ACLU to sue Clemson football and Tommy Bowden

[Bucs90]

Charleston, SC newspaper Post and Courier reporting-

The South Carolina chapter of the ACLU is going to sue Clemson and football coach Tommy Bowden over his "Church Day". Bowden picks one day a year and takes his football team to a selected church of his choice. It is a voluntary event, but the entire team goes. Bowden is a Christian, just like is dad Bobby. No South Carolina residents objected. No Clemson alumni or players objected.

But the ACLU is going to sue. The ACLU SC chapter rep said they wanted to keep the issue private to not make Clemson look "bad", but the story leaked. The ACLU said it is forced religion, and Clemson being a state school they cannot do it. Bowden said he's always done this. I believe most football coaches do this.

Two thoughts: Football is a voluntary activity. If a player doesn't like it, they dont' have to accept the scholarship. The Church Day is voluntary, but all the players go anyway to build team unity. What is the ACLU's problem? The fact that good men are going to church as a team?

Second, I got a feeling if a Coach Mohammed at Muslim State University took his football team to a mosque, the ACLU would praise it as "promoting diversity".

[Bucs90]

http://greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071129/NEWS01/711290310/1002/rss02

[CJHawkeyes]

The ACLU would sue if a Muslim coach did the same thing. The "voluntary" aspect is nonsense. A player could feel that they could suffer some time of backlash by not going along with Church day. There is more than ample evidence of religionists using religion to force people to conform.

[Bucs90]

I seriously don't agree. What if Tommy Bowden strongly urged his players to attend a voluntary team visit to a mosque, and labeled it "diversity day". The ACLU would celebrate it like Christman, oh, I mean, Winter Day (don't want to get sued by the ACLU for promoting Christianity).

The team trip Bowden had was voluntary, but you are right, if the head football coach urged attendance, there was peer pressure to go.

But at the same time, the football players are on that team as a voluntary, extra-curricular activity. They can quit the football team at any team. It is only a club, really.

If the Clemson school president did this, maybe they would have a point as a public school urging it's students to go would be violating seperation of church and state. But seriously, the the ACLU whackos heard a coach, lets say he is a black coach who has converted to Islam, urged his team to go to a mosque for a voluntary visit, and called it "diversity promotion", the ACLU wouldnt' make even a whisper about it.

[CJHawkeyes]

I seriously don't agree. What if Tommy Bowden strongly urged his players to attend a voluntary team visit to a mosque, and labeled it "diversity day". The ACLU would celebrate it like Christman, oh, I mean, Winter Day (don't want to get sued by the ACLU for promoting Christianity).

The team trip Bowden had was voluntary, but you are right, if the head football coach urged attendance, there was peer pressure to go.

But at the same time, the football players are on that team as a voluntary, extra-curricular activity. They can quit the football team at any team. It is only a club, really.

If the Clemson school president did this, maybe they would have a point as a public school urging it's students to go would be violating seperation of church and state. But seriously, the the ACLU whackos heard a coach, lets say he is a black coach who has converted to Islam, urged his team to go to a mosque for a voluntary visit, and called it "diversity promotion", the ACLU wouldnt' make even a whisper about it.

Your Muslim analogy is not true. The reason there are so many cases involving Christians is because some Christians seem to think they are entitled to use their positions of authority to promote their brand of religion due the misguided idea that the majority can do as it pleases. Furthermore, no player should be placed in the position of quitting or attending a "voluntary" team event. It doesn't matter if Bowden would never use it against a player that doesn't attend, a player may still feel that he is expected attend. And if this is allowed, some coach somewhere will use it against a player and than you will have players suing that school on the basis of relgious discrimination. Also, players could be outed to teammates as non-members of the majority religion and be ostracized that way. Bottom line is that Bowden is a coach. It is not his job to promote or suggest his players attend church and his players are old enough to know that they can find one if it is important enough to do.

