Coaches praying on field of competition

[TSherbs]

The SC got this one wrong, too:

CBS News: Supreme Court sides with high school football coach who lost his job for praying after games.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/supreme-court-joe-kennedy-high-school-football-coach-school-prayer-case/?ftag=CNM-00-10aag7e

Once again, Trump's three appointments in four years brings the court backwards in protecting young people from religious coercion on state property under state supervision. Go Christian warriors!

[Lloyd]

What's wrong if the coach prays on the field after the game?
After reading more, I agree with you. The school shouldn't have to permit it.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[TSherbs]

What's wrong if the coach prays on the field after the game?
After reading more, I agree with you. The school shouldn't have to permit it.
Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Indeed, the school should not have to. And the wards of the coach/school/state should not be compelled to make a decision about whether to follow a coach's lead in prayer on the premises of the school (on the field of play) before the adult's (and school's) supervisory responsibilities have ended.

But things are different now with this court's make-up.

[TSherbs]

Chuck, you might take a look at the June issue of The Atlantic. It has a strong article on the changes of the evangelical churches, especially around politics, since the time of Reagan.

[dneal]

Kennedy v Bremerton (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf)


Joseph Kennedy lost his job as a high school football coach because he knelt at midfield after games to offer a quiet prayer of thanks. Mr. Kennedy prayed during a period when school employees were free to speak with a friend, call for a reservation at a restaurant, check email, or attend to other personal matters. He offered his prayers quietly while his students were otherwise occupied. Still, the Bremerton School District disciplined him anyway. It did so because it thought anything less could lead a reasonable observer to conclude (mistakenly) that it endorsed Mr. Kennedy’s religious beliefs. That reasoning was misguided. Both the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment protect expressions like Mr. Kennedy’s. Nor does a proper understanding of the Amendment’s Establishment Clause require the government to single out private religious speech for special disfavor. The Constitution and the best of our traditions counsel mutual respect and tolerance, not censorship and suppression, for religious and nonreligious views alike.

[Lloyd]

I wonder if they would have supported the coach if his faith was Muslim, Wiccan, etc..

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[Chip]

If he's praying after the game (for forgiveness?) I won't stand in his way.

Let him sacrifice black chickens or whatever his so-called religion dictates.

[Lloyd]

If he's praying after the game (for forgiveness?) I won't stand in his way.

Let him sacrifice black chickens or whatever his so-called religion dictates.
I was curious if the SC would mandate that the school must allow a Wiccan coach to "pray" on the field after each game.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[ethernautrix]

The separation of church and state doesn't proscribe state employees from holding religious beliefs and expressing them in a merely personal (that is, non-compulsory) -- and unobtrusive -- way.

I see the issue as whether or not the coach -- an authority figure employed by the state -- compelled his team members to pray with him or if he, as an individual, simply expressed his devotion to the will of god as he understands it. If the former -- obviously it's a problem; if the latter, leave him alone, as we would all want to be left alone in such circumstances, to whisper "Praise Allah" or "Blessed be" or "I'm really good at this" or whatever.

[TSherbs]

He had already been caught leading prayer with students in the lockerroom and had been told he had to stop doing that. Now he is out on the 50yrdline of the field immediately after the game, in full view. This guy was interested in more than private, personal prayer, and some students testified to the pressure they felt to join. The coach could have prayed in many places/manners other than full public view on the field of play when he is still acting as the coach of his players. I have prayed many times at school, and I was a coach for 25 years. I would never consider doing what he did. It clearly signals a desire to be seen praying, and that means a desire to have influence, in this case a Christian one.

[Chuck Naill]

Chuck, you might take a look at the June issue of The Atlantic. It has a strong article on the changes of the evangelical churches, especially around politics, since the time of Reagan.

I came up in the time of Francis Sheaffer. He started the idea of evangelical political involvement and civil disobedience for my era in the late 1970’s. Then it was just that believers were trying to be a family with moral values. This was before Reagan.

We were trying to be out of debt, have the family meal, live on a single income, provide Christian education, and live by Biblical standards.

In many ways, politics sort of adulterated what we were doing. We didn’t promote it to others, but lived a quiet life.

