NFL Religious Discrimination

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
You have explored that exhaustively with all participants, and precisely NONE agree with you. But you are not required to answer any questions, mine or anyone else's. Seems a rather anti-social way to behave in a chatroom, but hey ...

Actually some people have agreed with me, including the guy who disagreed with me until he saw the mike pereria video and then changed with mind.

Regardless, whether people agree with me or not is not important. Whether they can prove my point wrong is what's important, and to date precisely NONE have been able to do that.
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
And I thank you for pointing this out to me. About all I know about your part of the world is that there is a kiwi in my fridge ^_^ I literally didn't mouse over your flag til Keith pointed it out, I just thought it was Oz

Why is NZ called the land of the long white cloud?

their flag has an extra star under the union jack that ours does not. otherwise exactly identical.

The Maori name for New Zealand is 'Aotearoa', which is commonly translated into the exact phrase 'land of the long, white cloud', although other translations are also possible. The exact origin of the phrase is unknown, but polynesians used cloud formations to spot land when they navigated, and also NZ is a sub-tropical climate that gets a lot of rain, and literally has a lot of clouds, so it is a pretty fitting name however it came about.
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
Ok, I get it. I get it. Because the NFL banning Tebow's John 3:16 eyeblack isn't anti-Christian enough for some of you, you want to liken someone calmly and quietly taking a knee to thank God to getting down on one knee and pretending to rope someone like a calf in a rodeo...

Do you comprehend the concept of a "celebration" or the real concern, "taunting"?

To summarize - mocking your opponent as "celebration" = bad.

Quietly celebrating God's grace in your life = good.

Not that I like the NFL's celebration rules. I rather agree with the general position that the NFL should just lighten up on it in general, but trying to compare a prayer to a "taunting" is pretty insipid.

All done here. I rather doubted there was any real comprehension of the actual rule behind this.

Taunting is a different rule, and taunting is not allowed. IE, you can spike the ball after a TD, but if you spike it in the direction of an opposing player then that is considered 'taunting', and you will be penalised. Likewise, if you celebrate on your feet, but in a way the official considers to be taunting, you will be flagged.

I agree sometimes the line between 'celebration' and 'taunting' is sometimes blurry, but that is not really the issue here.

The issue is this. If an atheist wanted to quietly give thanks to his family for all of their input in his life, and his knee touched the ground that is not allowed. If a muslim wanted to quietly give thanks to his god by pressing their forehead to the ground while kneeling that is not allowed. If a polynesian player wanted to give thanks to their ancestors and/or gods by peforming part of a haka (or equivalent) in which their knee touched the ground that would not be allowed.

When you start to allow certain actions just because of religion, then you are giving preferential treatment to some religions and discriminating against those with different religions, or no religions at all.

And banning tebows john (stone cold) 3:16 isn't anti christian. The rule is blanket for anything being written, regardless of religious content. That's how employers should be using rules. The same rule applies to everyone, regardless of religious meanings or not. If a player wanted to write 'there is no god' or 'praise allah' you could equally call the rule 'anti-atheist' or 'anti-muslim'.

pretty weak to just come into a thread, have a rant and then say you are done, lol. nice 'discussion'. and apparently my understanding is good enough to know that taunting is a different rule, and not the one under discussion here.

edit : and jared allens cow rope wasn't ruled illegal bevcause it is taunting ... because he's still allowed to do it. it was ruled to not be exempt from the rule banning your knee from touching the ground, which therefore means they ruled it is not religious/prayer and that's why he got the letter.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
pretty weak to just come into a thread, have a rant and then say you are done, lol. nice 'discussion'. and apparently my understanding is good enough to know that taunting is a different rule, and not the one under discussion here.

You are missing the history, the relevant law and it's actual interpretation, as well as the intent of the NFL rule. This has been established by poster after poster but the bottom line is, it's an odd quirk. If the NFL commissioner chose to change it, it would be changed. (And while I'm not sure, I don't think the "top referee" would have any say at all in the process)
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
You are missing the history, the relevant law and it's actual interpretation, as well as the intent of the NFL rule. This has been established by poster after poster but the bottom line is, it's an odd quirk. If the NFL commissioner chose to change it, it would be changed. (And while I'm not sure, I don't think the "top referee" would have any say at all in the process)

None of that changes the fact that the interpretation and application of this rule today is religious discrimination, something that 'poster and poster' has not been able to refute.

