[QUOTE=OvB;35529743]Abortion is legal in Texas. Though I think you're required to have an ultrasound before the procedure to see the baby.[/QUOTE]
Yes, true but i was talking about the "law of the Bible" part of the school, what is worse, pregnant or abortion?
[QUOTE=ToXiCsoldier;35530187]Yes, true but i was talking about the "law of the Bible" part of the school, what is worse, pregnant or abortion?[/QUOTE]
I suppose that depends on the school. I'm not going to speak for an entire religious community so that's up to them. Public schools in Texas wouldn't be able to fire for such a thing though.
[editline]11th April 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Emz;35530063]Yes they need to give an ultrasound to see how many weeks pregnant they are so that they use the correct method for termination. Only the nurse sees the ultra sound though (this is in the UK so things may be different over there.)[/QUOTE]
I think here they show you the ultrasound in hopes it will give you a second thought.
[QUOTE=Sector 7;35528923]jesus would have fired her ass too
don't you people read the bible? it's all very clear[/QUOTE]
I think that Jesus would have let her stay. After all, he did choose to eat dinner with tax collectors and prostitutes instead of the priests.
I find it weird that this popped up the very day that both my Math and Biology teachers come back to teaching after having their kids.
I assumed this was going to be one of those teacher we had in my school that seemed to spend more time pregnant than teaching. This seems a bit messed up but then again it's a religious s chool what do you expect?
you should be able to fire someone for whatever damn reason you wish, maybe be forced to offer them a few weeks of notice though.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;35530496]you should be able to fire someone for whatever damn reason you wish, maybe be forced to offer them a few weeks of notice though.[/QUOTE]
So you're ok for people getting fired because of their race/religion/sexuality? No!
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;35530496]you should be able to fire someone for whatever damn reason you wish, maybe be forced to offer them a few weeks of notice though.[/QUOTE]
Not really, if that was the case then you'd get people being fired just because the boss didn't like them.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;35530496]you should be able to fire someone for whatever damn reason you wish, maybe be forced to offer them a few weeks of notice though.[/QUOTE]
That's a state issue, actually.
Some states, like Washington state, have [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_at_will]At-Will Employment[/url]. Basically it means that employers can fire employees for any reason whatsoever (or no reason, if that's the case), as long as said reason isn't illegal under state or federal law (IE anti-discriminatory laws override AWE).
In an AWE state, an employer can fire an employee for wearing purple socks.
I have no idea how AWE stands up in court, though. I've never actually read a story of it actually being enforced for something as inane as that.
if it's a private school and she knew she wasn't supposed to become pregnant then i don't see the issue
[QUOTE=bull3tmagn3t;35529035]Yeah!
She deserves it!
Christians don't have babies, OR SEX![/QUOTE]
The article says...
[quote]Cathy Samford was fired during the fall semester after she became pregnant [B]out of wedlock[/B].[/quote]
I am guessing that means she was not married when she got pregnant, which christians are against.
[B]
Still should not have been fired though. Its a retarded excuse to fire.[/B]
[editline]11th April 2012[/editline]
DO PLEASE READ THE OP.
IT EVEN SAYS OUT OF WEDLOCK WHICH MEANS NOT BEING MARRIED.
Which christian people happen to be against.
[url]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wedlock[/url]
[QUOTE=JerryK;35530999]if it's a private school and she knew she wasn't supposed to become pregnant then i don't see the issue[/QUOTE]
might have something to do with the fact that theres no precedent or justification for this. maybe you don't see a legal issue here but at the very least it should raise some moral concerns about at-will employment and the mindset surrounding it.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;35529490]Replace drugs with alcohol then. And I wasn't comparing anything, just being curious about laws.[/QUOTE]
Pastor who was a teacher at a christian academy I used to go to ( I'm not christian though, I just went there for the good education. ) had a very bad drinking problem. He didn't get fired, so why should she?
It's funny though, the teacher I used to have there, she'd always single me out because I didn't go to church. Just another example of stupidity, really.
[QUOTE]"How's it going to look to a little fourth-grade girl that sees she's pregnant and she's not married?"[/QUOTE]
O c'mon. I hate this kind of defense. Kids that are that young and in school, do not give a shit about what there teachers personal lives entail much less pay attention to those kind of details. Not like you get an astute fourth grader making the deduction of pregnant + no wedding ring = license to whore.
[QUOTE=znk666;35528255]Well, considering it's a Christian school aren't the teachers forced to follow these outdated and sick...i mean moral principles of the bible?[/QUOTE]
there aren't any principles in the bible where it says Christians need to behave this way towards others...
People just use the term "Christian" where it benefits them more...
come to ask a person are they Christian? they'll say yes...
ask them do they go to church regularly, they'll laugh at your face...
[QUOTE=Usernameztaken;35531191]Pastor who was a teacher at a christian academy I used to go to ( I'm not christian though, I just went there for the good education. ) had a very bad drinking problem. He didn't get fired, so why should she?[/QUOTE]
How one school chooses, or doesn't choose, to enforce their morals clause has nothing to do with what another school does. All the morals clause does is provide the reason, it does not mean they have to use it, but it does give them the option to use it.
Plus we all know with religious people the men always get preferential treatment, especially where a woman's sexuality is concerned. A man fighting alcoholism is noble, a woman having a child out of wedlock is a whore, in their eyes.
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;35532881]How one school chooses, or doesn't choose, to enforce their morals clause has nothing to do with what another school does. All the morals clause does is provide the reason, it does not mean they have to use it, but it does give them the option to use it.
Plus we all know with religious people the men always get preferential treatment, especially where a woman's sexuality is concerned. A man fighting alcoholism is noble, a woman having a child out of wedlock is a whore, in their eyes.[/QUOTE]
That was in reply to someone being stupid.
He was comparing street drugs to pregnancy... and then alcoholism to pregnancy.
It was not meant for personal consumption/counterargument/rebuttal.
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;35528237]She signed a contract, though.[/QUOTE]
An employer cannot create a work contract which removes rights put forward in legislation. If he does such, those rights are still recognised.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