I do not think those disciples of Jesus would have ever voted for a Donald Trump.

[Chuck Naill]

Chuck, you might take a look at the June issue of The Atlantic. It has a strong article on the changes of the evangelical churches, especially around politics, since the time of Reagan.

I came up in the time of Francis Sheaffer. He started the idea of evangelical political involvement and civil disobedience for my era in the late 1970’s. Then it was just that believers were trying to be a family with moral values. This was before Reagan.

We were trying to be out of debt, have the family meal, live on a single income, provide Christian education, and live by Biblical standards.

In many ways, politics sort of adulterated what we were doing. We didn’t promote it to others, but lived a quiet life.

I do not think those disciples of Jesus would have ever voted for a Donald Trump.

And prayer was a private matter and not something to be exploited. I would not have participated in such nonsense after a football game.

[dneal]

Facts determined by the court (references to exhibits removed for ease of reading).


Initially, Mr. Kennedy prayed on his own. But over time, some players asked whether they could pray alongside him. Mr. Kennedy responded by saying, “‘This is a free country. You can do what you want.’”. The number of players who joined Mr. Kennedy eventually grew to include most of the team, at least after some games. Sometimes team members invited opposing players to join. Other times Mr. Kennedy still prayed alone. Eventually, Mr. Kennedy began incorporating short motivational speeches with his prayer when others were present. Separately, the team at times engaged in pregame or postgame prayers in the locker room. It seems this practice was a “school tradition” that predated Mr. Kennedy’s tenure. Mr. Kennedy explained that he “never told any student that it was important they participate in any religious activity.” In particular, he “never pressured or encouraged any student to join” his postgame midfield prayers.

For over seven years, no one complained to the Bremerton School District (District) about these practices.

It seems the District’s superintendent first learned of them only in September 2015, after an employee from another school commented positively on the school’s practices to Bremerton’s principal. At that point, the District reacted quickly. On September 17, the superintendent sent Mr. Kennedy a letter. In it, the superintendent identified “two problematic practices” in which Mr. Kennedy had engaged. First, Mr. Kennedy had provided “inspirational talk[s]” that included “overtly religious references” likely constituting “prayer” with the students “at midfield following the completion of . . . game[s].” Second, he had led “students and coaching staff in a prayer” in the locker-room tradition that “predated [his] involvement with the program.”

The District explained that it sought to establish “clear parameters” “going forward.” It instructed Mr. Kennedy to avoid any motivational “talks with students” that “include[d] religious expression, including prayer,” and to avoid “suggest[ing], encourag[ing] (or discourag[ing]), or supervis[ing]” any prayers of students, which students remained free to “engage in.” The District also explained that any religious activity on Mr. Kennedy’s part must be “nondemonstrative (i.e., not outwardly discernible as religious activity)” if “students are also engaged in religious conduct” in order to “avoid the perception of endorsement.” In offering these directives, the District appealed to what it called a “direct tension between” the “Establishment Clause” and “a school employee’s [right to] free[ly] exercise” his religion. To resolve that “tension,” the District explained, an employee’s free exercise rights “must yield so far as necessary to avoid school endorsement of religious activities.”

After receiving the District’s September 17 letter, Mr. Kennedy ended the tradition, predating him, of offering locker-room prayers. He also ended his practice of incorporating religious references or prayer into his postgame motivational talks to his team on the field.

On October 14, through counsel, Mr. Kennedy sent a letter to school officials informing them that, because of his “sincerely-held religious beliefs,” he felt “compelled” to offer a “post-game personal prayer” of thanks at midfield. He asked the District to allow him to continue that “private religious expression” alone. Consistent with the District’s policy, Mr. Kennedy explained that he “neither requests, encourages, nor discourages students from participating in” these prayers, Mr. Kennedy emphasized that he sought only the opportunity to “wai[t] until the game is over and the players have left the field and then wal[k] to mid-field to say a short, private, personal prayer.” He “told everybody” that it would be acceptable to him to pray “when the kids went away from [him].” He later clarified that this meant he was even willing to say his “prayer while the players were walking to the locker room” or “bus,” and then catch up with his team. However, Mr. Kennedy objected to the logical implication of the District’s September 17 letter, which he understood as banning him “from bowing his head” in the vicinity of students, and as requiring him to “flee the scene if students voluntarily [came] to the same area” where he was praying. After all, District policy prohibited him from “discourag[ing]” independent student decisions to pray.

