Teacher Claims She Was Fired From Catholic School For In Vitro Fertilization

sharon said:

I had no idea.. Its just a medical procedure.

Click to expand...

Well to some people, so is abortion. The Church is against that, too.

Phoenix said:

The Catholic faith finds invitro unethical.

Click to expand...

That and the fact religous organisations have been granted specific exemptions from certain laws, which is unethical.

HonestJoe said:

That and the fact religous organisations have been granted specific exemptions from certain laws, which is unethical.

Click to expand...

Why is that unethical? I would say it's unethical (and more importantly in relation to our government unconstitutional ) to force people to do something against their religion (or against their will, said a different way)

sharon said:

I had no idea.. Its just a medical procedure.

Click to expand...

The procedure involves fertilizing many eggs. Only a few are actually used for the procedure. The leftovers are then destroyed.

Top Cat said:

Emily Herx, Teacher Claims She Was Fired From Catholic School For In Vitro Fertilization

Wow. I hope she owns their asses on this. Unconscionable. As the father of two test tube babies, this pisses me off to no end.

Click to expand...

Private school. Teacher knew this when she signed on to teach. If she didn't, then they should have fired her for being to dumb to teach.

Phoenix said:

The procedure involves fertilizing many eggs. Only a few are actually used for the procedure. The leftovers are then destroyed.

Click to expand...

Actually that is not entirely true, many couples choose to donate them to others less fortunate.

Billy the Kid said:

Private school. Teacher knew this when she signed on to teach. If she didn't, then they should have fired her for being to dumb to teach.

Click to expand...

That is a bunch of bull****. Did you know that AI was frowned upon by the Catholic Church and that you could be fired for it? You don't know that this was or wasn't spelled out to her either.

Besides, I fail to see what business her reproductive issues are to the church. Hypocritical assholes the lot of them. Do they fire the women on staff who take the pill?

I would suggest to you that most people did not know that.

Top Cat said:

That is a bunch of bull****. Did you know that AI was frowned upon by the Catholic Church and that you could be fired for it? You don't know that this was or wasn't spelled out to her either.

Besides, I fail to see what business her reproductive issues are to the church. Hypocritical assholes the lot of them. Do they fire the women on staff who take the pill?

I would suggest to you that most people did not know that.

Click to expand...

Ignorance of the law is no excuse, yes?


If I was going to work for a privatge Catholic school, even I would know their basic tenets. It's not like the church hasn't been around for hundreds of years.

Phoenix said:

Why is that unethical? I would say it's unethical (and more importantly in relation to our government unconstitutional ) to force people to do something against their religion (or against their will, said a different way)

Click to expand...

The difference between against their religion and against their will is a key point.

Currently, US law only grants an exception on the grounds of a organisation's religious rules. A secular organisation with an equally strong moral basis is not granted the same exception. Also, a religious individual running a secular organisation can be forced to act against their faith on the grounds of these laws.

The point is that the elected government of your states and country have determined that discriminating against individuals on the basis of certain characteristics is wrong, and is significant enough to impose laws preventing people and organisations from doing so.

If it's wrong, it's wrong. The fact some has a religious basis to their discrimination doesn't magically make it less wrong just as someone basis discrimination on a strong secular moral basis would. There is no moral justification for having a rule or law but adding "unless you're religious" at the end.

The constitutional issue doesn't change the morality question. Taking freedom of religion to it's logical conclusion, it would mean that no law can apply to any religious individual or organisation if they feel that following it goes against their religious beliefs. Obviously that is not how it is interpreted in practice which raises the difficult question of why it is applied to some laws but not others (and, if only indirectly, to some religions and not others).

I know it's a mortal sin to say so in America, but maybe the Constitution (at least as interpreted) is immoral.

Superfly said:

I don't see why everyone is so bent out of shape over this. She works for a Catholic school. There are certain rules if you want to be a Catholic school teacher. She knows these rules. She chose to not follow them. Now she wants to sue? BS. Whether y'all agree with it or not, the fact remains that she is violating the rules with regards to her employer. If you break the rules at work, you pay then penalty. She's just trying to stir up emotion with this issue, and obviously it's working, just by seeing how lathered up everyone is getting over it in this thread.

