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

Agent Ferris said:

BFD. Happiness is not a right. She can pursue her happiness at another job.

No the bible is a lot more ****ing stupid.

I'm a ****ing anti-theist.

Yes it is a little more than just a piece of paper, it is a tyrannical piece of paper which forces the individual into the bonds of indentured servitude to the state since birth.

No it's not. You are not entitled to any good or service. You are not entitled to anything except the right of self ownership.

The employer is not obligated to hire anyone, the reason doesn't matter.

No what we have here is the right of self ownership and a made up right which infringes upon the right of self ownership.

A) If it was in her contract that she would abstain from sex then she violated the contractual agreement, B) unless the contract entitled her to a certain length of employment they could have fired her because it's a tuesday and not been in violation of the contractual agreement.

Click to expand...

Wow. That's pretty interesting. You're pretty interesting. Nice to meet you. I hope we get to talk again soon.



Does anyone who resides within the realm of reason and who is not pissed off beyond the limits of sanity want to have a conversation about this?

Agent Ferris said:

No one has the right to employment, the employer owes no good or service to anyone if she violated the voluntary contractual agreement which she entered into with the owner of the business whether she showed up five minutes late when it states clearly in her contract that she must show up on time or if she had sex if it said that she would not, then she violated the contract, it doesn't matter if it is being used as a pretext to deny maternity leave or not, she violated the contract and can be fired.

Click to expand...

That's just factually incorrect. Nearly everyone has violated their employment contract (if they have one) at some point during their careers. If the employer ignored it for a long period of time, they can't just suddenly fire you for it when it's inconvenient for them to pay maternity leave. That's a violation of the contract, which almost certainly specifies maternity leave.

Agent Ferris said:

In fact if offering maternity leave was mandated by the state then that in itself is a violation of his rights to begin with.

Click to expand...

Whether or not you agree with the state's mandate is irrelevant. The employee had a contract specifying she was entitled to maternity leave, which she was denied. That's a breach of contract.

Agent Ferris said:

Now if on the other hand she was under no contractual agreement to abstain from sex and was offered maternity leave in the contract then the employer is in violation of the contractual agreement so long as the contract entitled her to a certain length of employment.

Click to expand...

I highly doubt that her contract specifically mentioned premarital sex, but even if it did, it doesn't change the fact that the employer never had a problem with it until she requested maternity leave.

Kandahar said:

That's just factually incorrect. Nearly everyone has violated their employment contract (if they have one) at some point during their careers. If the employer ignored it for a long period of time, they can't just suddenly fire you for it when it's inconvenient for them to pay maternity leave. That's a violation of the contract, which almost certainly specifies maternity leave.

Click to expand...

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard, she violated her contract not the company, maybe the reason why that stipulation was in the contract to begin with is because they didn't want to pay maternity leave. If she violated the contract they can fire her end of story.

Whether or not you agree with the state's mandate is irrelevant. The employee had a contract specifying she was entitled to maternity leave, which she was denied. That's a breach of contract.

Click to expand...

No that's not a breach of contract because she violated the contractual agreement first, you can't very well obtain maternity leave if you don't have sex now can you?

I highly doubt that her contract specifically mentioned premarital sex, but even if it did, it doesn't change the fact that the employer never had a problem with it until she requested maternity leave.

Click to expand...

Maybe that's why the stipulation was in the contract to begin with. Regardless if she agreed to abide by a Christian ethos while under their employ and became pregnant out of wedlock during that time it is she who violated the contract.

Agent Ferris said:

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard, she violated her contract not the company, maybe the reason why that stipulation was in the contract to begin with is because they didn't want to pay maternity leave. If she violated the contract they can fire her end of story.



No that's not a breach of contract because she violated the contractual agreement first, you can't very well obtain maternity leave if you don't have sex now can you?



Maybe that's why the stipulation was in the contract to begin with. Regardless if she agreed to abide by a Christian ethos while under their employ and became pregnant out of wedlock during that time it is she who violated the contract.

Click to expand...

