The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Bremerton High School was justified in punishing their football coach for taking a knee in silent prayer on the football team after a game. The Washington State high school coach, Joe Kennedy, walked onto midfield after the football game and took a knee for a prayer after the game. This comes after the school warned Kennedy to refrain from bowing his head, taking a knee, or doing anything that would be perceived as praying on the school’s property.
The U.S. 9th Circuit wrote,
“When Kennedy kneeled and prayed on the fifty-yard line immediately after games while in view of students and parents, he spoke as a public employee, not as a private citizen, and his speech therefore was constitutionally unprotected.”
This ruling comes at an interesting time as some schools have allowed entire football teams including their coaches to take a knee in protest during the national anthem. Fox Q13 reported on September 16th, 2016 that the coaches and football team of Garfield High School in Washington State took a knee during the national anthem. Whether you believe it is honorable or not to the millions of Americans who have served and died for the nation, it does not matter in regards to the rights that those coaches and individuals have to take the knee. Under the First Amendment, an individual should have the right to kneel in protest. This should be equally applicable in regards to taking a knee in prayer as the First Amendment limits the government from preventing people from practicing their religion.
Twisted Progressive Agenda
Interestingly enough, the Supreme Court ruling that those who reject the true interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, always cite in matters of prayer in the public forum a ruling that was delivered by a Catholicism hating, white supremacist named Hugo Black. This is ironic as the nation is embroiled in a mainstream media invoked racial firestorm that is supporting people like former San Francisco 49er quarterback, Colin Kaepernick who is using the NFL as a political platform to push a Progressive pro-socialist class-warfare message into the main stream while torpedoing his lack luster career.
In 1937, Progressive President, Franklin D Roosevelt, nominated former KKK member, Hugo Black, to the United States Supreme Court. This would change the way the First Amendment was view by the courts. Black is most known for his support of the internment of Japanese-Americans as he supported Korematsu v. U.S. in 1944, as well as Everson v. Board of Education in 1947. In Everson v. Board of Education, the court ruled that our founders drafted the U.S. Constitution with a firm “separation of church and state” in mind while there is no language in our founding documents that mention a separation.
Everson v. Board of Education was a case brought to the court by a New Jersey taxpayer who believed that the state government should not be reimbursing the parents of private religious school students who rode public transportation to private school. Hugo Black, along with others, cited a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association as evidence of our founder's view of a wall of separation between the church and the state. Jefferson wrote:
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
This, of course, has been taken clearly out of context, as Jefferson’s candid remarks about this wall of separation were not embodied in the Constitution by the founders.
The First Amendment states:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
In regards to religion, it is crystal clear that the First Amendment restricts the government from establishing a religion for the people, as well as restricting the government from prohibiting an individual from the free exercise of religion under the law. Instead, Hugo Black and the court ruled that no function of the government paid by taxpayer dollars could participate in supporting activities associated with the practice of a religion.
Since Joe Kennedy is a public servant, his paycheck from the government strips him of his right to participate in his religion while he is on the clock. This is not what the founders intended. Our founders began a tradition that exists today where a prayer was orated in Congress. This alone should have nullified any argument of this fictitious notion that no resemblance of religion should exist within the reach of government-funded functions. The most important thing to remember is that our purpose as a nation as outlined in the Declaration of Independence is built entirely on the foundation that our rights are endowed by a creator. Remove the creator and the question to be asked is where do our rights come from? Do they come from government?
Our nation has been turned upside down by secular humanists who wish to extinguish any remnant of our history. Moreover, they wish to extinguish the founding principle that our government is restricted to simply protecting the rights of the individual American citizen. Instead, they wish the government or the state to be the arbiter of rights based on grievances of the oppressed embroiled in a class struggle that the government, itself, created.
It is time we stop rejecting our history and renew the efforts into explaining why our history exists in context.
There is no doubt that the people who have decided that America is responsible for their inadequacies are the beneficiaries of the rights endowed to them by God and that have been thus for protected by a constitutional system designed by imperfect men. They exercise the freedoms that many Americans have served and died for under the same flag that they reject. Instead of taking a knee and reflecting on the rights they have been afforded, they bend a knee to pray to the state that works to take those rights away.