20 replies to this topic

[beeseven]

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/...y-top-headlines

A teacher was fired from her job at a Catholic school for becoming pregnant out of wedlock. The school bans premarital sex because it's one of the values of Catholicism, so they fired the teacher for being a bad role model. She says that it's discrimination against women because it's much harder to prove if a male teacher had premarital sex, so she's suing.

A poll on the site shows that about 51% think she shouldn't have been fired, 45% say it was the right thing, and 4% aren't sure. Personally I'm with the 51%, but I've never liked a lot of the Catholic teachings.

[iwuvcookies]

I'm in the middle. I can't really decide what I want to say. A part of me wants to say she should be kicked out because she as a women and Catholic had duties to fulfil through her religion. Then there's that thing that says male teachers having premarital sex and others not knowing. She sort of knew it was against the school rules to get pregnant out of wedlock. OH I don't know. I'm the undecided percent.

[Mezzano]

its a difficult situation. Not sure what my personal opinion yet is on the mater but, i do know one thing, they dont have the right to know if it was pre marital sex or not that she commited. It is her right in every way for personal information to be personal. Others simply do not have to know... how it got out, i do not know... but the alternative would have been that nobodyt had to know about it, and it would not be effecting the kids in any way if they did not know, or thought it was not pre marital...

[FLaKes]

Im on the undecided part too. If she decided to work there she must have accepted something that said that she was so catholic that she want going to have premarital sex, and if its a school where many kids are going to see her pregnant I think she is definetely a bad role model, but what iwuvcookies says is true, so thats why Im also undecided.

[s243a]

I think men could get caught to, but the woman could have other options like, multiple levels of birth control. I.e. combine, condom, pill, diaphragm, spermicidal foam and morning after pill. And if all else fails I suppose abortion but that is a really non catholic thing to do.

The issue is how do we balance the rights of an employee with religions freedoms. I think in this case perhaps religious freedoms should perhaps take a back seat because education is such a fundamental role to the functioning of society and should not be controlled by the biases and dogma inherent in organized religion.

[kasm]

beeseven, on Nov 27 2005, 05:32 AM, said:

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/...y-top-headlines

A teacher was fired from her job at a Catholic school for becoming pregnant out of wedlock. The school bans premarital sex because it's one of the values of Catholicism, so they fired the teacher for being a bad role model. She says that it's discrimination against women because it's much harder to prove if a male teacher had premarital sex, so she's suing.
..

1- She is working for a Catholic institution and should follow their teachings.

2- It is breach for a contract since she "required to convey the teachings of the Catholic faith by his or her words and actions."

3- It is breach of belonging membership to the organisation. Exactly as the situation when a woman applying to be member in men club or a man applied to be member in women club or organisation.

4- Every job has a job description and duties and obligation. Every appointment has a selection criteria and points.

5- It is not discrimination since the school authorities is ready to show the door as well for a male teacher "if they knew that he had impregnated a women out of wedlock"

6- It is not of matter of forgiving since the trace of matter is continuing. It is not a matter of forgiving. Forgiving for a single event without trace for evever. Forgiving to who steal something and this something in his possesion is invalid forgiven. Because after microsecond from the forgiven the sin or the assult still active since the stolen thing is not returned. The same if some one is forgiven for cheating and the same behaviour is continuing after that, the forgiven was given is nonsense.

7- It is not matter of religions freedoms. She has the right to belief or act as she likes but not in matter affect the new generation. It is similar to the sex ofender case when it is not allowed the sex ofender to work in school or kingarten even after they have received punshiment.

8- It is not a personal or private matter because this matter can not be private i.e the others don't know about it and effecting the kids. Many another matter can be private.

[Saint_Michael]

well of course the catholics need to get the stick out their butts and get with the times its not 300 ad here, thats why I hate religions in general its either their way or you get executed for not doing it, whatever she has the right ti sue and I hope she wins bad enough catholic priest get away for assault children (most case are legit) and it would be impossible to know if a guy get freaky unless they get a daily medical check up to see if he did or not.


unlike kasm pointing out the rules for islam, people have the choice to do what the hell they want religiously or govemment, but its idiots like the catholics and the extremists that make all the problems for people to crack down, i want to be alive when the exsistance of God is proven wrong so i can laugh at everyone and tell them what fools they are.

[Spectre]

Quote

well of course the catholics need to get the stick out their butts and get with the times its not 300 ad here, thats why I hate religions in general its either their way or you get executed for not doing it... but its idiots like the catholics...

Saint_Michael, settle down. I'm not a religious person either, but I don't hate all religions. I can respect that some people may wish to believe in or worship certain figures or ideas which I do not agree with. I'm sure many people would take great offense to your words. Remember, you are a moderator and your job is to keep the peace and guide the forum's users.

Anyway, I stand sort of in the middle on this particular issue. If the teacher had not agreed or obide by the rules of the school and the religion under which it teaches, then I would certainly support her choice to take legal action against the school - however, as she apparently did agree to provide a religious role model to students and keep to the ideas and morals which that religion supports, I don't think she is in any position to try and sue them. It is indeed harder to prove that a male has engaged in pre-marital sexual activity, but I don't think it's so much that she participated in an act the school views with scorn that is the problem - I think it's that she is now pregnant, basically 'flaunting' it to her students and showing disregard for the laws of their religion in front of them that is more the issue.

[AeroBlack]

That is oh so messed up.. She gets fired because she wanted to get laid...I don;t understand Catholics, but there is nothing we can do about it now at this point in time. Why can't except the fact, that people like to have some sex. Its normal and humain..

[Spectre]

Of course it is. But she still stepped outside of her legally binding agreement and terms of employment at the school. Although I don't think it makes any sense having the rule in the first place, that's just what her religion insists on enforcing, and it's not like she 'accidently' broke her agreement.

Or rather, the religion under which the school follows. Sorry for the double post (most likely not her religion).