Anti-Abortion Group Backs Fired Pregnant Teacher

[Steeltemplar]

None of us here would judge this lady, and I’m sure she would be welcome anywhere we go along with her baby. That is not the issue here.

But she’s teaching in a Catholic School, and must have a modicum of creditbiliy. Just too much explaining to do for young kids, and if her pupils are teenagers, sure she will be called on by some of her female students for all kinds of info regarding sexuality.

That needs to come from a teacher not in that situation. I’d find it hard to accept my little girl was taking advice from a unwed mother about sex and relationships. Call me old fashioned. We are mature enough to undestand, and to sort things out, that people make mistakes, we have life experience to call on, but a 14 year old girl or younger does not have that benefit.

What are they to think?

If we’re talking about a woman who has repented and changed her life, then she would have a very powerful message to give. Her message would be: “I made the wrong decision by being promiscuous. Don’t make the mistakes I did!”

I’m old fashioned too, btw

 

[JimR-OCDS]

surf(name removed by moderator)ure

This is a common mistake that is made regarding compassion and forgiveness. What you have done is take the situation entirely out of context. The fact is that the diocese, the school, and the parents who are paying for the education of their young and impressionable children have a direct responsibility to those children.

The impression they’ll get seeing their teacher fired because she sinned, will have a long lasting effect, I’m sure.

Would Jesus have fired her?.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The school and the Church can be forgiving and compassionate, but she must repent and there must be consequences that must be paid.

First off, you don’t know if she went to confession and repented or not.

Second, she’s going to have to live with the consequences of raising a child by herself. Firing her, will hurts her further.

I can believe the lack of compassion I’m reading in this thread.

I’ll ask again, would Jesus have her fired?

Jim

 

[LRThunder]

First off, you don’t know if she went to confession and repented or not.

Second, she’s going to have to live with the consequences of raising a child by herself. Firing her, will hurts her further.

I can believe the lack of compassion I’m reading in this thread.

I’ll ask again, would Jesus have her fired?

Jim

Maybe, maybe not.

But as others have mentioned, her actions have created, or at least had the potential to create a scandal. If this was a public school, the scandal would not have existed. But since this was a Catholic school…

 

[JimR-OCDS]

BamaRider

But she’s teaching in a Catholic School, and must have a modicum of creditbiliy.

All the more reason the school should be showing compassion, rather than throwing the poor woman out of her job.

Just too much explaining to do for young kids, and if her pupils are teenagers, sure she will be called on by some of her female students for all kinds of info regarding sexuality.

These are pre-school children that she teaches. I bet the older kids would be less judgmental of her than the adults who fired her.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

If we’re talking about a woman who has repented and changed her life, then she would have a very powerful message to give. Her message would be: “I made the wrong decision by being promiscuous. Don’t make the mistakes I did!”

I’m old fashioned too, btw

How do you know she didn’t repent?

How do you know she was promiscuous? It may be she was involved with a man whom she loved and they were on the road to getting married, but he backed out, after he found out she was pregnant.

Jim

 

[LRThunder]

BamaRider

All the more reason the school should be showing compassion, rather than throwing the poor woman out of her job.

These are pre-school children that she teaches. I bet the older kids would be less judgmental of her than the adults who fired her.

Jim

Sometimes losing one’s job is a natural and reasonable consequence if one does something that is in direct defiance of their employer.

Maybe the school shouldn’t have fired her, but they were well within their rights to do so.

Jesus may or may not have fired her if he was in their position, but neither you nor I are in a position to judge what he would have done.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Sometimes losing one’s job is a natural and reasonable consequence if one does something that is in direct defiance of their employer.

Maybe the school shouldn’t have fired her, but they were well within their rights to do so.

Jesus may or may not have fired her if he was in their position, but neither you nor I are in a position to judge what he would have done.

Based on Jesus actions with sinners, I feel safe in saying, he would not have fired the woman.

Yes, the school has the right to fire her, but in Jesus day, they had the right to stone adulterers as well. The right doesn’t make it ethical or compassionate.

Jim

 

[Fidelia]

How do you know she didn’t repent?

How do you know she was promiscuous? It may be she was involved with a man whom she loved and they were on the road to getting married, but he backed out, after he found out she was pregnant.

Jim

Unmarried sex IS promiscuous. period. on the road to getting married is NOT married. period.

