Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 58

Thread: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornicator

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    It would be easy to prove that he did her with a paternity test. What she's saying is she got fired for having sex with him. Basically if he's the father, it proves that he also had premarital sex, but was treated differently.
    This is just stupid bullcrap. They were given the same exact contract when hired and like her case whatever happened before he was hired is NOT covered by the contract. This means it doesn't matter if he is the father or not. They were treated exactly the same in every way. You have no case. Breach of contract is breach of contract. Deal with it for a change.
    Last edited by Henrin; 03-06-13 at 05:01 PM.

  2. #42
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,127

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    This is just stupid bullcrap. They were given the same exact contract when hired and like her case whatever happened before he was hired is NOT covered by the contract. This means it doesn't matter if he is the father or not. They were treated exactly the same in every way. You have no case. Breach of contract is breach of contract. Deal with it for a change.
    They weren't treated the same. His premarital sex was treated differently from hers. Their marital statuses weren't different. We're even talking about the exact same instance of sex.

    2 differences, and one was the contract, the other was their gender. Now if they're morally horrified at the idea of premarital sex, why would they hire him? If you're going to say they have the right to only have employees who stand for their morals, wouldn't you ask that they be consistent and not hire someone they know violated that?

    If you're going to ask somebody to sign a contract that regulates their conduct, why would they hire somebody who they know can't live by it? If you as an employer had a policy that none of your employees was to drink alcohol, would it make much sense for you to hire a guy who was a raging alcoholic until 3 weeks ago?

    I'd think that as a libertarian, you'd bristle at the idea of somebody else regulating your off the clock conduct.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    They weren't treated the same. His premarital sex was treated differently from hers. Their marital statuses weren't different. We're even talking about the exact same instance of sex.

    2 differences, and one was the contract, the other was their gender. Now if they're morally horrified at the idea of premarital sex, why would they hire him? If you're going to say they have the right to only have employees who stand for their morals, wouldn't you ask that they be consistent and not hire someone they know violated that?

    If you're going to ask somebody to sign a contract that regulates their conduct, why would they hire somebody who they know can't live by it? If you as an employer had a policy that none of your employees was to drink alcohol, would it make much sense for you to hire a guy who was a raging alcoholic until 3 weeks ago?

    I'd think that as a libertarian, you'd bristle at the idea of somebody else regulating your off the clock conduct.
    Her boyfriend wasn't employed by the school at the time pre-marital sex occurred. Why would he be held to a contract he didn't sign?

    They married. After marrying, her now-husband got a job at the school. The contract now applies to him but he's no longer having pre-marital sex so he isn't braking the rules. Why fire him when he's never broken the contract?

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    They weren't treated the same. His premarital sex was treated differently from hers. Their marital statuses weren't different. We're even talking about the exact same instance of sex.
    They were treated the same. He wasn't under contract when it occurred and therefore it doesn't affect his employment picture. She was under contract when it occurred and therefore it did affect her employment picture.

    2 differences, and one was the contract, the other was their gender. Now if they're morally horrified at the idea of premarital sex, why would they hire him? If you're going to say they have the right to only have employees who stand for their morals, wouldn't you ask that they be consistent and not hire someone they know violated that?
    It has no bearing on the case if they hire people who had premarital sex or not.

    If you're going to ask somebody to sign a contract that regulates their conduct, why would they hire somebody who they know can't live by it? If you as an employer had a policy that none of your employees was to drink alcohol, would it make much sense for you to hire a guy who was a raging alcoholic until 3 weeks ago?
    If you are going to form a discrimination case around this than you would need to look at the hiring process of both parties. You aren't doing that. As for what I would do or what you would do, that has no bearing on the case either.

    I'd think that as a libertarian, you'd bristle at the idea of somebody else regulating your off the clock conduct.
    For goodness sake, don't even go there. It's a contract and like any other contract that you sign on your own free will you are bound to that contract. If people want to have sex outside of marriage than it would serve them well to not sign contracts forbidding such actions. This isn't a very hard concept to understand. Read the contract and if you agree with everything there then sign the contract, and if you don't, then by all means don't sign the contract.
    Last edited by Henrin; 03-06-13 at 05:45 PM.

  5. #45
    Professor
    vendur's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    06-05-13 @ 08:35 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,250

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Umm, isn't there already a way too long thread on this issue of someone violating a contract they freely signed?


    http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...aving-sex.html

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    For goodness sake, don't even go there. It's a contract and like any other contract that you sign on your own free will you are bound to that contract. If people want to have sex outside of marriage than it would serve them well to not sign contracts forbidding such actions. This isn't a very hard concept to understand. Read the contract and if you agree with everything there then sign the contract, and if you don't, then by all means don't sign the contract.
    I carry a gun at work. I signed a contract stipulating that having any kind of weapon could result in my termination (which on it's face is funny because of the tools we have). Should I ever be found out, I'll leave without a fuss, because I know what I signed, I agreed to the terms.

    Likewise if someone signs a contract stipulating that pre-marital sex can result in their termination, and they choose to have pre-marital sex anyway, then should they be found out and fired, they should leave without a fuss. They knew what they signed.

  7. #47
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,781

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Isn't anybody else on this forum a grammar nerd? I'm sure that some who hold opposing political and social views would like to call me out for posting what I posted here - 'cause I screwed up!

    The correct word is TENETS not TENENTS!!

    The other point about the difference between a church and a religion; there are some 30,000+ churches that place themselves into the religion of Christianity. Not all of them hold the same views as those promoted by San Diego Christian College, a fundamentalist, every word of the Bible is true, school.


    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    Two points here:
    1) It is not about a "RELIGION'S TENANTS!" Religions don't have TENANTS, they have TENENTS

    2) A church is not a religion, it belongs to or follows a religion
    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Grammar coppery is pointless and your distinction has no legal relevancy.

    What MAY be relevant is attempting to prove ADMINISTRATIVE staff is NOT part of "religion," but rather only a "business matter," which is what the attorney is trying to argue. That has been successful in some EEOC suits where a relation held a woman should be paid less than a man - because the men are "ministers" and the women aren't. By proving the men do no ministering and it just an evasion of law, such cases have been won.
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    Isn't anybody else on this forum a grammar nerd?
    The mod team consider being a grammar nazi a form of trolling and issue infractions for it. It's best just to ignore grammar and spelling errors and stick to the topic of the discussion.

  9. #49
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Discrimination lawsuits work by attacking the motivation of the firing. Its is clearly contractually grounded to fire to the women and hire her boyfriend, but it demonstrates a clear lack of consistency in motivation by the employer. Theological moral reasoning against premarital sex would consider the boyfriends act equally sinful and make him equally unsuited for the workplace. The schools deception about their purported justification for firing her strongly suggests that they had ulterior motivations.

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: School Allegedly Fires Woman for Premarital Sex Then Offers Her Job to Co-Fornica

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Discrimination lawsuits work by attacking the motivation of the firing. Its is clearly contractually grounded to fire to the women and hire her boyfriend, but it demonstrates a clear lack of consistency in motivation by the employer. Theological moral reasoning against premarital sex would consider the boyfriends act equally sinful and make him equally unsuited for the workplace. The schools deception about their purported justification for firing her strongly suggests that they had ulterior motivations.
    Ex-post-facto contracts are illegal. The boyfriend wasn't an employee at the time pre-marital sex occurred. You can't hire someone, obligate them to a code of conduct, and then go back and punish them for behavior which occurred prior to their signing the contract.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 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
  •