that Christ never compromises our freewill or forces us to follow. We should follow out of love, not out of fear or guilt. Shouldn't we try to emulate Christ and show others love and never attempt to control or coerce them? IMHO, the biggest mistake we make as Christians is trying help God too much. Again, God doesn't impose his will on us. Should we try to impose our will on others, even if our intentions are good? Are we here to save souls or is that something only Christ can do? Are we here to be God's enforcers? I think we are here to understand and accept God's perfect love, to love Him back, and to project that love to one another to the best of our ability. If we can do that, I believe we will never offend or impose upon anyone and, we will be part of a better world. I truly believe that if we are following the example of Christ, the question asked by the title of this thread would never be asked.

Sounds like from what OP has posted in this thread that maybe we have some folks in the AD that are trying to "help God" too much?

This new coaching staff came into a bad situation, we obviously have/had a cultural problem within the locker room and maybe the new staff wants to re-indoctrinate some good, sound moral values onto these young players. If you are a devout Christian man that firmly believes and lives a charismatic Christian life, then what is the first thing that comes to mind when you are trying to develop a plan to change the moral compass of the young people that you are in charge of? If you are a Christian, what would be the first step in changing the culture and the atmosphere of what was a cancerous environment?

I really think that our AD and our current coaching staff are trying to instill a sense of responsibility, accountability, and they are trying to fundmentally change the AU culture and mentality from what it was in the recent past. They are doing the best they can, using the knowledge and experience they have. Since they are obviously Christian men, they are approaching the situation the only way they know how - - - they are putting Christ in the forefront and using their faith that God will lead them in their endeavors. When faced with adversity and difficult situations as Christians, we turn it over to God and seek his guidance in dealing with difficult circumstances.

If a member of this team, or the staff are offended or have been made to feel uncomfortable about the approach CGM is taking to help this program, then I believe he is a man that will listen and will accomodate the beliefs and wishes of everyone on this team. This team HAS to find an identity, they have to have chemistry to be successful. IMO, Jay Jacobs and Gus Malahzn want to help much more than they want to offend or insult someone.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

I'm glad we've had this chat.

[homersapien 11,373]

I'm serious about my Christian faith, but I don't believe "Christian" talk correlates much with good character. And in a state university, defining a program in those terms is way out of line. I could do with less cheesiness.

On the other hand, I also believe people should have a right to be open about their faith.

So here is the OP delimma, which you authored...

In your opinion, what is the "acceptable" level of a coach/AD walking out their faith? Where is the standard? Who decides?... Al.com, Obama, congress, a nation-wide vote,???...

... this is not a relative issue, but is based upon absolute none changing standards as set and defined in the Bible... not open to being defined by personable preference... not based on a societal evolutionary sliding scale of morality or conduct...

And we are all probably at least a little intimidated by what this truth requires of each of us individually...

And yes, there is a great need for true Christian influence in every area of the market place today.

Look, I know a bit about the Bible. I teach New Testament in a denominational seminary (full professor, six academic books, national and international leadership responsibilities) and serve a local church p/t to boot. Doesn't mean my opinions are correct, but I'm informed.

The Bible doesn't say a thing about how a football coach should handle his job, how to do public relations, or even about how Christians should manage public roles. No such set of "standards" exists. You may interpret the Bible to address those contexts, and people should, but let's not pretend there's a "how-to" for coaches in there.

I've taught in secular contexts too. Students knew I was a Christian, as being a Christian informs my opinions. They could come to me for vocational or spiritual guidance, and some did. However, I did not -- I could not, ethically -- use that job as a platform to promote my faith. I could demonstrate that a reasonable, gracious person could excel as a scholar and a teacher. I could serve religious communities when invited. But I could not use my position, the stuff the state of South Carolina was paying me to do, to evangelize. Absolutely not.

My concern with the athletic department involves whether there's a culture that marginalizes unbelieving players and whether there's a bit of a good ole boy network that influences coaching decisions. I also believe it's wrong to project the image of a "Christian" program in a state university. Finally, there's the "cheesiness." There's no reason to tell the world you fired a coach after praying with him about it. And mercy, the "Satan" FB message last year was some moldy cheese.