It's irrelevant. This doesn't fly for the same reason that you can't say "We're sorry Mrs. Smith, we understand you filed for maternity leave...but we also have ignored it in the past when you showed up for work five minutes late. Sorry, you're fired." That is nothing more than an EXCUSE to not have to pay maternity leave since the employer never raised the issue before, and any court in America would feel the same way.

And you are simply factually incorrect that the text of the contract is the only thing that should matter. Anyone who has ever worked in a large organization knows that the rules on paper can be dramatically different from the rules in practice. If an employer allows violations of the written rules to occur, then the courts will NOT view the written policy as the employer's actual policy. This is widely established law.

winston53660 said:

She was not doing anything illegal nor trying intentionally to harm the school. She should sue them.

Click to expand...

Christian schools exist to educate childern in a Christian environment. I am sorry, but pre-martial sex is not a Chirstian value. To allow this would dilute the very essence of Christian education, which is exactly what the parents are expecting of the school. To not fire her would be hypocrisy. That said, I am certain many to most Christian schools are guilty of double standard or uneven application of Christian standards, that is not an argument against her firing.

I would advise against her filing a lawsuit that will not go in her favor but instead cost her a lot of money.

To argue to your direct point: intentional or not, she did do something to harm the school.

winston53660 said:

If emissions from your property are destroying my property I will come after you. You have no right to destroy my property just because you see fit to run a cement factory on yours.

Click to expand...

Except for the part where where the emissions of one party (the male) caused the other party (the female) to be permanently cemented together (in parenthood), this all seems a bit off topic.

Kandahar said:

It's irrelevant. This doesn't fly for the same reason that you can't say "We're sorry Mrs. Smith, we understand you filed for maternity leave...but we also have ignored it in the past when you showed up for work five minutes late. Sorry, you're fired." That is nothing more than an EXCUSE to not have to pay maternity leave since the employer never raised the issue before, and any court in America would feel the same way.

And you are simply factually incorrect that the text of the contract is the only thing that should matter. Anyone who has ever worked in a large organization knows that the rules on paper can be dramatically different from the rules in practice. If an employer allows violations of the written rules to occur, then the courts will NOT view the written policy as the employer's actual policy. This is widely established law.

Click to expand...

A violation of the contract is a violation of the contract, ignoring it in the past does not make it acceptable in the present. If she violated her voluntary contractual obligations it doesn't matter when she did it especially since becoming pregnant establishes beyond any doubt that she was in fact in violation of the contract.

Everybody commits a sin at some point. We always do. If teachers at Christian schools were to be fired every time they committed a sin there would be no teachers.

Thank God she wasn't a pedophile priest. They'd never get rid of her.

They must not have liked her. They could have swept this under the rug for anyone that they liked.

Meg13 said:

Everybody commits a sin at some point. We always do. If teachers at Christian schools were to be fired every time they committed a sin there would be no teachers.

Click to expand...

I don't believe in sin, at least not in the Christian perception of right and wrong, but what I do believe in is contractual obligation. If she violated the contract then they have every right to fire her.

If the school receives local, county, state, or federal tax dollars, then they need to follow local, county, state, or federal laws in regards to discrimination. If they operate purely as a private religious entity, then I don't care how ignorant they are.

Agent Ferris said:

A violation of the contract is a violation of the contract, ignoring it in the past does not make it acceptable in the present. If she violated her voluntary contractual obligations it doesn't matter when she did it especially since becoming pregnant establishes beyond any doubt that she was in fact in violation of the contract.

Click to expand...

So just to clarify, if an employee came into work late once six months ago, and the employer didn't raise the issue at the time, you DO think it should be legal for the employer to then use that as a justification to fire her when she requests maternity leave? Sorry, but that is the stupidest **** I've ever heard, and no one who believes in the rule of law can possibly take that seriously. If the courts actually took your claim seriously (which fortunately they don't...and haven't for nearly a century), then the employment contract guaranteeing maternity leave would mean literally nothing, as the employer will nearly ALWAYS be able to find SOME small violation of the rules in an employee's past to justify her termination.

Catz Part Deux said:

If the school receives local, county, state, or federal tax dollars, then they need to follow local, county, state, or federal laws in regards to discrimination. If they operate purely as a private religious entity, then I don't care how ignorant they are.

