Rockwall Texas teacher fired for out-of-wedlock pregnancy

[Darwin333]

Shrug, she is working for a private Catholic school. Sex before marriage is a no no to Catholics (at least thats what they teach/preach) and sex is usually required to get pregnant.

Personally I don't have a problem with a religious employer terminating someone for blatant and obvious (she is pregnant, kinda hard to hide) conflicts with that religions morals/ethics/teachings.

 

[Zebo]

"Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense."

-Robert Heinlein

Nice. This is why jury nullification is important. About half the laws are invented nonsense.

 

[Broheim]

Because it lends itself to irresponsibly-raised children and bad parenting.

so married people can't do the same?

 

[Jaskalas]

Because it lends itself to irresponsibly-raised children and bad parenting.

Why do you want to force parents into a contract with the government?

 

[Atreus21]

so married people can't do the same?

Of course they can. But married people tend to (I stress TEND to) be better suited to cope with that level of responsibility.

 

[Atreus21]

Why do you want to force parents into a contract with the government?

...I don't.

 

[sactoking]

Wow, this really blew up into a morality thread, and it's funny because everyone's trying to transpose their morals onto the situation to show it as moral or immoral.

People, morality is not a hard and fast standard. Hell, ethics have some fungibility to them and morals are less strict than ethics. While ethics must have some overarching continuity, consistency, and wide acceptance morals are more individual and don't require justification. A moral is something you feel not something you think.

In this case the school had a morality clause and that morality clause was consistent with the church's morals that out of wedlock sex/pregnancy is forbidden. The teacher signed the morality clause indicating that, even if she didn't agree with it she agreed to abide by it. That's the end of the story.

It is disingenuous to now sit here and say whether the church's morals are correct or not. They are what they are. She knew that and agreed to it. Whether or not it coincides with your own individual sense of morality is irrelevant.

 

[actuarial]

It's immoral because it's bad for young people to be saddled with those kinds of responsibilities.

More and more I get the impression that people on this thread object to the notion that ANYTHING ought to be called immoral; that no one has the right to judge one act as better or worse than any other.

Evan Sayet was right.

Because people disagree with the morality of one thing you think that they reject the notion of morality in general?

And based on the above, shouldn't it be sex among young people is immoral? A 30 year old single woman is likely much more able to accept the responsibilities of a pregnancy than two married 16 year olds.

 

[actuarial]

Of course they can. But married people tend to (I stress TEND to) be better suited to cope with that level of responsibility.

Do you believe that a single person adopting a child is immoral?

 

[Jaskalas]

...I don't.

You most certainly do when advocating marriage, for it is nothing else.

 

[Broheim]

Of course they can. But married people tend to (I stress TEND to) be better suited to cope with that level of responsibility.

any data to back that up?

what about divorce, is that immoral? divorce can be a hell of a lot more emotionally damaging to child than being brought up by a single parent, and with the current divorce rates there's a pretty good chance the child will have to go through one.

what about widow(er)s bringing up a child on their own, is that immoral? should they hurry up and remarry at the first change they get?

 

[Atreus21]

Wow, this really blew up into a morality thread, and it's funny because everyone's trying to transpose their morals onto the situation to show it as moral or immoral.

People, morality is not a hard and fast standard. Hell, ethics have some fungibility to them and morals are less strict than ethics. While ethics must have some overarching continuity, consistency, and wide acceptance morals are more individual and don't require justification. A moral is something you feel not something you think.

In this case the school had a morality clause and that morality clause was consistent with the church's morals that out of wedlock sex/pregnancy is forbidden. The teacher signed the morality clause indicating that, even if she didn't agree with it she agreed to abide by it. That's the end of the story.

It is disingenuous to now sit here and say whether the church's morals are correct or not. They are what they are. She knew that and agreed to it. Whether or not it coincides with your own individual sense of morality is irrelevant.

I stand blown out of the water. 🙂

 

[ichy]

Having sex outside of marriage does not have to equal having kids outside of marriage. I remain firmly opposed to out of wedlock pregnancy and think it's unfortunate that it has become to de-stigmatized.

 

[tommo123]

Correct, it says laws cannot be created to establish a state religion or to deny the free exercise of religion.

so the 1st covers sharia law? stoning, female circumcision?

 

[BoomerD]

Has Rush Limbaugh stood up to call this woman a "Slut" yet?

 

[dainthomas]

...I don't.

So if I want to have a child I can just say whatever vows I wish to my partner, referencing whatever deity/spirit I want, and you'd be fine with that? I wouldn't have to file the appropriate paperwork with the government to become magically moral?

 

[Ninjahedge]

Seems a difficult situation, but what they SHOULD have done is put her on probation until the kid was born.

If they are worried about morality and the obvious scene of an unmarried pregnant woman at the head of a class, there's your solution.

Firing her on religious grounds skirts the rights of an american citizen. If so many people file charges for being fired because of their race, creed, or other item, how is it legal for a Church to do the same in situations like this?

Would they be able to fire a Muslim Biology Teacher? What if he did the Salāh between class time? OMG (irony) that is not right!!!!