Click to expand...

Yes, she should be condemned to eternal damnation because she wanted a baby. God, ya gotta love religion, don't you?

Superfly said:

Well to some people, so is abortion. The Church is against that, too.

Click to expand...

The Church is against almost everything - except, apparently, molesting little boys and punishing those who do.

Zyphlin said:

While they're ethical standards may be established due to their belief in religion, it is not directly discriminating against her due to HER religion. That would be more along the lines of "You're a muslim, so we're not hiring you".

Click to expand...

Firing someone for violating their particular religious beliefs smacks of religious discrimination, I don't know how to put it otherwise. Add to that firing her for getting infertility treatment, I don't see how it's anything but discrimination. Interpretation matters, to be sure it may come down either way, but realistically I think it's pretty obvious what's going on. Religious tolerance on matters that collide with reason, is something I just don't have the stomach for.

Billy the Kid said:

Private school. Teacher knew this when she signed on to teach. If she didn't, then they should have fired her for being to dumb to teach.

Click to expand...

She knew they would break the law and discriminate against her (her perspective)?
She knew she was going to have fertility trouble when she took the job?

I don't find your argument compelling.

Wiggen said:

Yes, she should be condemned to eternal damnation because she wanted a baby. God, ya gotta love religion, don't you?

Click to expand...

Count on you Mr. Wiggen to drag that old smelly red herring over the trail.

If she's a Catholic then she went into the school knowing their standing on the issue. If not what does she care about the Catholic Church and their "eternal damnation".

See this is what gets me with the "non-believer" - "religion basher", if you don't believe then you should give a wizz about the rules.

The problem with 'they should have known better' is until now who knew the Catholic Church was against invetro? I mean this came up back when BushII was pandering to the Fundamentalists but the Mother Church stood silent. Now as the Church is pushing back against many women's issues this come up. The Church has a vague 'Church Doctrine' clause but never seemed to list invetro until the healthcare issue came up.

Life beginning at conception is a rather new 'infallible' tenant. Not Church Doctrine in the beginning, more a reaction to the Protestant 'uprising'.

Now for me the separation is a two way street. The Church needs a wall between it's Pulpit and business dealings. It is nothing new, Christian Charities do this all the time in non christian nations. Rome doesn't denounce this, but seems rather understanding in they can't push the Catholic Faith on people who don't agree with it.

No one is saying Nuns must take the pill. But if the nation's law says its OK to do invetro, take the pill and have an abortion then at the very least the Church must allow it's workers that option. Now once the law includes these as part of insurance programs then yes the Church must pay the insurance premiums for its lay workers in hospitals, outreach programs and schools. Don't have to pay the nun's insurance coverage for abortions but do have to for the teacher/coach/janitor.

Failure to keep the wall between the Pulpit and the businesses should at the very least cost the Church it's tax exempt status, for how much of it's dealings is a good subject to negotiate.

Way I see it, Christianity will be a big loser if both Fundamentalists and Catholics continue to attack birth control and fertility treatments using fertilized eggs. The number of AMERICAN women who use or accept birth control, fertility drugs that create multiple egg drop, and invetro is in the high 90's.

They are too American to submit to a foreign potentate, wish our right wing politicians remembered that part of the Constitution when they embrace it. eace

Wiggen said:

Yes, she should be condemned to eternal damnation because she wanted a baby. God, ya gotta love religion, don't you?

Click to expand...

It isn't even about that. It's about the fact that she broke the rules set forth by her employer. The baby aspect is just to garner emotion for her case.

Billy the Kid said:

Count on you Mr. Wiggen to drag that old smelly red herring over the trail.

If she's a Catholic then she went into the school knowing their standing on the issue. If not what does she care about the Catholic Church and their "eternal damnation".

See this is what gets me with the "non-believer" - "religion basher", if you don't believe then you should give a wizz about the rules.

Click to expand...

