• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should a Christian school be allowed to fire a teacher for fornication?

Should a Christian school be allowed to fire a teacher for fornication?

  • Yes, they should be allowed to demand a traditional Christian moral code from all teachers

    Votes: 25 35.7%
  • They should be allowed if they prove they apply the same standards to all teachers

    Votes: 3 4.3%
  • They should be allowed, but that doesn't make it right

    Votes: 19 27.1%
  • They are discriminating against women, since fornication is more obvious with them

    Votes: 3 4.3%
  • If the school board members can prove they never fornicated, then they stand on solid ground

    Votes: 2 2.9%
  • Christian schools should not be allowed to discriminate on moral grounds

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • Christians are the biggest bunch of hypocrites on the face of the Earth!

    Votes: 5 7.1%
  • Other response

    Votes: 4 5.7%

  • Total voters
    70
Based on what??? Nothing to agree or disagree with, it is the law. You really haven't shown anything that debunks what I have or posted proof of anything? Then you say the law itself "No it hasn't which is exactly why this is still up for debate." which is absolutely not true. No one has posted anything even remotely relevant to the counter point.



Religious morals have been upheld in almost every case for private entity's. Including employees who smoke, do drugs and in the case of the Boy Scouts are homosexual. The case law on this says no.

Hostile work environment? She was fired one week after disclosing she had premarital sex. That is a stretch.


BD, you're missing the point. There is no moral clause that trumps federal law. It's against the law to discriminate based on sex or pregnancy.

This woman was clearly discriminated against on both points. A man would not have "shown" his pregnancy, nor been asked about it......which leads to the moral clause you're talking about.
Federal law is clear about gender discrimination.

You can't treat a pregnant woman differently then a woman who is not pregnant. That's federal law. If a moral clause is in contradiction of federal law, the moral clause loses.
Actually, that moral clause is going to add up to dollars when settlement time rolls around.
 
I am no lawyer, but I think she will lose. Her lawyer will charge her a bunch of money and hopefully she can afford it.
Lawyers will take a case knowing it is unwinnable, seen it done within my own family. Judge threw it out immediately.

I think she'll win, Bill. :)

When I had a work related problem, my attorney agreed her fee would be 1/3 of my settlement so I had no lawyer "fees". I'm sure she can find an attorney willing to do the same.
 
NOOoooooo!!!!

Really??!??!??

That bit of info blindsided me… :shock:
Perhaps, but that’s future.

Presently, as I understand the situation, they did nothing illegal.

A point.

Really! Let me explain the birds and the bees...
 
Bodhisattva, what if the sex didn't result in pregnancy, would it be legal to fire her then?

Good question. At this point I think no. It is discrimination. I think that the employment contract that stipulates that would be illegal, and thereby invalid.
 
The teacher was interviewed on the TodayShow this morning (6/14/10) and stated she did not sign a maturnity clause w/her teaching contract which is typically required of most teachers who teach at private Christian/Catholic schools. If true, she'll win her case because she would have been unlawfully terminated based on her pregnancy being the reason why she was fired.
 
I'm only on page 4 of 20+ pages so if this was already addressed...sorry.

Couldn't a legal case be made based on sex (gender). A woman might "show" that she's had sex outside of marriage because of a pregnancy, where a man would not have outward signs.

That sounds like discrimination to me.

:shrug:

...back to reading through this thread

She told them the baby was conceived 3 weeks prior to the wedding. Had nothing to do with her showing.
 
The teacher was interviewed on the TodayShow this morning (6/14/10) and stated she did not sign a maturnity clause w/her teaching contract which is typically required of most teachers who teach at private Christian/Catholic schools. If true, she'll win her case because she would have been unlawfully terminated based on her pregnancy being the reason why she was fired.

Again the school has stated she was not fired for being pregnant. She was fired for have premarital sex, a violation of the moral code. If the school can prove it was something she knew about, then they are correct and she will loose.

Truth is school has said nothing else so again people are assuming she is not lying. She may be absolutely correct, but at this point no one knows.
 
Again the school has stated she was not fired for being pregnant. She was fired for have premarital sex, a violation of the moral code. If the school can prove it was something she knew about, then they are correct and she will loose.

That's hard to say actually. Even a very good attorney would have difficulty predicting the outcome on this one in a court of law I'd wager. The incident also took place in Florida, and we've all seen how their "court system" works in the past. The outcome is hazy at best.

Fundamentally speaking, a person cannot sign away their rights - which includes the right to have sex. Regardless of the contract and the specific wording this remains true.

For example, I cannot sign a contract giving up my legal right to vote. Well, I can sign it, but I can't be held to it.

It's going to depend on the nuances of the case and what the exact laws are in the State of Florida. We're probably not going to get those details from any of the news outlets prior to the case being heard in at least one court.

Frankly, if I were a bettin' man... I'd put my money on the teacher for this one.
 