[Chuck Naill]

Apparently there is more history and information for which you might not be aware.

Sure, if it was as simple as a locker room event, no problem. I’m trying to imagine a coach on his knees in a private place when players discover him and ask to participate.

A prayer of thanksgiving can be as simple as one sentence. Consider The Lord’s Prayer, no any pretense at all.

[Marsilius]

I wonder if someone would be allowed by law to shake a Purim rattle (grager/raashan) in protest during the recitation of the prayer?

[Chuck Naill]

“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing(B) in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father,(C) who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling(D) like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.(E) 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need(F) before you ask him.

Matthew 6:5-7

[Chip]

Does a Muslim coach have the right to kill a goat on the 50 yard line for Bakhri Eid?

Hmmmm. . .

[Lloyd]

Does a Muslim coach have the right to kill a goat on the 50 yard line for Bakhri Eid?

Hmmmm. . .
Only if the goat is later bar-b-qued and served in a dry rub.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[ethernautrix]

Probably just as acceptable as performing the sacrament of the eucharist. So... guessing not.

[TSherbs]

Looks like the locals knew the circumstances of the case pretty well. And, it looks like this conservative majority has an *activist agenda.*

The Seattle Times: The myth at the heart of the praying Bremerton coach case.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/the-myth-at-the-heart-of-the-praying-bremerton-coach-case/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=RSS_seattle-news

[Chuck Naill]

Thank you for posting, Ted. To me if makes the Supreme Court look like they didn’t do their homework. Now they look like anyone not dong their homework, unprepared and undisciplined.

[welch]

The coach is acting as a "religious teacher", as Patrick Henry meant in 1785, when Henry proposed a bill by which Virginia would pay the salaries of all "religious teachers". The issue was that Virginia had dis-established the Church of England, so Henry wanted any Christian preacher -- Baptist, Presbyterian, or Anglican -- supported by the state. That is what the Supreme Court Six supports.

James Madison replied that mixing religion and government hurts both. Read his "Memorial and Remonstrance", an earlier statement of what went into the amendment to the Constitution.

Incidentally, the Constitution is worded so that no government can make a law establishing a religion. As each state dis-established its state church, it was forbidden to establish another. The last of them, I think, was Massachusetts, which dis-established The Standing Order of New England (we remember it as the "Congregational" church -- now the UCC) about 1830. The Court seems to have established this guy's church, whatever he calls it, to be funded by the school district.

Here is Madison.

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-08-02-0163

The intro in the National Archives here is first-rate, and important to get an understanding of what Madison is arguing. Madison, himself, is clear. He sets what has been the American understanding of the separation of state and church, or at least what had been in the foundation of American thought until this Supreme Court.

[Chuck Naill]

That’s your opinion or else, but thanks for posting.

It’s obvious the intent was not to establish a religion as was the norm in England as a prerequisite for political participation.

[dneal]

Incidentally, the Constitution is worded so that no government can make a law establishing a religion

Also incidentally, it forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

[TSherbs]

This, to me, is a no brainer case, mostly because it involves a state-paid instructor of children (wards of the state while at school).

1) The coach's duties and resposibilities do not end when the game ends. We coaches (I have been one and have been instructed in this by school lawyers) are responsible for the care and well-being of our wards until they are handed off to legal guardians or until they leave school grounds no longer under our supervision (driving themselves or in the cars of others or walking home, etc). No matter if the players are on a bus waiting, or are in a lockerroom dressing or are in transit from the field of play to the lockerroom, or even if the students are waiting to be picked up by parents, the coach(es) is the primary adult responsible for the well-being and care of the players.

2) The field of play after a game is not a "private" space. It is where teams practice, meet, talk, strategize, and compete in games. No expectation of actual "privacy" can be reasonably held on a field of play (indoors or outdoors).

3) Adult/coach behavior, of all kinds, has an affect on the wards under our care. We are repeatedly told that we are "the models" for school values and rules and expectations, etc. What is "seen" or "heard" that we do can be more potent than lectures or rule-statements. We are told this by our administrators and by our lawyers.

