Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 179

Thread: Church fires unwed pregant employee

  1. #41
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,297

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    If legal action is taken, this one could well go to the Supreme Court:

    Mom-to-be claims she was fired from Baptist church for not scheduling wedding date | Fox News

    Earlier, SCOTUS rebuked Obama's attempts to have these terminations automatically reviewable by the government 9-0 (Tabor Lutheran vs EEOC). But, some justices also said the ministerial exemption, though broad, is not all encompassing. They then welcomed further cases.

    In this case, the woman is a day care worker, a position that may, or may not be considered "ministerial". In my opinion, if one accepts employment of any kind at a non profit (church, mosque, temple, PETA, etc), you play by their rules, or you dont play there.

    As a side note, there was a similar one with a Catholic dioceses, but the diocese offered a modest settlement (and in doing so placed their First Amendment rights in danger), and the case was dropped.
    control of whether you can have a kid or not while working should not lie with your bosses just cause they feel like it

    you should not fire peapole because their Christian you should not fire people because your Christian same goes for any faith

  2. #42
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    01-16-18 @ 09:07 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,532

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    If legal action is taken, this one could well go to the Supreme Court:

    Mom-to-be claims she was fired from Baptist church for not scheduling wedding date | Fox News

    Earlier, SCOTUS rebuked Obama's attempts to have these terminations automatically reviewable by the government 9-0 (Tabor Lutheran vs EEOC). But, some justices also said the ministerial exemption, though broad, is not all encompassing. They then welcomed further cases.

    In this case, the woman is a day care worker, a position that may, or may not be considered "ministerial". In my opinion, if one accepts employment of any kind at a non profit (church, mosque, temple, PETA, etc), you play by their rules, or you dont play there.

    As a side note, there was a similar one with a Catholic dioceses, but the diocese offered a modest settlement (and in doing so placed their First Amendment rights in danger), and the case was dropped.
    they have already ruled on these types of cases many times. whether ministerial or not they can be fired for not following church guidelines.
    she has no case in the matter.

  3. #43
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,406

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    The big case in this issue is Tabor Lutheran vs EEOC (teacher firing). The Obama administration lost 9-0. But, the Obama administration also wanted to end the ministerial exemption- even for actual ministers. This frightned even Soto Mayor, and may have led to the 9-0 beat down.
    I don't think you understand how the EEOC works....is't their job to take employers to court when someone files a discrimination complaint. The reason it went to the Supreme Court is due to the fact there was no current guidance in the law. It wasn't the Obama administration...it was the EEOC doing their job.

    All the justices (at least on that day), all agreed that a teacher who on occasion led prayers, was a minister. Conservative justices implied that almost all employees can be considered ministers in one way or another. Liberal justices said that it would not apply to almost every position.
    How did they imply that?

    As to whether or not a day care worker is a ministry, I think it is. Such workers represent the teachings of the church to children. There is also a practical aspect in saying that they are. For example, would a day care would that is required to explain scripture verses be a "minister"? If so, then alot of churches, mosques and temples will just add this requirement for their employees.
    As for you saying a day care worker is a ministry position, I can't find what ages she dealt with. What happens if she worked at the daycare for infants? There's generally not very much scripture discussed in that situation. Toddlers, I could see.
    “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.”
    *Adam Smith*

  4. #44
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,406

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    Well, Thomas for starters. If a church can deem any position to be "ministerial", then it is the same as stating that all positions at a church are potentially covered by the exemption (if a particular church so wishes).

    Scalia probably agrees with Thomas.
    When someone write a concurrence others can sign on with the position. Kagan signed off on the concurrence written by Scalia that explained that minister...which is typically linked to protestant clergy, also applied to other faiths. The fact no one else signed with Thomas shows they didn't agree with him
    “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.”
    *Adam Smith*

  5. #45
    Guru

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,899

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    3.) well like i said id have to know more before i have an opinion because i could easily create one in my head that i think SCOTUS would rule in her favor
    The big case in this issue is Tabor Lutheran vs EEOC (teacher firing). The Obama administration lost 9-0. But, the Obama administration also wanted to end the ministerial exemption- even for actual ministers. This frightned even Soto Mayor, and may have led to the 9-0 judicial beat down. In short, the numbers may have been closer if there was no over reach by the administration.