[ZOOMBAG]

As much as I hate the ACLU, and I do believe they are the single most anti-American "mainstream" organization in existence, a person in a leadership position at any public institution simply cannot do this sort of thing. Church or really any other "extra-curricular" thing. These players have such little personal time anyway between classes and practice they need to just be left alone when not on "official duty". Kids will feel pressured to "belong" in these sorts of things, not matter how well meaning or how "voluntary" these are.

So anyone else think off-season "voluntary" workouts are really voluntary???

[Bucs90]

I may be very wrong, because I don't know for a fact, but taking a team to church for a day during football camp is a very common practice, at least in the South. I see no problem with it, but I also believe America is becoming WAY to sensitive. I think if you polled Clemson football players and asked how many were offended by the church trip, it would be 100% none.

[CJHawkeyes]

I may be very wrong, because I don't know for a fact, but taking a team to church for a day during football camp is a very common practice, at least in the South. I see no problem with it, but I also believe America is becoming WAY to sensitive. I think if you polled Clemson football players and asked how many were offended by the church trip, it would be 100% none.

Of course, you see no problem with it. The majority never sees a problem with their own abusing rules that they would be the first to complain about if they were on the short end of the stick. And because the South gets away with it all the time means that its okay?

[ZOOMBAG]

Bowden is a football coach not a minister. If he wants to evangelize and preach he needs to resign and go to the Seminary and get ordained. Then he can take all the football players to church he can get to go with him. Otherwise, stick to football and find something secular for team bonding. Take them bowling or something.

[Jim]

The ACLU would sue if a Muslim coach did the same thing. The "voluntary" aspect is nonsense. A player could feel that they could suffer some time of backlash by not going along with Church day. There is more than ample evidence of religionists using religion to force people to conform.

I think if anybody brought up a stink about bringing players to a mosque then the ACLU would probably be selected (or perhaps even volunteer) to represent the coach who brought his players forceably to a mosque. Just look at the educational system today where Christians can't advertise the fact while they have diversity week where Islam dress and discussions are encouraged - might even be mandatory while on school grounds.

[ZOOMBAG]

Well the Supreme court has already ruled that "diversity" is NOT of enough value, by itself, to trump fairness in admissions at colleges, so at least the court has come down on the side of sanity and reason against the ALCU which seldom display any rationality or judgement at all.

The bottom line is that this IS a JUDEO-CHRISTION country, period and the traditions of that ethic should be protected at all costs, even in the face of mostly useless "diversity". This is the most diverse nation on earth and we all live together better than any other country on earth. We don't need the ACLU to enforce more of it on us or destroy our national traditions. But we do need to protect young individuals from being coerced to do things they find uncomfortable that are completely outside the realm of the activity they are engaged in.

Balance. We simply need reasonable balances in all things.

[CJHawkeyes]

I think if anybody brought up a stink about bringing players to a mosque then the ACLU would probably be selected (or perhaps even volunteer) to represent the coach who brought his players forceably to a mosque. Just look at the educational system today where Christians can't advertise the fact while they have diversity week where Islam dress and discussions are encouraged - might even be mandatory while on school grounds.

I kind of wish I hadn't inserted myself into this debate as I usually avoid political and religious debates. That said, most ACLU cases have Christian plantiffs that object to other Christians doing similar things as Bowden. I remember a story about a Christian family that had its house burned down after it was learned they had objected to officials at the local school promoting religion. More often than not, the ACLU takes cases when someone directly affected has complained. Therefore, Bucs90's assertion that no one has complained in SC may be false. That said, I think there is a difference between educationing people about other religions as opposed to promoting a specific religion. Of course, the difference may amount to semantics or create a slippery slope. However, the fact that some think the ACLU would not take similar action where Islam is concerned strongly suggests to me that that person would be bothered by a Muslim coach doing what they think a Christian coach should be able to do. After all, its about team unity.:rolleyes: Seems like the smart thing to do is let everyone take care of their religious needs on their own time.