Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:50PM, Nepenthe wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:40PM, Do_unto_others wrote:

It is simply another case of unjust dismissal. And by a Church, no less. And all you can do is make excuses for it.

The Church shouldn't have to make an excuse for the dismissal.  But then, I am a libertarian, and as such believe in freedom.

And what about "freedom" for Disabled Americans?

It sounds like you're in favor of "freedom" for ONLY the fully-abled....

That's an interesting position to take--are all "libertarians" so cold-hearted and ANTI-Constitution?

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:59PM, Wanderingal wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:52PM, Girlchristian wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:50PM, Wanderingal wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:34PM, Girlchristian wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:30PM, Do_unto_others wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:28PM, Girlchristian wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 3:26PM, Do_unto_others wrote:

Oct 10, 2011 -- 3:42PM, Girlchristian wrote:

One of the values of our society is separation of church and state, which is why churches are exempt from discrimination laws, otherwise, churches would be forced to hire people that don't fall in line with their teachings and/or their beliefs.

I think her 'beliefs' DO fall in line with the Church's. But she doesn't work for the Church. She works for the SCHOOL.

It's CHURCH RUN SCHOOL, which means she does work for the church.

Apologist. Excuses, excuses. You must have missed the part that said her beliefs are not COUNTER to the Church's. They just wanted an excuse to not have to abide by the ADA. Such a 'fine' example this "Church" is setting.

Read my post. I NEVER said HER beliefs were against the church's. I said that the reason that churches aren't held to the same discrimination laws is because if they were then they would be forced to hire people that did.

Here we have yet anotrher attempt to covdfr over the immoral acts of a supposed "religious" organization by presenting FALSE assertions as somehow being "true.

Nobody is talking about "Forcing any church to hrie someone."

Have you actually READ the info on the case?

Because your ill-nformed psots here suggest that yo bave not--but afr merely trying to defend a church that is acting in an immoral way.

 

Yep I went to PBS' website and read about it since the link didn't work and I read the piece TPaine supplied. Clearly, the fact that I was discussing why the ministerial exception was created in the first place has gone over your head.

Wrong as usual.

The INSTANT case is NOT about "forcing churches to hire" anyone--you've made that up in an attempt to pull the attention away from what the church is trying to do to a formerly valued employee.

Typical distracting attempts from you.....

BTW--the little digs about links are attempts to distract too--unless you think we're so stupid we don't know what you're trying to do?

My post was clearly about why the exception was created in the first place AND I've clearly stated that churches shouldn't be allowed to discriminate based on disability. I'm not going to argue over the fact that some here have misunderstood my point.

Has anyone read the 6^th Circuit Court decision which can be found here? I think it's important to understand why a court rules as it does.

It's incidents such as this that cause me to oppose vouchers for religious schools and faith based initiatives. Although it's not an issue in this case, when taxpayer funds are given to organizations which are allowed to discriminate, some individuals are subject to being discriminated against by those organizations their taxes money support.

Oct 11, 2011 -- 5:22PM, Tpaine wrote:

Has anyone read the 6^th Circuit Court decision which can be found here? I think it's important to understand why a court rules as it does.

It's incidents such as this that cause me to oppose vouchers for religious schools and faith based initiatives. Although it's not an issue in this case, when taxpayer funds are given to organizations which are allowed to discriminate, some individuals are subject to being discriminated against by those organizations their taxes money support.

Well phrased and to the point Thank you

Oct 11, 2011 -- 6:17PM, Lonesentinel wrote:

Oct 11, 2011 -- 5:22PM, Tpaine wrote:

Has anyone read the 6^th Circuit Court decision which can be found here? I think it's important to understand why a court rules as it does.

It's incidents such as this that cause me to oppose vouchers for religious schools and faith based initiatives. Although it's not an issue in this case, when taxpayer funds are given to organizations which are allowed to discriminate, some individuals are subject to being discriminated against by those organizations their taxes money support.

I admit to not reading your link yet, but I still wish to disagree.  As a parent, the voucher system of giving it to the parent to decide where their child goes is still the best method.  I am sending my children to a religeous school in my neighborhood because the alternative is to send them to a school with a rating of 2 on a scale from 1 to 10 on their ability to give quality education.  The school itself is ran by the LCMS which does teach not of my own personal convictions, but it is better than the alternative.  Presently, we afford this only due to the fact both my wife & I work - if either of us lost our job, we would not be able to send our children there. 

When you are a parent, although this topic of employment rights is important, your child's education exceeds almost all other concerns - just the way it is.  It is too bad that schools are not what I grew up with in the 70's & 80's...

I am absoutely opposed to any voucher system for education outside the public system.

My parents and grandparents chose to educate al of us in Private, not parochial, Catholic high schools and certainly wished no help from the state.

I pay high property taxes where I live so my grandchildren can attend an excellent public high school. I will pay them long after they graduate to maintain this school system. I am willing to fork out for good public education.

LS, why live in an area with shoddy public schools? Not a slam, just a question.