Christian school fires pregnant woman over premarital sex

[Double Trouble]

I don't see the problem.

Having an unmarried pregnant woman teaching that sex out of wedlock is unacceptable like trying to force a Jewish congregation to have a Christian rabbi. It doesn't make sense. If the lady doesn't believe in the concept of "sex only for married couples" , the shouldn't be in a teaching position where she's charged with teaching that view to the kids.

The supremes recognized that fact in a case not too long ago, accepting the idea of leeway for religious institutions in labor practices. If not, then fundamentally your right to freedom of religion doesn't exist.

 

[Double Trouble]

Are you seriously telling me that you don't understand how shitbag policies creep in, because no-one protests against them?

What you refer to as shitbag policies, most would call common sense.

 

[nehalem256]

The supremes recognized that fact in a case not too long ago, accepting the idea of leeway for religious institutions in labor practices. If not, then fundamentally your right to freedom of religion doesn't exist.

Are you seriously telling me that you don't understand how shitbag policies creep in, because no-one protests against them?

You mean like destroying the freedom of religion?

Imagine that a pro-lifer became a receptionist at an abortion clinic and then started wearing shirts* that said "Abortion is Murder". Should the clinic make required to keep her employed because she is just exercising her freedom of speech?

*assume that a pro-choice shirt would be considered appropriate attire at the office.

 

[zsdersw]

Imagine that a pro-lifer became a receptionist at an abortion clinic and then started wearing shirts* that said "Abortion is Murder". Should the clinic make required to keep her employed because she is just exercising her freedom of speech?

Anti-abortion advocates would say "yes".

 

[Veliko]

What you refer to as shitbag policies, most would call common sense.

Are you a follower of spaghetti flying monsters?

I don't think any of those people have any right to talk about what is and isn't common sense.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Anti-abortion advocates would say "yes".

Just like sexual deviants would say yes to allowing a unscrupulous teacher to teach children in a religious setting.

 

[nehalem256]

Anti-abortion advocates would say "yes".

So you are saying that the people who think the school is in the wrong are the same as the irrational pro-lifers ^_^

 

[zsdersw]

Just like sexual deviants would say yes to allowing a unscrupulous teacher to teach children in a religious setting.

The term "sexual deviants" is anachronistic.

 

[nehalem256]

Are you a follower of spaghetti flying monsters?

I don't think any of those people have any right to talk about what is and isn't common sense.

Why don't you just come out and say you want to tear up the first Amendment?

 

[nehalem256]

The term "sexual deviants" is anachronistic.

Let the record show you didn't say the term is inaccurate :whiste:

 

[zsdersw]

So you are saying that the people who think the school is in the wrong are the same as the irrational pro-lifers ^_^

Inasmuch as they both reject the rights of private business owners, yes.

 

[zsdersw]

Let the record show you didn't say the term is inaccurate :whiste:

It's that too.

 

[Munky]

She violated the rules of her employer, plain and simple. But rules and logic be damned, it's all about "feelings" to the lefties.

 

[nehalem256]

She violated the rules of her employer, plain and simple. But rules and logic be damned, it's all about "feelings" to the lefties.

It's all about women's feelings. Which is why they don't care about the feelings of the school or the students/parents there.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Are you seriously telling me that you don't understand how shitbag policies creep in, because no-one protests against them?

I'm telling you just that. These policies are institution specific and exist solely for that purpose. There is no movement or demand to expand this generally and non religiously affiliated higher learning entities have no motivation or desire to implement this. You cannot therefore rationally claim "creeping in" when there isn't a "creeper". You might as well shout your fears about nitrogen causing corrosion because no one has convinced oxygen to stop. Your scenario does not exist.

BTW, my wife laughed at your post.

 

[Veliko]

I'm telling you just that. These policies are institution specific and exist solely for that purpose. There is no movement or demand to expand this generally and non religiously affiliated higher learning entities have no motivation or desire to implement this. You cannot therefore rationally claim "creeping in" when there isn't a "creeper". You might as well shout your fears about nitrogen causing corrosion because no one has convinced oxygen to stop. Your scenario does not exist.

You'll note that I said 'shitbag policies' rather than just this particular one.

So yes, the scenario exists.

 

[Double Trouble]

Are you a follower of spaghetti flying monsters?

I don't think any of those people have any right to talk about what is and isn't common sense.

I'm pretty sure I have a right to talk about whatever I want regardless of my flying spaghetti monster affiliation (or lack of it).

You seem to be a very angry person, there must be some deep seated issues that go far beyond this particular topic.

 

[Veliko]

I'm pretty sure I have a right to talk about whatever I want regardless of my flying spaghetti monster affiliation (or lack of it).

You seem to be a very angry person, there must be some deep seated issues that go far beyond this particular topic.

Yeah, it's almost as if religious people have been burning atheists at the stake for several centuries or something.

And it's almost as if giant, powerful and wealthy institutions like the Catholic Church are still trying to cover up their endorsement of sexually abusing kids in their care.

And it's almost as if there are religious groups trying to get creationism taught in science classes.

There's plenty to get angry about.

 

[nehalem256]

Yeah, it's almost as if religious people have been burning atheists at the stake for several centuries or something.

Is witch a dog-whistle for atheist now?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Word to live by:

1) Read any contract you sign completely

2) If you do not understand anything on the contract have it explained to you or have a lawyer read the contract and explain whatever you don't understand to you

3) If you violate a term in the contract, don't be surprised when the other party holds you accountable for said violation.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You'll note that I said 'shitbag policies' rather than just this particular one.

So yes, the scenario exists.

Not as far as what you've been complaining about or the topic of this thread, so your point is irrelevant.

 

[Veliko]

Not as far as what you've been complaining about or the topic of this thread, so your point is irrelevant.

Shortsighted nonsense.

A shitbag policy is a shitbag policy, no matter how many employers will actually try to implement it.

With every additional policy like this that gets added, over time it gives employers more confidence that they can set whatever absurd conditions they like. Especially when economic times are hard, and people can be less choosy about who they get employed by.

 

[Double Trouble]

Yeah, it's almost as if religious people have been burning atheists at the stake for several centuries or something.

Yeah, just last week they burned my neighbor at the stake for insisting the earth was not flat!

And it's almost as if giant, powerful and wealthy institutions like the Catholic Church are still trying to cover up their endorsement of sexually abusing kids in their care.

It's almost as if there is some relevance to that for this discussion. Almost, but not.

And it's almost as if there are religious groups trying to get creationism taught in science classes.

It's almost as if there is some relevance to that for this discussion. Almost, but not.

There's plenty to get angry about.

Your anger seems a lot more personal and deep seated. Were you molested by a priest or something?

 

[Veliko]

It's almost as if there is some relevance to that for this discussion. Almost, but not.

You mentioned my anger, and I've listed some things to be angry about.

How is it not relevant?

 

[Double Trouble]

Shortsighted nonsense.

A shitbag policy is a shitbag policy, no matter how many employers will actually try to implement it.

You mean the shitbag policy of letting employers determine their requirements? Yeah, what a crazy notion.