As open as I am about my faith, I don't do "Christian" bumper stickers and the like. You know why? Because I make driving errors like everyone else, and I don't want my error to look like selfishness -- and then have someone associate it with my faith.

As a point of clarification:

Everyone is religious & has a personal theology... atheists=no god... christians = God ... agnostics = who knows... cosmic humanists = everything is god... each of these is a theological position in life.

As an agnostic, I feel compelled to point out you are expanding the meaning of religion and theology to include any personal philosophy, which can be secular (as you indicate above with "who knows?").

Some of us didn't get the "God gene".

Whether we realize it or not, whatever theology one adheres to, it leads directly to our ethical/moral system of thought, the psychology approach we use, etc... all based on Genesis 1:1 and how one interprets it... again, either God/no god/who knows/ everything god created creation...

The concept of morality doesn't necessarily emerge from theological belief. The scientific field of sociobiology makes a strong case for the natural evolution of morality.

and our culture is full of the failures of taking God out of the equation...

As a result, I am much more comfortable with a man coaching a team who instills the christian ethical system of honesty & integrity, personal sacrifice for a cause greater than selfish desires, putting the team ahead of self, accepting personal responsibity for actions (both good & bad), exercising personal discipline, etc.,

Nothing wrong with any of that, but once you start proselytizing the specific sectarian belief systems of Christianity you have really crossed the line into the inappropriate. Christianity is not the only way to promote honesty, integrity, personal sacrifice, personal responsibility, etc. And a football team is not the place to proselytize religious dogma, at least if you are in a position of leadership.

As an example, I am on the school board of a local high school which just won the state football championship in 2012. The coach is a man of strong christian integrity who held everyone to a high standard on the staff and on the team, including no cursing in practices and games. Yes, there was prayer and there was discipline as well. He also coached my son a few years ago and instilled character that supplimented what his mother and I had taught. This same coach has coached 2 national championship basketball teams @ our school over the years as well.

Was the prayer led by the coach or did the kids spontaneously do it on their own? Was it a sectarian prayer (to Jesus)? Were there any Unitarian, Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu kids on the team? What about kids who were being raised by agnostics and wanted their boy to reach his own conclusions without a coercive atmosphere?

As a side note, I have coached, been a high school principal and been the commissioner of an athletic conference ... and have observed first-hand the best and the worst of what I am presenting here...

I know that a lot of you have already put me in the "anti-Christian" category, which I can assure you is not true. Christianity happens to be my heritage. I have the utmost respect for Christianity (if not necessarily Christians).

I see this first as a question of power and secondly, as a question of basic respect and courtesy. Anyone in a position of power who proselytizes any religious dogma to people he has authority over is abusing that power and trust. It is also disrespectful of alternative points of view.

Please don't misconstrue my intent here, because I certainly respect your right to your religious freedom and everyone else's for that matter...

My point is that everyone is religious... even agnostics to a degree = which is the spring board from which one orders their life AND how they relate to others... and if an agnostic coaches he will talk/live/instill his dogma in his players...

Well, not to argue semantics but I do not consider agnosticism to be a religion (by definition) and (unlike atheism) there is no dogma associated with it.

But I think I do understand what you are getting at. We all possess inherent moral beliefs that are both inherited and taught. But such moral values do not have to be associated with religious dogma in order to inform by example or instruction.

So as an agnostic, to pass along positive moral attitudes to youth is not the same as transmitting dogma (such as the divinity of Jesus, for example). There is no necessity to link morality to any specific religious dogma and it is inappropriate to do so, at least outside a congregation who has assembled for that purpose. A football team is not a church.

No one will ever force anyone else to pray... not going to happen... and I didn't say a word about forced evangelism in this context, either...

You are correct if by "force" you mean "actively compelling". But what I am referring to is social coercion which is a lot more insidious but just as powerful. It has no place in an organization that relies on teamwork and unity, particularly if practiced by persons of authority within that organization.

