While I agree with what you say for the most part, I would be more inclined to keep my kids there for the moral stand the school has taken. To me, they are saying 'we have standards and you lied to us and failed to adhere to those standards; we love you, but cannot have you continue in this position.'. It has nothing to do with reconciliation. The bottom line is that in this world there is still a penalty for certain types of actions. To hold people accountable on the job for their actions is neither wrong or pharisitical.
I agree . . . jsut becaue you confess to something doesn't mean you shouldn't be held accountable. Sounds like she should teach at a differnt type of school.
My favorite time at my Christian school when I was younger was my Bible teacher telling my class of 30 plus girls that "50% of the time a woman is raped, it is her fault." Good values. Good values.
1) The chances that actually happened are probably less than 1%. 2) If it did, that person needs a strong talking to.
1. Yeah, I must have made it up in my 13 year old mind at a school I had attended since Kindergarten that my Uncle is the principal of. Silly me, I forgot that Christians doing something horrifically stupid and damaging to people is less than a one percent chance. 2. A strong talking to? Really? Firing someone for premarital sex with the man who turns out to be your husband and being honest about it means justified firing, but.. telling 30 girls that are 13-14 years old that if 50% of the time a woman gets raped its her fault.. equals.. strong.. talking to. My other favorite moment in Bible class was bringing in her daughter who had a kid out of wedlock and telling our class, infront of her daughter and grand daughter who was 5 mind you, that hey "You need to pray for my daughter so she is forgiven for her horrible sin." Good times.
I'd have to disagree due to his use of "actually happened", and then his second point being "If it did, that person needs a strong talking to." Edit: CAUSE I CANT SPELL DISAGREE RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.
Uhh, who fucking cares would be my first thought as I don't give two shits about what Christians do unless they try to force me to go to church. This brings me to the one thing I often agree with lefty loonies about, separation of church and state. See, what people like the OP want is to keep the church out of the government's affairs, just not the other way around.
More often than not wherever and whenever injustice, hate and envy rear their ugly heads, religious hypocrites are at the root of it.
The local leaders, to suppress any possible sexual revolution in order to keep everyone's mind on the work that keeps the leaders rich, would have their informers in the local group of stupified manhaters get the group to picket Joseph's house, demanding he lose his employability forever, become a felon, and live under a bridge the rest of his short life with other felons whom charities won't help. Mary would be supported as a welfare queen for the rest of her life, and any money that Joseph ever made would be garnished from his paycheck, while he'd go in and out of jail for not being able to pay it.
So far as I can tell, 100% of the replies were from men. I can't help wondering, what if a male teacher, newly married, announced his wife was pregnant? Would they make him reveal exactly when she conceived and fire him? And isn't it interesting how "morality" is defined only as controlling women's bodies? I mean, what about charity? Compassion? Loving thy neighbor? Those without sin being first to cast a stone? It's like "moral issues" or "values voters", so called, they are never about feeding the hungry, "moral values" means no family planning and no rights for gays. I'm no Christian, so tell me where Jesus said depriving a pregnant married woman of maternity benefits and holding her up to public scorn was Christ-like. Didn't he allegedly refer to "the least of these my people" in condemning lack of charity?
No, it's usually liberals. Just read your posts or jlprk's. That's about as pure hate as hate can get. Liberalism- the new face of hate.
Good response, good response. First basically call me a liar, then point out spelling mistakes. Always a sound counterargument.
I can't help that one. I'd love it if more women posted, getting me and Denny more $. I'd imagine that, when/if he asked for "paternity" leave, they'd find out. Amazingly enough, it doesn't take much to count backwards nine months. And if he was fired, then he wouldn't get "paternity" benefits, either. I'm not 100% positive, but he wouldn't even qualify for his unemployment insurance. I think it's only defined that way by you. In this case morality is partially defined by integrity (doing the right thing--not fornicating--even when you're pretty sure you won't get caught) and honor (doing the right thing b/c it's the right thing to do--especially if you want to stay employed here) and courage (doing the right thing even when it might hurt you...which I'll allow that this teacher showed when telling the truth). And yes, in this case I can say something b/c I kept my privates outside of women's bodies until I was married. It's tough, and requires an amount of self-discipline. In this case, the "right" thing was following the code of ethics/whatever at the school. She didn't (under her own admission) and was fired for it. Overly sensitive/tough? Maybe. The "right thing"? Dunno. Well within the school's rights? Certainly. What about it? An employee didn't follow the code of the employer, did what she wanted b/c it felt good, and doesn't seem to like the consequences. THAT's the crux of this argument...not religion, women's bodies, etc. It's that someone did something wrong, even though it's what they wanted, and didn't like the consequences. We've had multiple threads on this. "Cops pull me over for going 5 over". Well, don't go over the speed limit. "Cops pull over guy with small amount of weed and arrest him". Well, don't do illegal drugs. "Employer terminates employee for violation of ethics code". Well.... I wrote a novel of a post talking about how "charity" means different things depending on whether you're taking God's view of it or the "progressive" view. http://sportstwo.com/threads/147426-Any-of-you-Republicans-Good-Christians/page2?highlight=charity Conspicuously absent are any replies to that post. The "family planning" and "rights for gays" would probably be better discussed in another thread. See above link for more on "charity". Additionally, I'm not sure that "maternity benefits" qualifies as "charity", but let's let that one pass. If the loss of these benefits, due to her termination for cause, is affecting her ability to provide for her baby, then there are multiple outlets within the church that she can talk to. If she's sincere about it (and really, it's tough to tell, so most churches give to the "needy" and just get duped a lot) then there are plenty of churches that will help her with her "charity". Heck, she can come to my church and we'll help her find a job, get some clothes, use our food bank and maybe even get a little cash to hold her over. But that's not the bailiwick of an educational institution. Either, for that matter, is the burden of attempting to look "Christ-like" to those deriding their HR practices. They're there to teach kids. I'm sure that one of the lessons they're hoping to teach is that just b/c you're in a position of authority doesn't mean you skirt the rules. If a 17 y/o at the school had a baby through fornication, then I'm pretty sure the student would have been dismissed from the school. That happens even at my public high school. Yet when a teacher breaks the ethical code of conduct for the school, I'm supposed to feel bad or give her special treatment?