Click to expand...

Being a private entity is no excuse for violating the employee's contractual right to maternity leave.

Kandahar said:

Being a private entity is no excuse for violating the employee's contractual right to maternity leave.

Click to expand...

Did the school do this?

Catz Part Deux said:

If the school receives local, county, state, or federal tax dollars, then they need to follow local, county, state, or federal laws in regards to discrimination. If they operate purely as a private religious entity, then I don't care how ignorant they are.

Click to expand...

Im pretty sure private enterprises have to follow those laws too.

Kandahar said:

So just to clarify, if an employee came into work late once six months ago, and the employer didn't raise the issue at the time, you DO think it should be legal for the employer to then use that as a justification to fire her when she requests maternity leave?

Click to expand...

Wrong type of question, first of all yes if she had a pattern of absenteeism or a pattern of being late he would be well within his rights to fire her. A more apt analogy would be if the place of business had a zero tolerance policy for drug use and the lady came and asked for vacation time to go to a drug rehabilitation clinic. I mean how stupid can you be?

Sorry, but that is the stupidest **** I've ever heard, and no one who believes in the rule of law can possibly take that seriously. If the courts actually took your claim seriously (which fortunately they don't...and haven't for nearly a century), then the employment contract guaranteeing maternity leave would mean literally nothing, as the employer will nearly ALWAYS be able to find SOME small violation of the rules in an employee's past to justify her termination.

Click to expand...

You can't get pregnant if you abstain from sex. About the only way to prove that the person was having sex outside of marriage would be to come in and say they were pregnant and request maternity leave. If there was a contractual obligation to abstain from sex while employed then she violated the contract and now she wants a payed vacation for violating the contract? Are you ****ing kidding me?

Kandahar said:

Being a private entity is no excuse for violating the employee's contractual right to maternity leave.

Click to expand...

If she violated the contractual agreement it does, you can't very well be entitled to maternity leave if one of the stipulations of the contract is to abstain from pre-marital sex unless of course she pulled a Hail Mary. Ha! Anyways she could have just thrown herself down a flight of stairs, no fuss no muss no incriminating bulge in 4 months.

The Mark said:

Did the school do this?

Click to expand...

If they came up with a petty excuse (e.g. having premarital sex) to fire her after she requested maternity leave, then yes.

Agent Ferris said:

If she violated the contractual agreement it does, you can't very well be entitled to maternity leave if one of the stipulations of the contract is to abstain from pre-marital sex unless of course she pulled a Hail Mary. Ha! Anyways she could have just thrown herself down a flight of stairs, no fuss no muss no incriminating bulge in 4 months.

Click to expand...

What if the stipulation of the contract is giving up the right to vote because she was female or had to vote for the candidate the school endorsed?

winston53660 said:

What if the stipulation of the contract is giving up the right to because she was female or had to vote for the candidate the school endorsed?

Click to expand...

A) The right to what?

B) If she doesn't like the stipulations within the contract then there's a very easy remedy. DON'T AGREE TO THE CONTRACT!!!

Agent Ferris said:

A) The right to what?

Click to expand...

Oh the right vote sorry my bad

Agent Ferris said:

Wrong type of question, first of all yes if she had a pattern of absenteeism or a pattern of being late he would be well within his rights to fire her.

Click to expand...

Wrong. The employer would be well within his rights to fire her for being late AT THE TIME. But if six months passed and the employer never so much as raised the issue, then the employer would NOT be able to fire her for this reason after she requested maternity leave. The employer's own actions indicated that it was not a problem until the employee wanted maternity leave.

Agent Ferris said:

A more apt analogy would be if the place of business had a zero tolerance policy for drug use and the lady came and asked for vacation time to go to a drug rehabilitation clinic. I mean how stupid can you be?

Click to expand...