And you are what gets me with the religious fanatics. No matter what a church does it's fine because, by God, they're a church and they can do whatever the hell they like. I don't give a 'wizz' about stupid religious dogma. What I do care about are human rights, chief of which would seem to be the right to reproduce and not have it cost you your job.

Superfly said:

It isn't even about that. It's about the fact that she broke the rules set forth by her employer. The baby aspect is just to garner emotion for her case.

Click to expand...

Don't be silly. The baby is what the case is all about. You guys crack me up with your 'church rules' nonsense, as though that was the only thing that mattered. How about her right to have a baby and still have a job?

Wiggen said:

And you are what gets me with the religious fanatics. No matter what a church does it's fine because, by God, they're a church and they can do whatever the hell they like. I don't give a 'wizz' about stupid religious dogma. What I do care about are human rights, chief of which would seem to be the right to reproduce and not have it cost you your job.

Click to expand...

I think I've mentioned this before, but I was raised by an atheist. He could have cared what you or anyone else believed in or didn't. Wasn't his problem, nor would he make it his problem.

As to the lady in the article, if she went to work at a Catholic school and didn't know all the rules and regs of the position, then it was her fault. If she did then that's her mistake and problem.

Wiggen said:

Don't be silly. The baby is what the case is all about. You guys crack me up with your 'church rules' nonsense, as though that was the only thing that mattered. How about her right to have a baby and still have a job?

Click to expand...

Nobody is saying she can't have a baby. What they are saying is she cannot remain a Catholic school teacher and engage in a practice that is forbidden by the Catholic church. Religious institutions are different from regular workplaces, and I'm sure that if she taught in a private Jewish school, she would have rules that are set forth by the church. If she taught in a Muslim school, same rules apply. You have to follow the rules set forth by your workplace.

If she didn't want to follow the rules of the Catholic church, she should have gotten a job in a public school. Honestly, she was fortunate to get a job at all, fresh out of college. There are teachers who have been out of work for years, and she waltzes into a job when the ink isn't even dry on her diploma?

Wiggen said:

And you are what gets me with the religious fanatics. No matter what a church does it's fine because, by God, they're a church and they can do whatever the hell they like. I don't give a 'wizz' about stupid religious dogma. What I do care about are human rights, chief of which would seem to be the right to reproduce and not have it cost you your job.

Click to expand...

Doesn't the excecise of your rights have concequences? We seem to hear that a lot, when something happens that the Leftists don't like.

Mach said:

She knew they would break the law and discriminate against her (her perspective)?
She knew she was going to have fertility trouble when she took the job?

I don't find your argument compelling.

Click to expand...

If she knew they would dismiss her from her job for this infraction, then she is dumber than we've all thought.

I don't find the "poor lady was fired because she broke the rules", that you seem to have bought into, as compelling either.

It pays to do a little research, if you're taking a job with a religious organization. You might find out you can't stand any of their beliefs or rules.

Top Cat said:

Emily Herx, Teacher Claims She Was Fired From Catholic School For In Vitro Fertilization

Wow. I hope she owns their asses on this. Unconscionable. As the father of two test tube babies, this pisses me off to no end.

Click to expand...

If you don't wish to risk being fired for doing something the Catholic Church frowns on, don't choose to employ yourself with the Catholic Church.




I have no sympathy. I live in a "right to work" state and last year almost got fired for missing 4 days due to an emergency appendectomy surgery without which I would have died.

Well, I do agree that anybody who would work for the Catholic church under any circumstances is asking for trouble - especially if they have young sons.

Billy the Kid said:

Count on you Mr. Wiggen to drag that old smelly red herring over the trail.

If she's a Catholic then she went into the school knowing their standing on the issue. .

Click to expand...

You can't say that with a straight face.

I was raised Catholic, attended Catholic school and have two test tube babies.

I didn't know of it.

Superfly said:

Nobody is saying she can't have a baby. What they are saying is she cannot remain a Catholic school teacher and engage in a practice that is forbidden by the Catholic church.

Click to expand...

How ironic? You can molest children and remain a Catholic and keep getting paid too.

Too bad for her that she had the gall to want to have children instead of raping some