4) It is not an unreasonable nor burdensome limitation to ask a coach not to make a visible demonstration of his/her adherence to any one religion on a field of play after a game. He is not being told that he can't pray at all. He is being asked not to pray a certain way and at a certain time to avoid the "modeling" of a particular faith as part of his efforts to coach his team in a public location on school grounds.

5) The SC has moved too far to the side of allowing prayer at schools (it is lost on no one that this is Christian prayer, of course) under the guise of limiting atttempts to regulate the exercise of religion.

[Chip]

It'd be more fun to have coaches lead opposing prayers: Lord, lend us your flaming sword to smite the Eastside High heathen and drive them bleeding from the field, etc.

Each coach could have five minutes and there'd be an electronic vote.

When I was in New Zealand, I thought this was cool.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiKFYTFJ_kw

[welch]

That’s your opinion or else, but thanks for posting.

It’s obvious the intent was not to establish a religion as was the norm in England as a prerequisite for political participation.

You have missed the meaning of an established religion. The Constitution forbids the government from paying for a church. That is the the establishment of religion. Read Madison, who knows better than you do, what he meant. The coach is employed by the school board, yet he wants to organize a religious service in the middle of the school's football field.


Also incidentally, it forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Read Madison and read the Constitution. Madison argues against, and the Constitution forbids exactly what the coach has done. He is using his authority as a paid football coach and teacher to push players to join him on the 50 yard line for a public prayer. As noted above, it is anti-Christian. It is heresy and boasting rather than practicing religion. As Madison warns in The Memorial and Remonstrance, this is how a government harms religion. Notice that Madison also warns that religion then threatens a free government.

The Supreme Court majority has stepped on the throat of James Madison, who, of course, knows far better what he intended than do Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Roberts, and the rest. It has burned the US Constitution.

[dneal]

read the Constitution.

I did, so I added an important part you omitted.

[Chuck Naill]

You have missed the meaning of an established religion. The Constitution forbids the government from paying for a church. That is the the establishment of religion. Read Madison, who knows better than you do, what he meant. The coach is employed by the school board, yet he wants to organize a religious service in the middle of the school's football field.


Also incidentally, it forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Read Madison and read the Constitution. Madison argues against, and the Constitution forbids exactly what the coach has done. He is using his authority as a paid football coach and teacher to push players to join him on the 50 yard line for a public prayer. As noted above, it is anti-Christian. It is heresy and boasting rather than practicing religion. As Madison warns in The Memorial and Remonstrance, this is how a government harms religion. Notice that Madison also warns that religion then threatens a free government.

The Supreme Court majority has stepped on the throat of James Madison, who, of course, knows far better what he intended than do Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Roberts, and the rest. It has burned the US Constitution.

A church is not a building as apparently you thought it did.

Allowing a state paid employee to establish Christian prayer does not establish, but doesn’t allows for other religious affiliations.

[TSherbs]

You have missed the meaning of an established religion. The Constitution forbids the government from paying for a church. That is the the establishment of religion. Read Madison, who knows better than you do, what he meant. The coach is employed by the school board, yet he wants to organize a religious service in the middle of the school's football field.


Also incidentally, it forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Read Madison and read the Constitution. Madison argues against, and the Constitution forbids exactly what the coach has done. He is using his authority as a paid football coach and teacher to push players to join him on the 50 yard line for a public prayer. As noted above, it is anti-Christian. It is heresy and boasting rather than practicing religion. As Madison warns in The Memorial and Remonstrance, this is how a government harms religion. Notice that Madison also warns that religion then threatens a free government.

The Supreme Court majority has stepped on the throat of James Madison, who, of course, knows far better what he intended than do Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Roberts, and the rest. It has burned the US Constitution.

A church is not a building as apparently you thought it did.

Allowing a state paid employee to establish Christian prayer does not establish, but doesn’t allows for other religious affiliations.The process of elevating or legitimizing one religion above or ahead of others is one of the definitions of "establish," particularly when talking about state employees in charge of children. No one is talking about "building" any thing here. The man asked to conduct "private prayer" in a non-private location in a non-private manner while still performing the duties of his job for the state.