With maternity leave, the reason why she's leaving is obvious. This is not the case with vacation time. Did the employer require the employee to disclose how she would be spending her vacation, or did she volunteer this information? If the former, then yes, it's illegal for the same reason: You can't deny someone leave to which they are contractually entitled just because you're able to concoct an excuse for firing them. If the latter, it's a bit different as she VOLUNTEERED the information...but even in this case, I'm not sure if it would fly with a judge, as the employer STILL didn't raise the issue until the employee requested leave. Plenty of companies have a zero tolerance policy on the books, but not in practice. An employee handbook is not the end-all-be-all just because it's in writing; if the employer routinely ignores violations of its own written rules, then a judge will (and should) take that into account when determining what the company's ACTUAL policy was.

Agent Ferris said:

You can't get pregnant if you abstain from sex. About the only way to prove that the person was having sex outside of marriage would be to come in and say they were pregnant and request maternity leave. If there was a contractual obligation to abstain from sex while employed then she violated the contract and now she wants a payed vacation for violating the contract? Are you ****ing kidding me?

Click to expand...

The employer never raised the issue until the employee requested leave. Ergo, it is functionally equivalent to firing someone for coming in late one time six months ago, or for stealing a pencil from the office last year. You can't pull that crap once an employee requests their leave. You can let them take their leave and THEN fire them if it's truly a problem, but you can't just make up excuses to get rid of them because you don't want to pay for their leave.

Agent Ferris said:

If she violated the contractual agreement it does, you can't very well be entitled to maternity leave if one of the stipulations of the contract is to abstain from pre-marital sex unless of course she pulled a Hail Mary.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant. The employer didn't care enough to fire her until AFTER she applied for maternity leave.

Agent Ferris said:

Ha! Anyways she could have just thrown herself down a flight of stairs, no fuss no muss no incriminating bulge in 4 months.

Click to expand...

You're just trolling now. :roll:

Kandahar said:

Wrong. The employer would be well within his rights to fire her for being late AT THE TIME. But if six months passed and the employer never so much as raised the issue, then the employer would NOT be able to fire her for this reason after she requested maternity leave. The employer's own actions indicated that it was not a problem until the employee wanted maternity leave.

Click to expand...

An employer has the right to review his employees work performance whenever they want, if that performance is found to be lacking then he has the right to fire her, that would include excessive absenteeism and lateness.

With maternity leave, the reason why she's leaving is obvious.

Click to expand...

The reason is obvious, IE that she violated her contractual agreement.

This is not the case with vacation time. Did the employer require the employee to disclose how she would be spending her vacation, or did she volunteer this information? If the former, then yes, it's illegal for the same reason: You can't deny someone leave to which they are contractually entitled just because you're able to concoct an excuse for firing them.

Click to expand...

Um if she requested maternity leave then she volunteered the information that she violated her contractual agreement to abstain from sex while under there employ, see ya later.

If the latter, it's a bit different as she VOLUNTEERED the information...but even in this case, I'm not sure if it would fly with a judge, as the employer STILL didn't raise the issue until the employee requested leave. Plenty of companies have a zero tolerance policy on the books, but not in practice. An employee handbook is not the end-all-be-all just because it's in writing; if the employer routinely ignores violations of its own written rules, then a judge will (and should) take that into account when determining what the company's ACTUAL policy was.

Click to expand...

Oh I see a contractual obligation means absolutely **** all to you. Why even have contract terms then?

The employer never raised the issue until the employee requested leave. Ergo, it is functionally equivalent to firing someone for coming in late one time six months ago, or for stealing a pencil from the office last year. You can't pull that crap once an employee requests their leave. You can let them take their leave and THEN fire them if it's truly a problem, but you can't just make up excuses to get rid of them because you don't want to pay for their leave.

Click to expand...

Understand contracts are not binding unless they are continiously enforced under strict zero tolerance guidelines. Interesting, bull****, but interesting none the less. A contract is a contract, she violated the contract, she was in the wrong, the employer had every right to fire her.

Kandahar said:

Irrelevant. The employer didn't care enough to fire her until AFTER she applied for maternity leave.

Click to expand...

No it's not irrelevant, you can't actually prove conclusively that someone is having sex unless they volunteer the information willingly which she did by applying for maternity leave, she violated the contract end of story. Oh and just where did you come up with the idea that a contract is only valid if it is continiously enforced under zero tolerance guidelines?