 Welcome to the Knuckleheads of Liberty. Potentially a separation of church and state a little bit here. So essentially there was a football coach who was praying after games on the field. And he was, and so it was voluntary. He wasn't forcing any players to do it, but he would just sort of go out in his own at the end of the game, take a knee, and just sort of pray silently to himself, I guess. And so I guess a lot of other players started doing it with him. And the school then got upset about it, and so they fired him for it. And so he wound up taking this all the way to the Supreme Court. And this Supreme Court came down on his side saying that, you know, it's his free speech. You know, he were seeing anybody to do anything religious. He was just sort of praying on his own. And the intent of the separation of church and state was that it simply not be to penalize people who wanted to practice their religion, but simply to, you know, not have religion encroach in the government. So what do you guys think about this case? It's kind of an interesting case. It seems like there's some possible things that could fall out of this, you know, in the future as well. So yeah, yeah, why don't you guys jump in on this? Well, I think over the years the meaning of the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution have been grossly distorted because the religion in all forms, any any encroachment of religion into the into the public space where government authorities are involved. In this case is a school district. It was interpreted to mean that no, there's always that separation there always should be the separation. But in the intent of the establishment clause was to prevent and to prohibit the government from advocating for a particular religion. So for instance, they can't say, well, we only want the Catholics in this space. We only want the Anglicans in this space or the Muslims in this space or whatever. The government cannot the government has to be totally neutral on the on the on in the terms of the advocate application of religion. But what have happened over the years is that every form of religion expression have been treated as a violation of the establishment clause. And what the court is trying to say that is incorrect. Okay. In this particular case, the coach, I think he was an assistant coach actually was not forcing anybody. And as a matter of fact, the school district, which is the government authority here was not even supporting him in this endeavor. So this coach was not forcing anyone anyone to join him in this thing. He will go on the field on the 50 on the 50 yard line and some of his players will join him and they would pray and that kind of stuff. It was not the government trying to advocate for the establishment of any religion. So the court said the guy was right. He had a free speech right to advocate for whatever you want to pray to whichever God he wants to pray for and all that kind of stuff. And I think it was a sensible ruling. It doesn't mean every expression of religion in a public space as in terms of like a school or somewhere. Every advocate, a vocation of religion in those spaces and not violations of the establishment clause because we still have free speech rights. Yeah, I think it was good ruling too. That was good explanation to Leon that I thought you did just now. Appreciate that. And yeah, I think the left just hates religion. Yes, we know. Is that a true statement. Absolutely. Secular religion that they love. Exactly. For example, I mean, they, they want to be able to establish the rigid religion of sex in schools. They want to make that the religion that they're going to teach your little Johnny and little Mary about, and they're going to make sure that they have the right attitude about all aspects of the human sexual experience embedded in their tiny little brains at the age of five and six and seven years of age. So they want that religion embedded in the skulls full of mush, but they didn't, but they don't want anything else, especially, you know, all this nonsense about Jesus Christ or anything like that, you know, forget about that. You can do. But, but I mean, in this case, it was clearly not the establishment of a particular religion by a government entity of any kind is a stupid football coach playing, praying after the game. Nobody was apparently even necessarily invited, but he went out there and they, you know, the players who wanted to followed and those that wanted to continue to to worship the sex God would were able to stay off to the side. They worship the sex God, you know, I don't know. They have their dildos out there or something. I'm not sure. So, so I don't know that it's a good rolling next. Is the sex God goddess Christina Aguilera. I think she did a dance recently featured something like that. Before we leave this, before we leave this topic, there was another ruling by the court that has to do with school choice and another issue of religion. So I believe it's main they had a sort of school choice program, but one of the things that they did that they forbid the for using the same logic about the establishment clause and whatever and that kind of stuff. They prohibited religious schools from participating in the program is the vouchers or whatever it is or distributed could not be used in in religious schools schools with religious backgrounds and the court ruled against against against the state of main on that particular issue, they did not validate the establishment clause. The money was going to give or however the program was going to be administered, but it was the parents making the choice as to where they wanted to send the train. And that was an important factor is not a government was telling somebody they had to go somewhere or you have to go listen to this person or anything like that. The parents are making a choice and the court said that the establishment course was not violated by by the parents making the choice and sending the kids to a religious school if they so choose. Leon was was this scotis or a federal court. I just curious. Before before this one we are speaking about. You know, it's a slightly different I'm completely with you on the whole main thing that one you just brought up on this particular one. I just a tiny bit of pushback and that's it. You could see where, let's say, for instance, if you were an administrator at a school or something else and you had some kind of an after together, or after after work get together or something else centered around religion. You know, you might feel compelled to go if you wanted to advance potentially you know I mean whether it be in some government agency right if you're not hanging out with the people right then. But you know, to me, the solution is not to bar people from being able to practice religion the solution is why have we gotten government so big that it's everything so that we have to worry about religion coming butting up against it right I mean, you know if we had a mostly private schools competing against one another this wouldn't be an issue at all. Right. I mean, all of these schools could could literally just do you know you could have a religious school over here have a non religious school. And to me that's the real libertarian choice here is let's let's shrink government here a little bit so that this isn't an issue period with, you know religion and government coming head to head. I will have to push, I have to push back a little bit on your pushback Jason okay. I mean, sure, I can see where if if for instance you're having some after school thing and you know it's religiously oriented. Some, some kid might feel some pressure to go to that, even though, even though the coach never said that you have to come to it or whoever the administrator doesn't have to come to it. And you know, without, without stating it, they it could, you know, you know, retired or keep them back from getting ahead in whatever program they engage in. However, however, if there are no clear explicit expressions of forcing children to into those religious events or anything like that. If there are no expressions of it, I do not see how we could assume them because some kid felt the pressure. So I would say even in those cases where a kid may have felt a certain pressure even though he was not told to do it, but he felt the pressure to do it. I would say in those cases, I don't think the establishment cause will be will be will be violated, even in those cases. But I do agree with your with your with your with your statement as the solution, the overall solution to this is where we have private schools competing against each other and that kind of stuff. I do agree with that, but I do push back on your your original purpose. Yeah, because I'm not always going to be in the details, you know, you're always going to have to parse the story to figure out what somebody truly discriminated against or not. You know, and I just think, well, let's just shrink government, then we don't have to worry about it anymore. No, we're not. We're not. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness always and forever.