 

[Fidelia]

Based on Jesus actions with sinners, I feel safe in saying, he would not have fired the woman.

Yes, the school has the right to fire her, but in Jesus day, they had the right to stone adulterers as well. The right doesn’t make it ethical or compassionate.

Jim

that is right. I agree with the person who suggested having her take a leave of absence, so as not to scnadalize the young students. But a woman known to her students as “Miss…” should not be standng before them with a baby-belly. They are pre-K and that’s too young. and like somoen else said, if there are teen students in the same school, teen girls might go to her for advice, etc. and who knows if she would say “don’t make my mistake” or say “make sure you use two forms of BC because we only used a condom and it broke”

 

[LRThunder]

Based on Jesus actions with sinners, I feel safe in saying, he would not have fired the woman.

Yes, the school has the right to fire her, but in Jesus day, they had the right to stone adulterers as well. The right doesn’t make it ethical or compassionate.

Jim

Firing someone isn’t nearly the same as stoning someone.

 

[childofmary1143]

First off, you don’t know if she went to confession and repented or not.

Second, she’s going to have to live with the consequences of raising a child by herself. Firing her, will hurts her further.

I can believe the lack of compassion I’m reading in this thread.

I’ll ask again, would Jesus have her fired?

Jim

Now look who’s casting stones by saying we aren’t compassionate.

 

[childofmary1143]

Based on Jesus actions with sinners, I feel safe in saying, he would not have fired the woman.

Yes, the school has the right to fire her, but in Jesus day, they had the right to stone adulterers as well. The right doesn’t make it ethical or compassionate.

Jim

We aren’t talking about stoning someone. Just firing. Also by having her fired won’t prevent her from securing employment elsewhere. I’m sure the Public School board could care less why she was fired and in fact they might give her a raise and feel sorry for her.

 

[whatevergirl]

I don’t think she should have been fired…considering that priests who have struggled with sin were not let go from their vocations, I’m confused as to why this young woman was fired. She should have been sent out on a leave of absence…that would have been compassionate, and if she seemed unrepentant (we can only say seemed because we don’t know her heart for sure) then perhaps, letting her go would have been the best recourse.

It’s not that easy for someone to just get a new job at a snap–she will also lose her benefits and she will need these to be able to get good prenatal care for her baby. I understand the sentiments, but all I’m saying is that we should hold everyone to the same standards. If priests are in mortal sin and are ‘found out’, should they be let go too?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Unmarried sex IS promiscuous. period. on the road to getting married is NOT married. period.

You need to get a dictionary.

pro·mis·cu·ous
Pronunciation: pr-mis-ky-ws
Function: adjective
: not restricted to one sexual partner

There is no indication that this woman was promiscuous. Yes, she had sex outside of marriage, and it was a mistake, that will cause her life to be difficult. The school helped make her live even more difficult.

Nothing like kicking a person when they’re down, eh?

Jim

 

[catharina]

You need to get a dictionary.

pro·mis·cu·ous
Pronunciation: pr-mis-ky-ws
Function: adjective
: not restricted to one sexual partner

There is no indication that this woman was promiscuous. Yes, she had sex outside of marriage, and it was a mistake, that will cause her life to be difficult. The school helped make her live even more difficult.

Nothing like kicking a person when they’re down, eh?

Jim

Having given this situation days of thought, my conclusion is that it’s regretful that Feminists for Life chose to take up the cause of this fired teacher in reference to her on-the-job rights. There’s no doubt that when she became pregnant, she realized her private violation of the employee practices agreement would soon be public fact. That she, a brand-new teacher, (who was still being assessed as a brand-new teacher, I’m sure), would ever imagine the policy should become an exception in her case is ludicrous.

She has lost her job. Feminists for Life have made the point that financial pressures can lead to some abortions and I don’t argue with that conclusion - but to support this woman’s right to work in her chosen job in a Catholic school teaching preschoolers is so far-fetched that I think it’s insupportable. Preschoolers are not houseplants. Many of them could be very interested in a teacher’s growing/pregnant belly. Next question: where’s the baby’s daddy? Some could ask, ‘Will the daddy come to visit them’ at school? Etc… Who needs such conflict? Not preschoolers, that’s for sure. If the teacher has major concerns about her hurt feelings (losing a job and contact with children who no longer require any contact with her!), she might want to make a case of the hurt feelings she’s sustained as a result of the missing daddy. Has he let her down? It sounds like it. Has her family cut her loose too? The school, her employer, owes her absolutely nothing in the way of a job.

I’ve worked in ProLife for more than 30 years. I’ve participated in more than 100 childbirths and yes, it was a privilege. I’ve also worked with children including preschoolers for almost forty years. They don’t need the grief of this situation - nor do their parents or siblings. Did this woman imagine the school was joking about its expectations for employees? There is an abundance of resources who could help her in her circumstances, from food, clothing, housing, medical care and even with a need for a job. To pretend that her problem is the problem of a Catholic school? Give me a break.

 

[whatevergirl]

Having given this situation days of thought, my conclusion is that it’s regretful that Feminists for Life chose to take up the cause of this fired teacher in reference to her on-the-job rights. There’s no doubt that when she became pregnant, she realized her private violation of the employee practices agreement would soon be public fact. That she, a brand-new teacher, (who was still being assessed as a brand-new teacher, I’m sure), would ever imagine the policy should become an exception in her case is ludicrous.

She has lost her job. Feminists for Life have made the point that financial pressures can lead to some abortions and I don’t argue with that conclusion - but to support this woman’s right to work in her chosen job in a Catholic school teaching preschoolers is so far-fetched that I think it’s insupportable. Preschoolers are not houseplants. Many of them could be very interested in a teacher’s growing/pregnant belly. Next question: where’s the baby’s daddy? Some could ask, ‘Will the daddy come to visit them’ at school? Etc… Who needs such conflict? Not preschoolers, that’s for sure. If the teacher has major concerns about her hurt feelings (losing a job and contact with children who no longer require any contact with her!), she might want to make a case of the hurt feelings she’s sustained as a result of the missing daddy. Has he let her down? It sounds like it. Has her family cut her loose too? The school, her employer, owes her absolutely nothing in the way of a job.

I’ve worked in ProLife for more than 30 years. I’ve participated in more than 100 childbirths and yes, it was a privilege. I’ve also worked with children including preschoolers for almost forty years. They don’t need the grief of this situation - nor do their parents or siblings. Did this woman imagine the school was joking about its expectations for employees? There is an abundance of resources who could help her in her circumstances, from food, clothing, housing, medical care and even with a need for a job. To pretend that her problem is the problem of a Catholic school? Give me a break.

I agree with the reasoning, but why not let her have a leave of absence?

 

[catharina]

I agree with the reasoning, but why not let her have a leave of absence?

If a leave of absence could be fitted into the confines of the code of conduct for employees and if she had proved to be “good in the classroom” then maybe, yes.

However, the further point is that she is denying her own breach of the contract - and that does not make for a trustworthy employee in any setting.

 

[Steeltemplar]

How do you know she didn’t repent?

I have not said if she has or has not. Getting bogged down in such details is why I am trying to discuss the concepts and not the specific case.

How do you know she was promiscuous? It may be she was involved with a man whom she loved and they were on the road to getting married, but he backed out, after he found out she was pregnant.

Jim

Is it really necessary to split hairs like that? In common parlance, people use the term promiscuous to describe someone who is having relations outside of the bonds of marriage. It makes sense because if they are not bonded by marriage than they are not truly restricted to one person.

Regardless, since you make an issue of it, she fornicated. And that is a grave, mortal sin. No amount of love justifies it. So repentance and a change of life are necessary.

 

[KathleenElsie]

abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1641467&page=1

I think its ridiculous for “Feminists for Life” to say that by firing this woman it drives her to have an abortion.

This is a situation that is hard on both parties. The teacher broke her contract when she had sex outside of a sacramental marriage. So this is the grounds of dismissal per her contract.

The teacher is doing the right thing in giving birth to the child that she conceived. But this does not negate her contract with the school. OTOH if she had been raped then she would not have been in breach of her contract on the morals clause.

The school is in a situation that creates a bad image ether way. This might be a good time to teach that all actions in this life have consequences and finally doing the right thing does not negate doing the wrong thing first.

And yes in some instances it could be an excuse for having an abortion. As human beings we all make excuses for our sins when we decide to commit them with full knowledge of their sinfulness.