Exactly right. But the feelings of others, with no factual support, should not override one’s freedom to practice one’s religion.
Lines are blurry. But freedoms of religion is an expensive and expansive freedoms we have granted. Facts which lawfully chill that freedom have to be narrow, discreet and rationally based. This case is a close call, and in my opinion (and based on press reports and without having read the actual facts, to be candid), the coach did nothing wrong by exercising his freedom.
@mdgator05 ’s point is the correct one. You, as a private citizen, have every right to react to Disney’s actions by punishing them in the form of refusing to further consume their products or other protests. Ron DeSantis has the same right, as a private citizen. What DeSantis cannot do is to wield the power of the state to do this punishing. And yes, selectively revoking a special privilege is a punishment because that action would not have happened without Disney’s CEO speaking out.
Freedom FROM religion is also a right. You're prioritizing the freedom OF religion of a person who CHOOSES to be a government employee above the freedom FROM religion of children attending public schools. I don't think that's a persuasive stance. A government employee does not have the right to impose their religious beliefs on others during the course of their job. In fact, let me offer a hypothetical. A gay couple go to the clerk's office to apply for a marriage license. The deputy clerk before handing them a license application, bows her head, and loudly prays for God to forgive the couple for their sinful relationship and to bring them back into his grace by stopping this abomination of a marriage. The deputy clerk then hands the couple the application. The county hears what happened and fires the clerk. Do you think the clerk has a valid claim under the Free Exercise Clause?
You have mentioned that they have to RESPECT Florida several times. I don't think that respect is in the state or US constitution anywhere. Did people or other entities HAVE to respect Trump, Obama, Biden or Bush? The answer is no. As long as Disney was following the rules in their Interlocal Agreement for that special district they can do whatever they want. Having said that, I also think Disney should have kept their mouth shut and maybe work behind the scenes to express what they want.
I do not, because it is done within the performance of the clerk’s duties. It’s not a close call. The coach here, if the press is accurate, was not coaching when he prayed. I think your analogy should be: Is it ok for a clerk, during his lunch hour, to pray for the lost souls who he provided licenses to that morning. Would you agree that the clerk has a right to pray during his lunch hour?
I thought what Q was talking about was the irony of Disney doing business in China using cheap Chinese labor where people have no free speech but using our 1st amendment to say something in this country that other countries in the world would not allow. It has no bearing on Desantis's actions but it is a bit disingenuous on Disney's part to basically hide their thoughts in some countries but not others.
This was also done while the coach was on the job and performing his duties. He went out to the 50 yard line and made a public spectacle of praying IMMEDIATELY following the game. A high school coach's duties don't end when the final whistle blows. Anybody who has played or coached football will tell you that. The coach can't just walk off the field, head to his car, and drive home as soon as the clock hits 0:00 in the 4th quarter. The school offered him accommodations so that he could pray privately. He rejected them. And yes, I would agree that the clerk can pray privately during her lunch hour.
Speak, not legislate (incorrectly at that) against out of a fit of rage. That is where you are wrong.
He certainly has the right to determine who is going to get special privileges. Disney can speak. The State of Florida can speak. He is not violating Disney's rights. If this was deal all corporations had and were afforded under the Constitution...I would agree with you.
When I say that...my point is there are consequences for speech when you are getting favors. There is an expectation of respect that comes when two sides are working together. And the State of Florida was affording Disney privileges others did not have. With that will come some expectations of respect. Same with private dealings. Respect is not in the constitution. But neither is the right to special privileges.
Florida can legislate privileges to entities. And Florida can legislate away privileges from entities.
Guyz. Take these new drugs if you want. The virus is going to speak. The data about the drugs speaks. The best defense against the virus is not the new drugs, it’s to be healthy. The body speaks. Oh sh… wrong thread.
But if the “special privilege” involved contracts with specific terms of engagement, it actually isn’t as simple as “legislating it away”. Rule of law and all that…
No it can not when contractual bonds are involved. SCOTUS precedent is on Disney's side (1866 Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy) which held that once local government issues a bond based on authorized taxing power, the state in contract bound and can not eliminate the taxing power. Also, there is great protection for bonds created by the government in the Florida Constitution which would render Desantis's temper tantrum legislation moot. Or do you not agree with the Florida Constitution? The Florida Supreme Court in 1967 also upheld the original Reedy agreement after being challenged. Either way, you're still wrong. And it's pretty much true because Reedy has said it will run as normal because of the constitutional protections it has. But continue to believe your opinions as fact....
