Private school fired unwed pregnant woman

[Invert]

In my opinion I think it's wrong for the school to do that but...

I was listening to a report about this today and like all the teachers in that Catholics school this teacher signed an agreement with this school to uphold the Catholics believes by teaching them and by example (this was in her contract). The school fired her because she did not fulfill that part of the agreement as Catholics do not believe in pre marital sex. It was also reported that all of the teachers including the principle liked this teacher and said that she was a good teacher.

It was also reported that this baby is her ex-boyfriends. She was not raped.

[Arta]

I think it's wrong, but probably not illegal. AFAIK, religious schools get quite a bit of leeway with this kind of thing.

[shout]

It's perfectly fine on a legal level, but it is terrible on a moral level.

[QwertyMonster]

That IS wrong, and pretty much stupid!

[Forged]

I think it's wrong, but probably not illegal. AFAIK, religious schools get quite a bit of leeway with this kind of thing.

http://www.sidley.com/news/pub.asp?PubID=134716252001

They are going to lose the lawsuit.

[hismajesty]

I don't think this is wrong. She signed a contract. What's the big deal? If George Bush signed a contract saying he was going to give a billion dollars to welfare, and then he didn't do it, lord knows you'd be all over that. It's the same thing, except it deals with a religious aspect of the contract. But that shouldn't matter, seeing as how the contract was legally binding.

[Adron]

It was also reported that this baby is her ex-boyfriends. She was not raped.

Well, then it sounds like a religiously correct thing to do. Maybe a little late, if she is no longer even with that boyfriend, but... And what about Mary and Jesus? Do they know that she has had sex just because she is pregnant?

Morally, wrong, since they are effectively also punishing her unborn child.

And legally, probably wrong as well. Since they are firing her over the pregnancy, not over having a private detective snoop into her private life to detect her actually having sex before marriage. Discriminating against women, obviously.

[Arta]

http://www.sidley.com/news/pub.asp?PubID=134716252001

They are going to lose the lawsuit.

Good.

[iago]

I don't think this is wrong. She signed a contract. What's the big deal? If George Bush signed a contract saying he was going to give a billion dollars to welfare, and then he didn't do it, lord knows you'd be all over that. It's the same thing, except it deals with a religious aspect of the contract. But that shouldn't matter, seeing as how the contract was legally binding.

If George Bush signed a contract saying he'd make sure all non-Catholic behaviour was outlawed, they probably wouldn't hold him to it. 

[Forged]

Those are two way diffrent things though iago.  This woman teaches at a private religous instituion, George Bush is running a religouslly liberated country.  In theory I agree with the school, but other variables need to be taken into account.

[iago]

Those are two way diffrent things though iago.  This woman teaches at a private religous instituion, George Bush is running a religouslly liberated country.  In theory I agree with the school, but other variables need to be taken into account.

I was just just arguing against what Trust said. 

Of the situation, if it's a religious private school, then I agree with their expectations.  If it's not religious, then I don't.  I don't know if they're religious or not, I didn't read the story

[hismajesty]

It's religious.