If she was teaching religion, or was involved in the clergy, I would say they had every right to determine if she stayed or went. But this is just ridiculous. Very poorly handled and now a cause for much more attention than they ever needed.

 

[silverpig]

*snip*
I'd say that under these standards she would have a very tough road to showing that she was not under the ministerial exemption unless she can show unequivocally that her duties were 100% secular.

She was the volleyball coach...

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Surprised no one posted this yet.

Not surprised coming out of Texas, the heart of the radical religious right.


4-11-2012

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highs...stian-school-wedlock-pregnancy-145601399.html

Rockwall Texas teacher fired for out-of-wedlock pregnancy


In an incredibly bizarre situation that appears headed for a legal challenge, a Dallas-area volleyball coach and science teacher was fired by the Christian school at which she worked for becoming pregnant before being married.

Rockwall (Texas) Heritage Christian Academy volleyball coach and science teacher Cathy Samford was fired during the fall semester after she became pregnant out of wedlock. Samford had led the volleyball program for three years and had been named the school's coach of the year once during that span.

Still, that couldn't help save her job when she first admitted her pregnancy during the fall semester, with the school terminating her based on a violation of her contract's morals clause because it was determined her pregnancy meant she could not serve as "a Christian role model."

That has left Samford uninsured and in financial distress as she heads towards giving birth, a situation she never considered possible when she was a proud member of Heritage Christian Academy's faculty.

It has nothing to do with the state of Texas. It has to do with organized religion, which last time i checked, has churches, private schools, mosques, synagouges in every state. Why do fools like you keep thinking that everyone in a state all have the same radical ideas associated with the prevailing political color of that state?
I live in Texas, and think the church should have no power to terminate someone based on "morality" as organized religion is not moral to begin with. As proven time and time again, they all preach and claim to be understanding and accepting of everyone, but in tiny print they add *as long as they follow our beliefs.

 

[Ausm]

Sex is not immoral. Premarital sex is.

I know that I am on a "Highway to Hell" but isn't not engaging in Premarital bliss sort of like buying a car without test driving it?

 

[Broheim]

I know that I am on a "Highway to Hell" but isn't not engaging in Premarital bliss sort of like buying a car without test driving it?

it's more like buying a car with a manual and then driving it across america without ever having sat behind a wheel before, sure he's pedalled his bike around the block by himself every day so he might know how to yank on the stick but he's still not gonna know how to work the clutch....:awe:

 

[Ausm]

it's more like buying a car with a manual and then driving it across america without ever having sat behind a wheel before, sure he's pedalled his bike around the block by himself every day so he might know how to yank on the stick but he's still not gonna know how to work the clutch....:awe:

lmao +1

 

[cybrsage]

so the 1st covers sharia law? stoning, female circumcision?

Female circumcision is not part of sharia law. I do not know enough about Islam and its relation to US Law to speak much on the matter of stoning. I can say that Judaism's stoning is permissiable by US Law - since it is only allowed in the Land of Israel. 😉

 

[cybrsage]

Seems a difficult situation, but what they SHOULD have done is put her on probation until the kid was born.

If they are worried about morality and the obvious scene of an unmarried pregnant woman at the head of a class, there's your solution.

I would have terminated her, but continued her health insurance until 1 year after the child was born...paying her portion as well, since she is not unemployed. It is for the best of the child, who is 100% innocent of all wrongdoing.

Firing her on religious grounds skirts the rights of an american citizen. If so many people file charges for being fired because of their race, creed, or other item, how is it legal for a Church to do the same in situations like this?

The First Amendment allows it, it protects religion from the government. Add to it that she legally agreed to be bound by the religious morals of the institution or be fired.

Would they be able to fire a Muslim Biology Teacher?

A Catholic School is allowed to not high a Muslim anything. A Muslim School would fire a Biology Teacher who was found to have had sex outside of marriage.

What if he did the Salāh between class time? OMG (irony) that is not right!!!!

Muslims already do this all over the place. I had a Muslim working for me on a job once (we are still good friends to this day) and he was a bit worried I would be mad when he said he had to go and pray. I told him to go, his god's commands are of utmost importance and he should go even if I said no. He was quite relieved and instantly became both my best worker and a good friend. He knows I consider both his prophet and his god to be pure bunk, but I also know he considers me to be confused and misguided. 🙂

]quote]If she was teaching religion, or was involved in the clergy, I would say they had every right to determine if she stayed or went. But this is just ridiculous. Very poorly handled and now a cause for much more attention than they ever needed.

She agreed to be bound by the moral code in her employment contract. She violated the employment contract. Are you saying employment contracts should be tossed aside at a whim?

 

[Jhhnn]

She agreed to be bound by the moral code in her employment contract. She violated the employment contract. Are you saying employment contracts should be tossed aside at a whim?

Contracts exist within the wider scope of the law and the Constitution, meaning that illegal provisions cannot be enforced. It remains to be seen if such is the case here, but previous linkage indicates that it may not be legal, at all. Time will tell.