Quick question. Say someone was working for an atheist organization and part of the employment contract was that they agreed not to attend any religious services/church. Say one of their employees was curious about Christianity and went to Mass one morning. The employer found out and fired that person, was his firing justified?
 
Quick question. Say someone was working for an atheist organization and part of the employment contract was that they agreed not to attend any religious services/church. Say one of their employees was curious about Christianity and went to Mass one morning. The employer found out and fired that person, was his firing justified?

No...........
 
No because a term of employment cannot be forfeiture of your right to free religious expression.

Exactly.

Which is why I also believe that the teacher will win this case. I'm not positive on that mind you, but like I said, "If I were a betting man."

One can neither sign away their devotion, nor can they be contractually obligated for devotion. The teacher did nothing illegal in this case and it in no way impacted her ability to educate the students. I don't know for sure, but "if I were a betting man..."
 
As long as the organization like the Boy Scouts can legally ban gays from being Scout Masters, and religious organizations can ban people of different faiths, then yes they could.
 
As long as the organization like the Boy Scouts can legally ban gays from being Scout Masters, and religious organizations can ban people of different faiths, then yes they could.

Isn't being a scout master a volunteer position not a employment position?
 
Many employers have the arrogant belief that they own their employees and can demand anything from them just because they give them a pay check every month. This case is an example of this.

Any decent labour laws would make a firing like this illegal since it is not the business of an employer how the employee spends his free time, and certainly not who the employee sleeps with.
 
As long as the organization like the Boy Scouts can legally ban gays from being Scout Masters, and religious organizations can ban people of different faiths, then yes they could.

No they cannot make signing away religious expression a term of employment. In fact, it is illegal, by federal law, to even ask what holidays an prospective employer celebrates as a means to garner information on that subject. If the candidate brings it up, it's fine to discuss but a prospective employer cannot even approach the subject.

There is only one exception to this and it's not because it's an exception to federal law but because the information is previously disclosed during their training and ordination: clergy members.
 
There is only one exception to this and it's not because it's an exception to federal law but because the information is previously disclosed during their training and ordination: clergy members.

Well also it is the job description. Like being a topless dancer is a job desription.
 
No they cannot make signing away religious expression a term of employment. In fact, it is illegal, by federal law, to even ask what holidays an prospective employer celebrates as a means to garner information on that subject. If the candidate brings it up, it's fine to discuss but a prospective employer cannot even approach the subject.

There is only one exception to this and it's not because it's an exception to federal law but because the information is previously disclosed during their training and ordination: clergy members.

Not true. My wifes company asks you as it is a Christian/Catholic organization. You cannot work their if you are not, period. So yes a private institution can. They can also fire you for breaking the rules. In the mornings they have a mandatory prayer meeting and study. If you don't go or do not lead at least one time a month you can and will be fired, period.

So yes a private religious organization can.

PS My wife and most of the employees are not clergy.
 
Last edited:
Not true. My wifes company asks you as it is a Christian/Catholic organization. You cannot work their if you are not, period. So yes a private institution can. They can also fire you for breaking the rules. In the mornings they have a mandatory prayer meeting and study. If you don't go or do not lead at least one time a month you can and will be fired, period.

So yes a private religious organization can.

PS My wife and most of the employees are not clergy.

Is she on the clock during these meetings?
 
As long as the organization like the Boy Scouts can legally ban gays from being Scout Masters, and religious organizations can ban people of different faiths, then yes they could.

That's a fair point.

It'll be interesting to see how it all comes down.
 
Not true. My wifes company asks you as it is a Christian/Catholic organization. You cannot work their if you are not, period. So yes a private institution can. They can also fire you for breaking the rules. In the mornings they have a mandatory prayer meeting and study. If you don't go or do not lead at least one time a month you can be fired.

So yes a private religious organization can.

No they cannot. In fact, if anyone were to raise an issue with it, they would be paying through the nose for forcing it. You cannot forfeit religious freedom as a term of employment. I could maybe see it as a term of hire but no employer can deny one the right to convert or stop practicing religion altogether.
 
No they cannot. In fact, if anyone were to raise an issue with it, they would be paying through the nose for forcing it. You cannot forfeit religious freedom as a term of employment. I could maybe see it as a term of hire but no employer can deny one the right to convert or stop practicing religion altogether.

OK I see what you are saying. I mean as in term of employment.

He asked would it be legal to fire you if it was a term of your employment, so again I say yes they can. It has to be stated in the contract, but other than that I don't see why. If someone working for my wifes company became a Wikkan, they would be fired. No court in the land would say they could not. It would disrupt business and create a very hostile work environment for everyone involved.
 
Last edited:
OK I see what you are saying. I mean as in term of employment.

He asked would it be legal to fire you if it was a term of your employment, so again I say yes they can.

Well at least you are a good person to agree to disagree with. Peace.
 
Back
Top Bottom