The Ministerial Exception isn't a law, its a legal precedent. See Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. E.E.O.C.
The exception is for ministers of a religious organization, which while a fuzzy definition, certainly doesn't apply to a completely secular position like financial aid.
ALL forms of unmarried sex were included in the contract. Even those engaged in by married people (adultery). Married people would also be fired if they had extramarital sex. That means it cannot be considered discrimination based on marital status, since the rule against extramarital sex is equally applied to both married and unmarried people. It's an important distinction.
The contract does have one thing that I would say is certainly discriminatory, and that is the prohibition of homosexual sex. Married homosexuals would not be allowed to have sex with each other due to that clause being present, and that is discrimination based on sexual orientation.
But all extramarital sex (the specific behavior) receives the same consequences, regardless of whether or not the participants are single or married.If two individuals engage in the same behavior but receive different treatment depending on whether they are married or not, its discrimination based on marital status.
Tucker Case - Tard magnet.
Of course, that won't happen in this case because she since married her boyfriend. Who also works at the same place and was not fired. Don't let the facts grind you down Jerry. We all know Conservatives never ever have sex outside of marriage.
but i dont agree with you here, if you sign a contract you are-------> bound to it.
the contract involves immoral behavior, which by signing a person agrees to not violate, being black is not an immoral action, under the bible.
one of the biggest problem this nation faces, is most people do not want to obey the contracts, things they sign, with they pledge to honor.
this is not taking responsibility ......for the actions a person takes.
Anti-Democracy advocate, Mixed government is the only good government
THE second point to be examined is, whether the [constitutional ]convention were authorized to frame and propose this mixed Constitution.