[welch]

You have missed the meaning of an established religion. The Constitution forbids the government from paying for a church. That is the the establishment of religion. Read Madison, who knows better than you do, what he meant. The coach is employed by the school board, yet he wants to organize a religious service in the middle of the school's football field.


Also incidentally, it forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Read Madison and read the Constitution. Madison argues against, and the Constitution forbids exactly what the coach has done. He is using his authority as a paid football coach and teacher to push players to join him on the 50 yard line for a public prayer. As noted above, it is anti-Christian. It is heresy and boasting rather than practicing religion. As Madison warns in The Memorial and Remonstrance, this is how a government harms religion. Notice that Madison also warns that religion then threatens a free government.

The Supreme Court majority has stepped on the throat of James Madison, who, of course, knows far better what he intended than do Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Roberts, and the rest. It has burned the US Constitution.

A church is not a building as apparently you thought it did.

Allowing a state paid employee to establish Christian prayer does not establish, but doesn’t allows for other religious affiliations.

A church is a religious organization. It is NOT a building, and no one thinks it is. Didn't you read Madison? His point is that the government should never pay a preacher. In Patrick Henry's jargon, a preacher was meant to be a religious educator. That, like this coach, is exactly what James Madison argued against in the Remonstrance, what what he forbid in the Constitution as establishing religion.


I did, so I added an important part you omitted.

Clear that you are not reading the US Constitution. The coach is an employee of the government. As a school teacher and as a football coach, he has power and influence over kids. He was free to go someplace private and to pray, and, thereby, to exercise his religion freely. Before this week, he was not free to use his authority as a teacher to bring kids -- hypocritically and in an anti-Christian way -- to the center of the football field, where he could have the biggest audience.

Do either of you understand what Virginia did when it dis-established religion? Do you understand that no government, at least in the USA, is allowed to re-establish a GOVERNMENT SUPPORTED religion?

[dneal]

Welch, you cited a portion of the first amendment that supports your point and omitted the following portion that doesn’t. Your “read the constitution” bit is silly.

You can have your opinion. SCOTUS had a different one. What happened to “the courts have decided…”?

Next thing you know, somebody will be reaching for the steering wheel and inciting an insurrection.

[TFarnon]

I wouldn't be averse to a coach simply pointing skywards after a game (win or lose) as a way of expressing thanks to his or her chosen deity. I have an issue with the kind of display that the coaches own religious book expressly condemns.

On a secular level, I strongly object to someone who is in a position to exert power, by granting or not granting play time to athletes, based on whether those athletes join the coach in prayer. It doesn't matter if the coach is completely impartial. It's the mere potential for an abuse of power that is unacceptable.

[Chuck Naill]

You have missed the meaning of an established religion. The Constitution forbids the government from paying for a church. That is the the establishment of religion. Read Madison, who knows better than you do, what he meant. The coach is employed by the school board, yet he wants to organize a religious service in the middle of the school's football field.


Also incidentally, it forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Read Madison and read the Constitution. Madison argues against, and the Constitution forbids exactly what the coach has done. He is using his authority as a paid football coach and teacher to push players to join him on the 50 yard line for a public prayer. As noted above, it is anti-Christian. It is heresy and boasting rather than practicing religion. As Madison warns in The Memorial and Remonstrance, this is how a government harms religion. Notice that Madison also warns that religion then threatens a free government.

The Supreme Court majority has stepped on the throat of James Madison, who, of course, knows far better what he intended than do Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Roberts, and the rest. It has burned the US Constitution.

A church is not a building as apparently you thought it did.

Allowing a state paid employee to establish Christian prayer does not establish, but doesn’t allows for other religious affiliations.The process of elevating or legitimizing one religion above or ahead of others is one of the definitions of "establish," particularly when talking about state employees in charge of children. No one is talking about "building" any thing here. The man asked to conduct "private prayer" in a non-private location in a non-private manner while still performing the duties of his job for the state.

A building, not building.

[Chuck Naill]

The skyward point has always given me a laugh. As if God is somewhere above. My father used to refer to God as “The Man Upstairs “. Why is God not seen as being everywhere?

