100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Catholics at it again.... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Our civil laws would never allow such a dismissal for such a reason, it's different in the US, I guess signed contracts hold more weight but these contracts can be easily contested in court. I googled Montana and at 13% practicing Catholics... It's pretty safe to say if you're in the teaching business, there isn't any other choice, especially if she was Catholic? It could have been handled differently and now this woman gets maternal stress and they get to prove their superiority.  if she got her degree , she should be able to read a contract its pretty simple, cant go into an institution or enter a religious environment and insist they change to your choices and values , it doesn't work that way |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our civil laws would never allow such a dismissal for such a reason, it's different in the US, I guess signed contracts hold more weight but these contracts can be easily contested in court. I googled Montana and at 13% practicing Catholics... It's pretty safe to say if you're in the teaching business, there isn't any other choice, especially if she was Catholic? It could have been handled differently and now this woman gets maternal stress and they get to prove their superiority. if she got her degree , she should be able to read a contract its pretty simple, cant go into an institution or enter a religious environment and insist they change to your choices and values , it doesn't work that way ok, i get it... it's her fault for believing in a god with the catholics... but your right, she's just stupid and should have learned to read, that would help her more than wanting to help catholic school children learn... just send her to hell and be done with it, the catholics know better than anyone else... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From a catholic priest ... To the best of my knowledge, the only crimes for which the Church says that you must be dismissed are: if you procure an abortion, if you sexually abuse a minor, and if you align yourself with any group that is schismatic with the Church. We all know how the church has bent over backwards to protect priests accused of sexual abuse of minors .. Surely they can see the double standard they promote in dismissing this women for her pregnancy and chosen lifestyle . Even if a nun was to become pregnant she would not be forced to leave her employment with god . She would have to give the child up for adoption but she could still remain in god's service .. Does anyone see the irony here :-) she wasn't employed with the catholic church though,,, it's a catholic school...governed by the church... then that church must have determined the terms of employment,, and if she violated them, she gets what anyone else gets who does the same at their job only if she was married... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our civil laws would never allow such a dismissal for such a reason, it's different in the US, I guess signed contracts hold more weight but these contracts can be easily contested in court. I googled Montana and at 13% practicing Catholics... It's pretty safe to say if you're in the teaching business, there isn't any other choice, especially if she was Catholic? It could have been handled differently and now this woman gets maternal stress and they get to prove their superiority. if she got her degree , she should be able to read a contract its pretty simple, cant go into an institution or enter a religious environment and insist they change to your choices and values , it doesn't work that way ok, i get it... it's her fault for believing in a god with the catholics... but your right, she's just stupid and should have learned to read, that would help her more than wanting to help catholic school children learn... just send her to hell and be done with it, the catholics know better than anyone else... there are children other than catholics that need to learn,, yes, its her fault for signing a contract whose terms she didn't intend to keep |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not about the contract, i can only assume what the contract says at this point.
