He criticized a Supreme Court ruling that was likely to prove that a high school football coach could pray during a game, which the magazine called the move “subversive” as a fundamental tenet of American democracy.
Writing for the magazine, Greg Bishop falsely claimed that the expression of religious ideas in government-sponsored schools violated the concept of “separation of church and state.” However, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld some religious expression in schools, and it goes without saying that religious assaults in schools are a modern trend that has so far accounted for a small proportion of court cases.
The case was referred to SCOTUS by Bremerton High School assistant coach Joe Kennedy, who was disciplined by the school district in 2015 for praying on the field with his players.
Writer Bishop described this event as follows:
However, it is likely that the coach is not in this legal theater. He was aimless for most of his 53-year life. It hasn’t been religious for decades, and it’s not openly even now. He had never followed football so closely. But now he is in the middle of a seven-year legal battle that started with this covenant to pray after every game. It escalated into a debate, then a circus, and then a case that focused on the First Amendment and its provisions. It ended in a political war. It has become a culture war club. And it was successful in the court system until case #21-418 was filed for trial in the United States Supreme Court.
In character, while Bishop described the “feel” of this cause, he defined the issue only from the left, the anti-religious side of the issue, and called Christians “white nationalists” and “Christian nationalists” seeking to destroy America’s democracy. In the “Betting” section, Bishop did not once mention the side that supported Kennedy’s right to pray on the school property. Instead, he simply referred to those who wanted to end Kennedy’s religious freedoms.
Bremerton coach Joe Kennedy led the team in prayer (via AP Meagan M. Reed/Kitsap Sun)
At the end of the story, Bishop finally tells readers about First Liberty, the group that represents Kennedy. up to the point, but doesn’t give them many direct quotes, just summarizes their ideas and words. And nowhere in this story Bishop mentions any case that could support the coach’s free speech on religion.
However, at the time of the lawsuit’s opening, there were many precedents that supported Coach Kennedy’s right to pray during the game. For example, as can be seen on pages 24 through 41 of the official whitepaper, the United States Supreme Court has often ruled in favor of teachers and school workers who have the right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion while in office. And because Coach Kennedy’s prayer is not coercive (that is, he does not want students to participate) or is not approved by the school, his prayer is not a school-approved religion.
However, the main point of Bishop’s article seems to be to downplay the importance of Coach Kennedy. Throughout the play, Bishop continues to describe Kennedy as “aimless”, clumsy and struggling to find meaning in his life, and as such the coach describes him as a nothing whose sudden fame from the case has turned into a men’s joke. . As if any history of Kennedy’s life had anything to do with the case that brought him to the Supreme Court.
What would have happened if Kennedy had not been religious for most of his life? Why is it so important that Kennedy wasn’t a football coach his entire life? What difference does it make if his prayer is calculated or impulsive? What is the significance of the date of marriage? None of that mattered in this case, but Bishop piled up paragraphs in this long article, quickly tearing the man apart and downplaying his presence as if everything mattered. What is clear is that Bishop is trying to undermine the readers of this case by portraying Kennedy as an unlucky clown who doesn’t deserve to be the center of attention on an important case.
The bishop’s disdain for Coach Kennedy comes out of this article and is best revealed in one of the last paragraphs of this defamatory work:
Does Kennedy know? Doesn’t care? Or did he evolve to become a “hero” with such a great purpose? Perhaps the political workers standing next to you have found the perfect target, someone looking for a call, a big stage. While groups fighting for their own goals joined him, they gave him the greatest theater imaginable – the Supreme Court – to further their plans. After all, football never impressed Kennedy, and so did faith until recently. But this faith and football legend is like Kennedy’s own Christian football movie. He is a hero. He won and is on his side for everyone.
Bishop’s latest attack made it clear that he views Coach Kennedy as a selfish puppet with no mental or emotional capacity to be the focus of this important goal. And therefore, the lawsuit itself was against the law, because the coach did not like it.
Throughout the story, Bishop also attacks the evil conservatives who “fill the courts” and undermine democracy.
In another part of this long defamatory article, Bishop responded with concern to the fact that during the Reagan years conservatives had begun to “systematically fill the courts with judges who did not really believe in discrimination.”
It fails to point out that this trend, which began in the 1980s, is not a conspiracy all born but a backlash against left-wing judges who have for decades made decisions that have undermined the US Constitution, American traditions, and social order. stability. . More than once, the Conservatives involuntarily waved their hands and decided to “fill the courts with like-minded activist judges.” This movement was born after decades of left-wing judicial activism.
This article is nothing but a lengthy slander on a personal level against Christians, conservatives and whites in general and Coach Kennedy in particular.
Source: Breitbart