I grew up thinking the church was a building. Children couldn’t run in the church as It was God’s house. Imagine that a little white clapboard building in the sticks is where God resided.

The Jewish temple and RCC traditions really shaped the American concept of church.

[welch]

Welch, you cited a portion of the first amendment that supports your point and omitted the following portion that doesn’t. Your “read the constitution” bit is silly.

You can have your opinion. SCOTUS had a different one. What happened to “the courts have decided…”?

Next thing you know, somebody will be reaching for the steering wheel and inciting an insurrection.

This Supreme Court made a bad decision. That's the point. And the Constitution should not be read to contradict itself: if neither the federal government nor a state government can establish religion, then the free exercise of religion cannot mean that a government employee can use his power to draw students to the 50 yard line -- the center of attention -- in a government-provided football field to hold a prayer meeting.

Why do you think the current Supreme Court Six has more insight into the religious establishment clause than James Madison?

[Chuck Naill]

Welch, you cited a portion of the first amendment that supports your point and omitted the following portion that doesn’t. Your “read the constitution” bit is silly.

You can have your opinion. SCOTUS had a different one. What happened to “the courts have decided…”?

Next thing you know, somebody will be reaching for the steering wheel and inciting an insurrection.

Coming to a theater near you, Justice Thomas and the revisiting of a free press.

You, @dneal, do the same with the 2nd. Obviously it speaks of citizens being able to own a firearm to defend the nation, but you leave that section out when you speak.

[Chuck Naill]

The Supreme Court Six demonstrate the frailty of man for which education does not overcome. People simply do what’s right in their own minds.

[TSherbs]

On a similar note, teacher training on the separation of church and state in Florida:

https://floridaphoenix.com/2022/07/01/fl-civics-training-ignites-questions-of-religious-indoctrination-separation-of-church-and-state/

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

I can only conclude that these Republicans thinks more people think like them than actually exist.

[TSherbs]

The efforts against CRT and other "divisive concepts" or "divisive language" in schools is mostly fueled by white grievance against the browning of national demographics and the gradual erosion of white privilege in America. White, Christian, patriarchal privilege has been chipped away at for 60 years politically and socially, and this shift toward greater justice and equity is painful for those who culturally came to expect to inheret the same advantages as their parents. Turns out that the idea that "working hard" is no guarrantee of anything in this country, and while black Americans have known this for 350 years, whites have held onto the myth of the "American Dream" for a long time, even though that for so many of them, too, it did not apply. The myth is teetering, and angry lower and middle-class whites have begun flailing while looking for scapegoats, and wealthy whites hope that they never turn on them (the real problem). So manipulative politicians demonize progressive ideas like BLM or CRT or simply acknowledging the fact of slavery to eight-year-olds to keep the rabble whites from turning their anger on them.

[Chuck Naill]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

[TSherbs]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?What does this question even mean?

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chip]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.

[Lloyd]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.
This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[TFarnon]

There is no sport better to watch than rugby. It's got everything: stamina, grace, strength, endurance, quick wits, speed, action. And add in a hakka by the New Zealand All-Blacks... I love rugby.

[Chip]

This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Says the Dolly Llama dude.

[Chip]

There is no sport better to watch than rugby. It's got everything: stamina, grace, strength, endurance, quick wits, speed, action. And add in a hakka by the New Zealand All-Blacks... I love rugby.

My best yachting mate in Auckland was a great fan of the All Blacks and we spent many evenings glued to the telly.

One element I like is the continuous play, during which players have to think for themselves and execute spur-of-the-moment tactics. Compared to which, Yank football, with most plays less than a minute followed by a long administrative wait (and an advert or two) is hard to watch. Sportus Interruptus.

[Chuck Naill]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.
This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

I the words of our learned friend, fuck sakes you stupid son of a bitch, ass hole, stop trying to pretend to be the hall monitor. It makes you look like a hypocrite and worse.

[Lloyd]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.
This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

I the words of our learned friend, fuck sakes you stupid son of a bitch, ass hole, stop trying to pretend to be the hall monitor. It makes you look like a hypocrite and worse.
Now, THAT'S more the style of insults that this subforum should aspire to! That one I commented on was too wimpy.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[Chuck Naill]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.
This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

I the words of our learned friend, fuck sakes you stupid son of a bitch, ass hole, stop trying to pretend to be the hall monitor. It makes you look like a hypocrite and worse.
Now, THAT'S more the style of insults that this subforum should aspire to! That one I commented on was too wimpy.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™
LOL!!!!!