Feel free to call it an 'odd quirk' if you wish, perhaps that is just what it is. However, if it is an 'odd quirk' that is religious discrimination, then it should be changed, should it not?
 
Upvote 0

Skaloop

Agnostic atheist, pro-choice anti-abortion
May 10, 2006
16,332
899
47
Burnaby
Visit site
✟29,046.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-NDP
once again ... whether or not I have a remedy, why I care about this issue and who else might care about it are all irrelevant to the issue of whether this is religious discrimination or not. the truth is not a popularity contest.

And until we get agreement on that issue, I don't see the point in discussing other side issues.

You have explored that exhaustively with all participants, and precisely NONE agree with you. But you are not required to answer any questions, mine or anyone else's. Seems a rather anti-social way to behave in a chatroom, but hey ...

So you think the truth is a popularity contest?

Way to keep up with the dialog. Not.

The issue was whether the truth is a popularity contest. He claimed it isn't and unless there was agreement on that, he saw no point in discussion. You replied saying that nobody agrees with him. Which means everyone else (including you) thinks the truth is a popularity contest.

That's what you said, right up there. Do you rescind your statement that there are none who agree with him on the issue of the truth not being a popularity contest?

Also, I agree with him for the most part. So you can drop the idea that none agree with him. Although I probably get labelled an ignorant Canadian atheist who cannot speak to American or NFL or Christian culture.
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
And tonight, we saw the perfect example. Abdullah of Kansas City was penalised for performing a traditional muslim prayer following his interception touchdown (2 knees on ground, forehead pressed to the earth), yet the traditional prayer of *some* christian churches of one knee on the ground is allowed.

Religious discrimination much? Only in 'Murica huh?
 
Upvote 0

ranunculus

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2008
898
575
✟270,730.00
Country
Luxembourg
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
And tonight, we saw the perfect example. Abdullah of Kansas City was penalised for performing a traditional muslim prayer following his interception touchdown (2 knees on ground, forehead pressed to the earth), yet the traditional prayer of *some* christian churches of one knee on the ground is allowed.

Religious discrimination much? Only in 'Murica huh?

wdhpptddnsfyivccdkdg.gif


They said it was the slide
Referees flag Chiefs safety Husain Abdullah for celebration penalty after slide and prayer in endzone | The Kansas City Star
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,796
✟247,431.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The "class of activity" allowed is *religious practices*, which Jared's is not.

... which he doesn't and won't, so this is irrelevant.

The religious allowance law has been in place since 1964. This supposed chaos you describe hasn't happened yet. Nearly 50 years now. Why should it be realistic to think it will happen *this* time??

What if Allen claimed his celebration was indeed a religious practice? Would it then be allowed in your book?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lost Angel

מָ֫וֶת
Apr 1, 2013
715
23
✟15,969.00
Faith
Agnostic
In the NFL, a player may not leave his feet in celebration of a touchdown or a big play. IE no other body part may touch the ground. EXCEPT, if you wish to pray then your knee may touch the ground. However, other celebrations that involve the knee touching the ground are not allowed. Jared Allen of the Vikings was told that his traditional 'calf roping' celebration of a sack was not allowed and he would be penalised 15 yards and received a fine.

However, as an employer, the NFL is required by american law to treat all employees equally with regards to religion.

"Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of l964 ("Title VII") prohibits employers, except religious organizations 3 4 5, from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. Title VII also requires employers to reasonably accommodate the religious practices of an employee or prospective employee, unless to do so would create an undue hardship upon the employer. This means that:

[*]Employers may not treat employees more or less favorably because of their religion.
[*]Employees cannot be required to participate"or to refrain from participating"in a religious activity as a condition of employment.
[*]Employers must reasonably accommodate employees' sincerely held religious practices unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the employer.
[*]Employers must take steps to prevent religious harassment of their employees.
[*]Employers may not retaliate against employees for asserting rights under Title VII."
So in this case it seems clear to me that the NFL is not treating it's employees equally. It is allowing one behaviour for religious people that it is banning (and fining) for others.

Either everyone should be allowed to go on to one knee, or no one should be allowed to go on one knee. You can't discriminate because of religion (or lack thereof).

right?