In my opinion, a man or woman with a true growing relationship with Christ possesses the "goods" to help mold youth, especially single parent kids, in a profound way. I gave our coach as an example of those proven as a winner in athletic competition as well... which is really what this OP is about...

I don't disagree with that, but in the case of a football coach, his actual job (aside from actual coaching) is not to impart religious dogma but to impart moral and social values with the emphasis on inclusion, not exclusion. To use specific (Christian) dogma as a vehicle excludes certain individuals who happen to believe in a different dogma, or none at all.

[homersapien 11,373]

And now it's a land-grant state college. Back then, it was a private liberal-arts school. At the time they were still teaching blood-letting as proper medical treatment and women weren't allowed in.

Things change, and frankly, things get better.

I guess you opinion of better and mine must differ. I certainly don't think that the world has become a better place in the years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to ban prayer in schools. We now have to regularly deal with school shootings. I can't understand why someone that disagrees with a prayer can't respectfully remain silent for a few minutes even if they chose not to pray.

The SCOTUS didn't ban prayer in schools. Anyone who wants to pray is school is perfectly free to do so. What it banned is organized prayer initiated by those in a position of authority. I have already explained why this is inappropriate, although from your last sentence it is apparent you don't agree with my reasoning.

I suspect even you would get a little uncomfortable if children had to sit through just any prayer (Islam, voo-doo, witchcraft). After all, your kids could remain "respectfully silent" instead of getting down and kneeling toward mecca with the rest of their peers.

[gctiger 931]

And now it's a land-grant state college. Back then, it was a private liberal-arts school. At the time they were still teaching blood-letting as proper medical treatment and women weren't allowed in.

Things change, and frankly, things get better.

I guess you opinion of better and mine must differ. I certainly don't think that the world has become a better place in the years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to ban prayer in schools. We now have to regularly deal with school shootings. I can't understand why someone that disagrees with a prayer can't respectfully remain silent for a few minutes even if they chose not to pray.

The SCOTUS didn't ban prayer in schools. Anyone who wants to pray is school is perfectly free to do so. What it banned is organized prayer initiated by those in a position of authority. I have already explained why this is inappropriate, although from your last sentence it is apparent you don't agree with my reasoning.

I suspect even you would get a little uncomfortable if children had to sit through just any prayer (Islam, voo-doo, witchcraft). After all, your kids could remain "respectfully silent" instead of getting down and kneeling toward mecca with the rest of their peers.

If you read my posts carefully, then you know how I feel about forced prayer. On the other hand, I find utterly rediculous that any group of people with common beliefs can't hold an organized prayer amongst themselves in a public school.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

And now it's a land-grant state college. Back then, it was a private liberal-arts school. At the time they were still teaching blood-letting as proper medical treatment and women weren't allowed in.

Things change, and frankly, things get better.

I guess you opinion of better and mine must differ. I certainly don't think that the world has become a better place in the years since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to ban prayer in schools. We now have to regularly deal with school shootings. I can't understand why someone that disagrees with a prayer can't respectfully remain silent for a few minutes even if they chose not to pray.

The SCOTUS didn't ban prayer in schools. Anyone who wants to pray is school is perfectly free to do so. What it banned is organized prayer initiated by those in a position of authority. I have already explained why this is inappropriate, although from your last sentence it is apparent you don't agree with my reasoning.

I suspect even you would get a little uncomfortable if children had to sit through just any prayer (Islam, voo-doo, witchcraft). After all, your kids could remain "respectfully silent" instead of getting down and kneeling toward mecca with the rest of their peers.

If you read my posts carefully, then you know how I feel about forced prayer. On the other hand, I find utterly rediculous that any group of people with common beliefs can't hold an organized prayer amongst themselves in a public school.

They can. The administration just can't lead it or write the prayer in their official capacity.

ETA: I mean, if what you are saying is correct, no school would have a Fellowship of Christian Athletes. That's clearly not the case. The difference is that the FCA or the FCS is entirely voluntary, and is a student-led group with a faculty advisor.