What I'm trying to explain is that people change, situations change, it's a shame Catholics can't contract or not, it was handled poorly is all |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From a catholic priest ... To the best of my knowledge, the only crimes for which the Church says that you must be dismissed are: if you procure an abortion, if you sexually abuse a minor, and if you align yourself with any group that is schismatic with the Church. We all know how the church has bent over backwards to protect priests accused of sexual abuse of minors .. Surely they can see the double standard they promote in dismissing this women for her pregnancy and chosen lifestyle . Even if a nun was to become pregnant she would not be forced to leave her employment with god . She would have to give the child up for adoption but she could still remain in god's service .. Does anyone see the irony here :-) she wasn't employed with the catholic church though,,, it's a catholic school...governed by the church... then that church must have determined the terms of employment,, and if she violated them, she gets what anyone else gets who does the same at their job not if she has violated terms of her contract,, she is entitled to be fired I cant get pregnant and then be absent two weeks and cry about termination because I chose to get pregnant AND chose to breach my contract |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not about the contract, i can only assume what the contract says at this point. What I'm trying to explain is that people change, situations change, it's a shame Catholics can't contract or not, it was handled poorly is all thank you, everyone keeps bringing up the stupid contract, which we all know is binding... the church just ruined this womans life for basically a 1700 mentality... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not about the contract, i can only assume what the contract says at this point. What I'm trying to explain is that people change, situations change, it's a shame Catholics can't contract or not, it was handled poorly is all I don't know how it was handled, just as we don't know what the contract says Im only stating that If ANYONE signs employment and violates the terms,, whether its attendance or religious terms they should understand that they will lose their job |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there are children other than catholics that need to learn,, yes, its her fault for signing a contract whose terms she didn't intend to keep But she's Catholic and besides, who would hire a Catholic in a Baptist church? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there are children other than catholics that need to learn,, yes, its her fault for signing a contract whose terms she didn't intend to keep But she's Catholic and besides, who would hire a Catholic in a Baptist church? catholics and Baptists go to public schools too there is no way around the fact she had choice, and is trying to force her employer not to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not about the contract, i can only assume what the contract says at this point. What I'm trying to explain is that people change, situations change, it's a shame Catholics can't contract or not, it was handled poorly is all I don't know how it was handled, just as we don't know what the contract says Im only stating that If ANYONE signs employment and violates the terms,, whether its attendance or religious terms they should understand that they will lose their job do you honestly think we don't understand that? your first post i said i agree 100%, and yet you still keep harping about the stupid contract... forget about the dumb contract for a moment and think about what message the church is sending to the kids there... it's ok to ruin a persons life because they don't think like you(the church)... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She'll have her day in court and probably win.....
"" Evenson, through her lawyer, earlier this year filed a discrimination charge with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will investigate the firing. Her lawyer, Brian Butler, told The Montana Standard last spring that Evenson is protected from discrimination on the basis of pregnancy by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The attorney won a similar case against an archdiocese in Ohio last year when he represented a woman who had become pregnant while unwed while working at a Catholic school. She was awarded $170,000 after the jury found the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati had discriminated against her by firing her once she became pregnant by artificial insemination while unmarried. In that case, the jury was instructed that even if an employee signed an employment contract containing a morality clause, that does not exempt that person’s employment from the protections of federal and state anti- discrimination laws. The jury was told that an employee cannot waive his rights to be free from unlawful discrimination. Butler said that case made clear that an employer, even if it is a religious institution, cannot require an employee to sign a contract giving up certain civil rights, which includes the right of a woman to bear children."" From my link on an earlier page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