As an outsider, I believe it is inappropriate, unsporting, and vain to do any of this stuff on the field.
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,889
6,561
71
✟321,245.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
As an ex lineman who has scored far more than his share of touchdowns from that position I was a bit upset to see a play that shows how I would fare.

Wasn't a lineman, but it was a very long run, and not just an outsprint but with cuts and broken tackles on a turnover.

After the score the player went to both knees and then head also to the ground. One could interpret it as either prayer or exhaustion.

Yup flagged.
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist

'They' being the player and coach. What the officials said over the pa at the time was that he was penalized for going to the ground on TWO knees. The NFL have been very clear in the past that touching one knee to the ground in prayer is the only exception to the rule. That stance discriminates against both the religious and the non-religious and is unacceptable in a supposedly modern, secular society.
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
As an ex lineman who has scored far more than his share of touchdowns from that position I was a bit upset to see a play that shows how I would fare.

Wasn't a lineman, but it was a very long run, and not just an outsprint but with cuts and broken tackles on a turnover.

After the score the player went to both knees and then head also to the ground. One could interpret it as either prayer or exhaustion.

Yup flagged.

At the time it seemed obvious to me it was prayer and the player confirmed it after the game.

'Yup flagged' means you are ok with discrimination? The attitude from many American christians seems to be that they are ok with discrimination .. As long as it is against groups they dislike, such as Muslims and atheists.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,889
6,561
71
✟321,245.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
At the time it seemed obvious to me it was prayer and the player confirmed it after the game.

'Yup flagged' means you are ok with discrimination? The attitude from many American christians seems to be that they are ok with discrimination .. As long as it is against groups they dislike, such as Muslims and atheists.

I'm hardly Ok with it, especially in that instance.

Well perhaps a bit Ok in this instance, but for a totally different reason. Kansas City was killing New England. In that situation it is best for officials to be hard on KC on any borderline call and hard on either team on any late hits or taunting calls.
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,796
✟247,431.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

In general, the NFL has been getting into it's own way in regards to increasing penalties for all sorts of new infractions.

I watched one NFL game this weekend, where you could have sworn the refs turned the game into flag football. It is getting to be a bit of a joke.

No other league stops players from celebrating scores and the NFL shouldn't either. The players themselves, will police those who embarrass others when they perform celebrations over the top, just as you see in other sports.
 
Upvote 0

Skaloop

Agnostic atheist, pro-choice anti-abortion
May 10, 2006
16,332
899
47
Burnaby
Visit site
✟29,046.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-NDP
In general, the NFL has been getting into it's own way in regards to increasing penalties for all sorts of new infractions.

I watched one NFL game this weekend, where you could have sworn the refs turned the game into flag football. It is getting to be a bit of a joke.

No other league stops players from celebrating scores and the NFL shouldn't either. The players themselves, will police those who embarrass others when they perform celebrations over the top, just as you see in other sports.

Police how, and by whom? Do you mean teammates giving him a stern talk in the locker room? Or do you mean opponents taking some liberties when tackling him?

And most leagues do regulate celebrations. Perhaps not to the same degree as the NFL, but a hockey player who makes a throat-slashing gesture after scoring a goal will likely be penalized and/or fined (for example).
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
22,889
6,561
71
✟321,245.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
In general, the NFL has been getting into it's own way in regards to increasing penalties for all sorts of new infractions.

I watched one NFL game this weekend, where you could have sworn the refs turned the game into flag football. It is getting to be a bit of a joke.

No other league stops players from celebrating scores and the NFL shouldn't either. The players themselves, will police those who embarrass others when they perform celebrations over the top, just as you see in other sports.

I'm pretty sure the NHL has rules related to celebrations. NBA covers that under technical fouls and they can be called. NBA has the advantage that play does not stop after a score so celebrate away while the other team scores.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,266
20,267
US
✟1,474,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
In general, the NFL has been getting into it's own way in regards to increasing penalties for all sorts of new infractions.

I watched one NFL game this weekend, where you could have sworn the refs turned the game into flag football. It is getting to be a bit of a joke.

No other league stops players from celebrating scores and the NFL shouldn't either. The players themselves, will police those who embarrass others when they perform celebrations over the top, just as you see in other sports.

Why should the NFL's rulemaking authority be limited to what other entirely different sports are doing?
 
Upvote 0