Comments on: NYCLU Sues Queens Catholic School Over Unwed Teacher’s Pregnancy

By: Marie

Marie — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 20:29:27 +0000

for those who do not understand where it is written in the Bible about no premarital sex. THat’s an easy one, just look at the Ten Commandments, Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery. Having sex with someone who is not your spouse, is adultery. Your boyfriend/girlfried does not qualify as your spouse.

By: Marie

Marie — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 20:23:44 +0000

As a reverted Catholic who was in the same situation, I understand both points of view. I was an unwed pregnant woman who taught in a Catholic school. I left before I was showing (at the end of the school year) and had not told my boss in fear that I would lose the insurance that I desperately needed in order to have my baby. The school is legally and morally correct in their decision, however they should allow her to keep insurance until the alloted time for her to apply for individual coverage (6 weeks after birth and given the okay by both doctors).

By: Jay

Jay — Sun, 27 Nov 2005 04:38:27 +0000

Funny? First of all we aren’t even speaking of the same school. Second of all, that guy should have been fired, if that particular school had it in the regulations.

By: Michael Turton

Michael Turton — Sun, 27 Nov 2005 01:56:03 +0000

Funny, because my cousin who is the ethics teacher at his Catholic School got his g/f pregnant, and wasn’t canned. The message of the Church is clear: if you’re a man you can boink whatever you like (unless it is another grown adult man) but if you’re a woman, be very very afraid.

Also, although you claim that the Church’s position is biblically-based, it is not, but instead is based on non-Biblical doctrines and interpretations. Which scriptures specifically disallow sex before marriage? Answer: none. None of the sayings attributed to Jesus address it, and in the OT it is never presented as a sin, only as an offense against the value of the woman as a marriage partner. In the NT “fornication” is usually a translation of the Greek that is generally iffy.

There’s no clear prohibition in the Bible against premarital sex. It’s just another shining example of the way Christians reading their desired interpretation into their text.

Michael

By: apostle

apostle — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:58:38 +0000

Sorry Mr. Sinistere, but I’m married, have been for 6 years, and am not obsessed with being laid. You’ve made a lot of claims that need demonstrating, but like any atheist idiot, fail to do so. I thought I was debating with someone intelligent, but I guess I was wrong. Very hypocritical of “tolerant” liberals to rant and rave about the injustices and hypocrisy of the Christian faith. While atheists fail to realize that by claiming there is no moral law giver but me, myself, and I, they are saying that they themselves have no right to bitch about Christians or conservatives way of thinking, because after all whatever is right for me is all that matters. So my desire to abort liberals and eat them for dinner should not be condemned by anyone. How much do you weigh?

By: in sinistere-BV

in sinistere-BV — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 22:59:41 +0000

“…the fairy tale of fairy tales is that this world was formed from nothing out of nowhere.”

I see you’re a biology and cosmology expert now. Benighted [edited]

“Then in that case my friend, all atheists, deists, and liberals would be excluded from your staff.”

Not surprisingly, your reading is for crap. I imagine you’re one of those cross-eyed Christ-[edited] who yammers on about atheism and science supposedly being as religious in nature as Christianity. Here’s one of many key differences: Christians, by and large, are miserably stupid people, suitable only for menial jobs, incest, blind worship of invisible geeks, and gravitating toward ramshackle hole-in-the-wall Web sites like this one.

Know any Christians who have gottenm divorces, Bible-boy? I do. I also know a few who have gotten remarried in their own churches. That’s known as adultery, but of course they conveniently ignore this, just as they conveniently ignore parts of the Bible that inconvenience them while making pariahs out of people like this schoolteacher. The bottom line is that you’re just envious it wasn’t you who banged the broad, and couldn’t get laid in a Thai whorehouse.

By: apostle

apostle — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 22:15:52 +0000

Then in that case my friend, all atheists, deists, and liberals would be excluded from your staff. It is laughable that you call Christians and other people of faith delusional when the fairy tale of fairy tales is that this world was formed from nothing out of nowhere. It is also laughable that you call us hypocrites when it is this woman who claimed Christianity, took a position in a church, and then becomes pregnant out of wedlock.

By: in sinistere-BV

in sinistere-BV — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 21:59:45 +0000

apostle, you’re absolutely right that the school has the legal right to [edited] this teacher for whatever reason they like. This, however, doesn’t negate the hypocrisy or stupidity inherent in doing so. I also have the “right” to believe in fairy tales, complain about faggotry, and tell people they’re bound to suffer for all eternity for (gasp) fornication, but that doesn’t mean I should.

That you would blither on in suport of any institution mandating that sentient adults “keep her legs closed” just because they don’t own wedding rings marks both you and the institution as laughingly backward.

I fully support the right of any enterprise to fire anyone, for any reason. If I found out someone with strong religious convictions was working for me I’d lose him or her in a heartbeat, because I’m not a fan of keeping puritanical, worthless sub-human delusionals on my staff.

By: apostle

apostle — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:56:13 +0000

Excuse me Mr. Rat, but the fact that fornication isn’t a crime won’t get you very far when you swear an oath sexual morality in accordance with the Bible then turn around break it. The Church, since it is protected by the separation of church and state card you lib idiots always play, is free to fire her for whatever they want. The only civil rights that would be violated would be the rights of the church to practice its religion, which is what the church did in this case. Its not just Catholics that would have fired her by the way, any protestant church worth anything would have done the same thing. Get an education and come back later. And to you Monica, should we give this woman a cookie because she chose not to murder her baby? How about choosing to keep one’s legs closed since the church they are working in prohibits the activity? Bet you never dreamed of personal responsibility have you? She knew the rules and doctrines when she got the job. Period. And now you Beelzebub: You claim right-wingers are against America and all that it stands for? You mean like the Constitution that protects the churches right to practice their religion, which includes the firing of people that fail to meet standards of their faith? Go back to Communist Russia you ignorant moron. Its left-wing liberals that have this country in the middle of a war on terror, since it was libs that left Bin Laden go 4 times. Its communists like yourself that want to take away the American Dream by putting a cap on how much money someone (like an oil company) can make. You better look in the mirror before you go saying something stupid like that. The ACLU and liberals as a whole have done nothing but try and rewrite the Constitution and the Bill of Rights since this country was founded. If you want sexual freedom to screw whoever and whatever you want whenever you want, don’t join a Christian church.

By: The Paulie Revolution

The Paulie Revolution — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 16:09:26 +0000

Call the NYCLU!!!!
Stop the ACLU has uncovered more evidence of a Catholic school acting, well, Catholic.
Now why would a Catholic school fire an unwed, pregnant teacher? Ah, maybe the same reasons you wouldn&#8217;t want a junkie to be the lead counselor at your next…