perhaps some undiagnosed psych issues... Because she is gay...or because she wants a child...??? no , because she agreed to employment under a religion that frowns on her choice of behaviors,,, kind of like if I signed on for telemarketing for the kkk,,,,,I wouldn't be crazy because Im black but because Im a black person who chooses to be employed by a group that is anti black,,,, similarly,, her creaziness is choosing the employment she chose giving the other things in her life that she has chose being so clearly in conflict with that employers culture umm... they can't fire you for being black or being gay...there's laws against that in the US... but it's not about her, it's about the church not being churchlike... that's true, because being black is not a choice like being pregnant, not being married, etc,,,, but my point is about her being not wound too tight ,,,,or having an aagenda,, giving what her lifestyle choices are and who she chose to be employed with,,, and being churchlike means forgiving,,, it says nothing about mandating continued employment and bad examples of the values trying to be taught at the school true, but i'm look at the ungodly aspect from the catholics more than the woman being at fault here... any other job, ahe wouldn't have been fired, and the church should have been the last in line to fire her, from what they preach anyway... if the church had a contract that she agreed to sign that stated that as the consequence,, than they absolutely should have followed their contract yea, sorry, i forgot that contracts trump what god wants and preaches... no sense in showing kindness and love to people in need.. God wants us to not sin,,,and not consciously and/or deliberately live in sin as I said before, there is forgiveness and there is consequence, one does not eliminate the other,,, he also wants you to be kind to others and love your neighbors... lots of kindness and love shown there, huh... like i said before, all churches are hypocritical, nothing really new in my eyes... things such as this make me realize i'm not wrong in my atheistic point of view... kindness and love has nothing to do with whether someone is compatible with a job,,,,,churches don't have to hire or keep everyone employed out of 'kindness',, that's silly there is no hypocrisy where there was an agreement , there was an agreement and there is a consistency in sticking to the agreement well, i think your wrong there... thats what the church preaches, love and kindness to your fellow man... thats what i read in the bible, did you read something else? is firing a pregnant unwed mother to be showing kindness and love? thats no different from the muslims POV... you keep assuming that being loving and kind means being obligated to be without choice why bother having a contract or any guidelines at all if that is the case? there are conditions they set for their school , its not about love or kindness when you are running a school, its about the objectives of the parents and the institution if you cant abide by the environment set, you shouldn't be there,, why should a 'religious' institution fire someone who never comes to work,, would that be 'unloving'? why should they fire someone who was cursing out the children,, would that be 'unloving'? love has nothing to do with choice and consequence she made a poor choice and like any other employer she will have to find other work for doing so |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She'll have her day in court and probably win..... "" Evenson, through her lawyer, earlier this year filed a discrimination charge with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will investigate the firing. Her lawyer, Brian Butler, told The Montana Standard last spring that Evenson is protected from discrimination on the basis of pregnancy by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The attorney won a similar case against an archdiocese in Ohio last year when he represented a woman who had become pregnant while unwed while working at a Catholic school. She was awarded $170,000 after the jury found the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati had discriminated against her by firing her once she became pregnant by artificial insemination while unmarried. In that case, the jury was instructed that even if an employee signed an employment contract containing a morality clause, that does not exempt that person’s employment from the protections of federal and state anti- discrimination laws. The jury was told that an employee cannot waive his rights to be free from unlawful discrimination. Butler said that case made clear that an employer, even if it is a religious institution, cannot require an employee to sign a contract giving up certain civil rights, which includes the right of a woman to bear children."" From my link on an earlier page Amen! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She'll have her day in court and probably win..... "" Evenson, through her lawyer, earlier this year filed a discrimination charge with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will investigate the firing. Her lawyer, Brian Butler, told The Montana Standard last spring that Evenson is protected from discrimination on the basis of pregnancy by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The attorney won a similar case against an archdiocese in Ohio last year when he represented a woman who had become pregnant while unwed while working at a Catholic school. She was awarded $170,000 after the jury found the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati had discriminated against her by firing her once she became pregnant by artificial insemination while unmarried. In that case, the jury was instructed that even if an employee signed an employment contract containing a morality clause, that does not exempt that person’s employment from the protections of federal and state anti- discrimination laws. The jury was told that an employee cannot waive his rights to be free from unlawful discrimination. Butler said that case made clear that an employer, even if it is a religious institution, cannot require an employee to sign a contract giving up certain civil rights, which includes the right of a woman to bear children."" From my link on an earlier page cool, i was thinking it was still America... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She'll have her day in court and probably win..... "" Evenson, through her lawyer, earlier this year filed a discrimination charge with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will investigate the firing. Her lawyer, Brian Butler, told The Montana Standard last spring that Evenson is protected from discrimination on the basis of pregnancy by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The attorney won a similar case against an archdiocese in Ohio last year when he represented a woman who had become pregnant while unwed while working at a Catholic school. She was awarded $170,000 after the jury found the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati had discriminated against her by firing her once she became pregnant by artificial insemination while unmarried. In that case, the jury was instructed that even if an employee signed an employment contract containing a morality clause, that does not exempt that person’s employment from the protections of federal and state anti- discrimination laws. The jury was told that an employee cannot waive his rights to be free from unlawful discrimination. Butler said that case made clear that an employer, even if it is a religious institution, cannot require an employee to sign a contract giving up certain civil rights, which includes the right of a woman to bear children."" From my link on an earlier page that's unfortunate rebels trying to legally unhinge religious values thousands of years old,, and succeeding not enough that these are private institutions and not public,, no place religion can go,, shame we cant use the lgbt pc logic 'if you don't like it don't participate in it' now others can participate and force those they join to change their standards to adapt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She'll have her day in court and probably win..... "" Evenson, through her lawyer, earlier this year filed a discrimination charge with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will investigate the firing. Her lawyer, Brian Butler, told The Montana Standard last spring that Evenson is protected from discrimination on the basis of pregnancy by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The attorney won a similar case against an archdiocese in Ohio last year when he represented a woman who had become pregnant while unwed while working at a Catholic school. She was awarded $170,000 after the jury found the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati had discriminated against her by firing her once she became pregnant by artificial insemination while unmarried. In that case, the jury was instructed that even if an employee signed an employment contract containing a morality clause, that does not exempt that person’s employment from the protections of federal and state anti- discrimination laws. The jury was told that an employee cannot waive his rights to be free from unlawful discrimination. Butler said that case made clear that an employer, even if it is a religious institution, cannot require an employee to sign a contract giving up certain civil rights, which includes the right of a woman to bear children."" From my link on an earlier page Not if the church proves she was a ministerial employee.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
read what you sign before you agree to employment... I agree. I did not apply, a few years ago, to a protestant Christian College because I read the employee conduct agreement and realized that since I drink alcohol, wear make up and sometimes go dancing I probably could not abide by the conduct agreement. Maybe I should have taken the job and then sued them after a boisterous few nights out...lol you don;t have to agree with the church, and that's fine, but don;t work there...pretty simple |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
RebelArcher
on
Thu 05/14/15 07:15 PM
|
|
She'll have her day in court and probably win..... "" Evenson, through her lawyer, earlier this year filed a discrimination charge with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will investigate the firing. Her lawyer, Brian Butler, told The Montana Standard last spring that Evenson is protected from discrimination on the basis of pregnancy by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The attorney won a similar case against an archdiocese in Ohio last year when he represented a woman who had become pregnant while unwed while working at a Catholic school. She was awarded $170,000 after the jury found the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati had discriminated against her by firing her once she became pregnant by artificial insemination while unmarried. In that case, the jury was instructed that even if an employee signed an employment contract containing a morality clause, that does not exempt that person’s employment from the protections of federal and state anti- discrimination laws. The jury was told that an employee cannot waive his rights to be free from unlawful discrimination. Butler said that case made clear that an employer, even if it is a religious institution, cannot require an employee to sign a contract giving up certain civil rights, which includes the right of a woman to bear children."" From my link on an earlier page that's unfortunate rebels trying to legally unhinge religious values thousands of years old,, and succeeding not enough that these are private institutions and not public,, no place religion can go,, shame we cant use the lgbt pc logic 'if you don't like it don't participate in it' now others can participate and force those they join to change their standards to adapt Now if you want my personal opinion......too bad so sad for the pregnant woman. Shes been employed at that school for 9 years so Im pretty sure she knew the policies......and yet she chose to get pregnant anyway. It wasnt an accident, it was invitro, planned and she made a point to NOT inform the school that she was pregnant...and I dont think its coincedence that she hired the lawyer that she did. Im sure she researched previous cases....including the one in Ohio. My personal opinion is that she knew what she was doing....Hell, there is even a GoFundMe page for her now......and she knew if she got fired, she'd have an out. I dont think she's an innocent mom who didnt have a thing to do with her situation at all....she planned and knew what she was doing IMO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol, I wasn't talking about rebelarcher,, that's a funny coincidence
I meant 'rebels' as in people who seek to try to disrupt and upset things |
|
|
|
|