[TSherbs]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.
This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]

I the words of our learned friend, fuck sakes you stupid son of a bitch, ass hole, stop trying to pretend to be the hall monitor. It makes you look like a hypocrite and worse.
Now, THAT'S more the style of insults that this subforum should aspire to! That one I commented on was too wimpy.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]Chuck is not happy with either of us lately.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[TSherbs]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.
This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]To be fair, Chuck started it with an oblique insult about my brain. I think. Chuck didn't respond to my query for clarity, so I took it as an aspersion.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Lloyd]

It was Chip's "nyah, nyah, doodie-head" insult that I was commenting on. If you guys want to insult each other, at least demonstrate some craft when doing so.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[Chuck Naill]

Is this something from your brain, Ted?

At least he has one.
This is the level we've stooped to? Second grader insults?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]To be fair, Chuck started it with an oblique insult about my brain. I think. Chuck didn't respond to my query for clarity, so I took it as an aspersion.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

So, you really think I was commenting on your reputation and integrity?

We all bring our experiences and such to the forum. I never disregard anyone's integrity or reputation. If Ted thinks the cut off for abortion is 15 weeks, I gotta ask why not 16?

[TSherbs]

Not this thread, Chuck.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[TSherbs]

It was Chip's "nyah, nyah, doodie-head" insult that I was commenting on. If you guys want to insult each other, at least demonstrate some craft when doing so.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]Challenge accepted.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Lloyd]

It was Chip's "nyah, nyah, doodie-head" insult that I was commenting on. If you guys want to insult each other, at least demonstrate some craft when doing so.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect[emoji769]Challenge accepted.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk
Insulting can be an art, you know...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSo0duY7-9s

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[Chip]

It was Chip's "nyah, nyah, doodie-head" insult that I was commenting on. If you guys want to insult each other, at least demonstrate some craft when doing so.

Craft? I didn't say nyah, nyah, etc. You did. If you're going to repeat my insults, at least be accurate.

[Lloyd]

It was Chip's "nyah, nyah, doodie-head" insult that I was commenting on. If you guys want to insult each other, at least demonstrate some craft when doing so.

Craft? I didn't say nyah, nyah, etc. You did. If you're going to repeat my insults, at least be accurate.
I couldn't bring myself to reiterate your playground insult.... my line was just a representative example from the same level of repartee.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[Chip]

As my old Da used to say, I reckon you're farting about six inches higher than your arse. :dirol:

[Chip]

https://i.imgur.com/DL3DYWz.jpg
—Liana Finck

[Chuck Naill]

As my old Da used to say, I reckon you're farting about six inches higher than your arse. :dirol:

Colostomy/Stoma gas I suspect.

[Chip]

You really are a dolt.

[TFarnon]

Ex.act.ly. The play isn't stopped except for players who are bleeding a lot. Not just a little--a lot. Otherwise the medics run out there and haul the injured off if that's what's needed, with play swirling around them on the field.

[Niner]

If he's praying after the game (for forgiveness?) I won't stand in his way.

Let him sacrifice black chickens or whatever his so-called religion dictates.

Why is his religion merely so-called?

[Chip]

He calls it religion.

I call it delusion.

[Niner]

Does a Muslim coach have the right to kill a goat on the 50 yard line for Bakhri Eid?

Hmmmm. . .
False equivalency, as the coach wasn't preforming baptisms or laying on hands. One might reasonably ask "Does a Moslem coach have the right to similarly pray." But perhaps you posted facetiously.

[Chip]

Given the recent scandals involving coaches, Larry Nassar et al., we could start a thread about Coaches Preying. . .

[Niner]

I do appreciate a pithy pun done well.

[Chip]

I do appreciate a pithy pun done well.

Oscar Wilde once boasted that he could make a pun on any subject.

Someone called out "The Queen!"

"Ah," replied Wilde, "but the Queen is not a subject."

[Niner]

Hilarious.