    In either case, I would recommend reading a synopsis of the case and some of the opinions. It makes for very good reading. As a side note, I dont think whether or not the day care takes in outside business or not is a core concept (Lutherna school also took in outside students) but rather who is, or is not a "minister".

  6. #46
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,133

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    They asked her to set a date, not get married NOW, just set a date. They gave her a set time to do so and she failed to meet that timeline. Sounds to me like the church was pretty understanding and offered a simple way of keeping her job that showed flexibility in the rules and empathy to her situation. She failed to meet their requests per the handbook the church states she signed. The church wasn't cold and cruel they simply set a simple standard and asked her to meet that standard as part of her employment requirement.
    Demanding someone get married on their timescale is maybe not the most understanding position to take. For folk who claim love, understanding, and forgiveness this act is particularly cold and cruel. Well within their rights though. But that didn't change the heartless manner they acted in.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #47
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    I'll bet you think so.
    You would lose your money, I am defiantly pro-choice, but I wouldn't recommend a pregnant woman to get one unless her health was and issue.


  8. #48
    Guru

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,899

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    they have already ruled on these types of cases many times. whether ministerial or not they can be fired for not following church guidelines.
    she has no case in the matter.
    I wish it were settled, but I dont think it is. For example, the progressives could well argue that making a non minister comply with a particular guideline (no preganancies outside of marriage) is not constitutional.

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    When someone write a concurrence others can sign on with the position. Kagan signed off on the concurrence written by Scalia that explained that minister...which is typically linked to protestant clergy, also applied to other faiths. The fact no one else signed with Thomas shows they didn't agree with him
    Point well taken. Or it could mean they wanted to write a slightly different opinion. I"ll read their opinion and get back to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    I don't think you understand how the EEOC works....is't their job to take employers to court when someone files a discrimination complaint. The reason it went to the Supreme Court is due to the fact there was no current guidance in the law. It wasn't the Obama administration...it was the EEOC doing their job.
    The justices referred to the "Adminstration" when writing theor opinions. EEOC was perceived by them as acting on behalf of Obama.
    Last edited by Cryptic; 01-14-15 at 03:53 PM.

  9. #49
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    45,404

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    The big case in this issue is Tabor Lutheran vs EEOC (teacher firing). The Obama administration lost 9-0. But, the Obama administration also wanted to end the ministerial exemption- even for actual ministers. This frightned even Soto Mayor, and may have led to the 9-0 judicial beat down. In short, the numbers may have been closer if there was no over reach by the administration.

    In either case, I would recommend reading a synopsis of the case and some of the opinions. It makes for very good reading. As a side note, I dont think whether or not the day care takes in outside business or not is a core concept (Lutherna school also took in outside students) but rather who is, or is not a "minister".
    I think it would simply based on any ethics or appearance argument . . . if others arent held to that regard then why anybody else
    and i followed that case a little but i dont remember it
    wasnt it a private school and there was a contract? or was that some other case
    Quote Originally Posted by RamFel View Post
    Genetically human & human being is exactly the same thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    homosexuality is objectively wrong, but because science tells me it is, not politics.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    I'm not at risk for AIDS. Gays are.
    Quote Originally Posted by ajn678 View Post
    there is no such thing as an abortion on a dead fetus.

  10. #50
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    01-16-18 @ 09:07 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,532

    Re: Church fires unwed pregant employee

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    I don't think you understand how the EEOC works....is't their job to take employers to court when someone files a discrimination complaint. The reason it went to the Supreme Court is due to the fact there was no current guidance in the law. It wasn't the Obama administration...it was the EEOC doing their job.
    yet that is exactly what they are doing and there is currently a lawsuit in the works that the EEOC is not giving employers enough time to work out a deal and or correct the issue.
    in this case it was a mining company.

    the EEOC has been tried against church's and church organizations and they fail every time.

    As for you saying a day care worker is a ministry position, I can't find what ages she dealt with. What happens if she worked at the daycare for infants? There's generally not very much scripture discussed in that situation. Toddlers, I could see.
    My kids attended a church day care. I think they go as little as 2-3 years old. they sing church songs and everything else and do bible stories along with learning colors and shapes etc ...

    most people working at a church have to sign some kind of statement of faith and that they will live by the church by laws.
    getting pregnant outside of a marriage and not getting married in a timely fashion could violate church law.

Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •