[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Sure that doesn’t mean they don’t necessarily deserve the right and it doesn’t make it any less wrong.
[/quote]
“Wrong?” No rights are trespassed upon.
[/quote]
I remember this convo
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Sorry BC but there is still going to be a lot of gray. Not in the morals of the church (those are very clear and I am not disputing the beliefs). But if she was educated on what the church would terminate her for.
I’m covered under a contract and what I can be terminated, demoted or suspended for is covered in detail (probably more so than Mrs. Herx) and updated regularly. The first three days of the first week of employment are devoted to rules and regulations (which you are then tested on). After that you continue to cover SOP’s (Standard Operating Procedures) for the rest of your academy. And then after that you are tested on them annually (each grade test zero’s in on different SOP’s) until your 5th year of employment. After that any promotion requires re-study of the rules and SOP’s and another test.
That is why I said there is a gray area here, if the church has proof that this was covered with her then she doesn’t have a leg to stand on. BUT if it wasn’t it’s going to be difficult, but like DrMatt said this will never see a courtroom and end in a settlement.
In that though Mrs Herx also has to show that this wasn’t covered with her.
Forgive me if I rambled here.[/quote]
I am assuming you are a firefighter from your avatar, but what you described there is very similar to what teachers must go through. I spent my first 5 days going over all kinds of rules and guidelines on school procedures and such and am required to maintain my knowledge of these guidelines through training provided by my school. My contract and the training are very specific and I have no questions on what I can and cannot be fired for. It will be easy to prove this one either way, since the school is required to write out its guidelines on the matter and have its training on the matter approved, plus the teacher and the school will have a copy of her contract.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now, if the court finds against her, do you guys change your mind, end of controversy? She had no right to renewed contract after all? That’s it. Finished. Nothing more to say.[/quote]
Since I answered, will you change your mind if the court rules against the school?[/quote]
Nope. I perceive inalienable rights to be endowed by a creator.
[/quote]
So this schools admin has the inalienable right to run their school like a bunch of amateurs?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now, if the court finds against her, do you guys change your mind, end of controversy? She had no right to renewed contract after all? That’s it. Finished. Nothing more to say.[/quote]
Since I answered, will you change your mind if the court rules against the school?[/quote]
Nope. I perceive inalienable rights to be endowed by a creator.
[/quote]
So contract law ties into creator endowed rights? That’s a bit of a stretch. Because that is what this is…
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Sorry BC but there is still going to be a lot of gray. Not in the morals of the church (those are very clear and I am not disputing the beliefs). But if she was educated on what the church would terminate her for.
I’m covered under a contract and what I can be terminated, demoted or suspended for is covered in detail (probably more so than Mrs. Herx) and updated regularly. The first three days of the first week of employment are devoted to rules and regulations (which you are then tested on). After that you continue to cover SOP’s (Standard Operating Procedures) for the rest of your academy. And then after that you are tested on them annually (each grade test zero’s in on different SOP’s) until your 5th year of employment. After that any promotion requires re-study of the rules and SOP’s and another test.
That is why I said there is a gray area here, if the church has proof that this was covered with her then she doesn’t have a leg to stand on. BUT if it wasn’t it’s going to be difficult, but like DrMatt said this will never see a courtroom and end in a settlement.
In that though Mrs Herx also has to show that this wasn’t covered with her.
Forgive me if I rambled here.[/quote]
I am assuming you are a firefighter from your avatar, but what you described there is very similar to what teachers must go through. I spent my first 5 days going over all kinds of rules and guidelines on school procedures and such and am required to maintain my knowledge of these guidelines through training provided by my school. My contract and the training are very specific and I have no questions on what I can and cannot be fired for. It will be easy to prove this one either way, since the school is required to write out its guidelines on the matter and have its training on the matter approved, plus the teacher and the school will have a copy of her contract.
[/quote]
Yep I’m a fireman ;),
and thanks for your insight on this. That is why I keep saying there is more to this story than what we’ve seen so far.
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Yep I’m a fireman ;),
and thanks for your insight on this. That is why I keep saying there is more to this story than what we’ve seen so far.[/quote]
Firefighters are one of the very groups of people who always have my respect, no questions asked. And there is always more to these things then what is reported. As a famous TV character is fond of saying, everybody lies. That holds true for Catholic priests as well. I have no proof, but I would bet anything that the pope himself has told a fib or two in his life. In this case, it will be fairly easy to figure out the truth since their guidlines are required to be documented. The only real question will be whether this teacher, who had no religious responsibilities, claims to not be a member of the Catholic faith, and taught only secular classes can be legally considered a minister. I am leaning towards no if all those claims hold true.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Sure I can. We are unique because of our intellect, brain size and everything that entails. We are certainly unique. Special? No.[/quote]
[/quote]
Many animals have larger brains. Many humans don’t have much intellect. All people have periods in life where they do not posses an intellect, coma, unconscious, even asleep or day dreaming. If that is your definition, an unconscious or mentally retarded person isn’t worthy.
But please, start the convoluted logic. I would like to see how impressive of a contortionist act you can pull off.
Once you break your own back, we can start in on how these “specialness” justifies specific privilege. (hint: another infinitely large logic hole you cannot contort your beliefs to arrive at)[/quote]
Okay we are unique because no other species has 100% the same DNA as us. [/quote]
And no other animal has the same genetic structure as ANY ANIMAL ON THE PLANET. Sorry, that doesn�??�?�¢??t make us unique at all. Plus, almost every human has different genes which leads to other wholes.
BUT even if we accept this, you are claiming that a fertilized egg IS special? And second, how would this “specialness” (that we share with every life form on the planet) logically result is special rights? Why don’t dolphins also get this specialness for their special DNA?
[/quote]
We are not special, I merely said we are unique from other species and a supernatural aspect is not required to say that[/quote]
Yes, we are unique, just like everything else.
So, you disbelieve human rights. [/quote]
No I personally consider human life above all others. I do not claim to be able to prove why I think we are
[/quote]
So you believe in something without proof or reason? Interesting.
Must be magic. But a soul is just silly.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now, if the court finds against her, do you guys change your mind, end of controversy? She had no right to renewed contract after all? That’s it. Finished. Nothing more to say.[/quote]
Since I answered, will you change your mind if the court rules against the school?[/quote]
Nope. I perceive inalienable rights to be endowed by a creator.
[/quote]
So this schools admin has the inalienable right to run their school like a bunch of amateurs?[/quote]
I would look into schools run by the CC, the average cost per student and their overall administration costs and then…
bow my head in shame.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Sure I can. We are unique because of our intellect, brain size and everything that entails. We are certainly unique. Special? No.[/quote]
[/quote]
Many animals have larger brains. Many humans don’t have much intellect. All people have periods in life where they do not posses an intellect, coma, unconscious, even asleep or day dreaming. If that is your definition, an unconscious or mentally retarded person isn’t worthy.
But please, start the convoluted logic. I would like to see how impressive of a contortionist act you can pull off.
Once you break your own back, we can start in on how these “specialness” justifies specific privilege. (hint: another infinitely large logic hole you cannot contort your beliefs to arrive at)[/quote]
Okay we are unique because no other species has 100% the same DNA as us. [/quote]
And no other animal has the same genetic structure as ANY ANIMAL ON THE PLANET. Sorry, that doesn�??�??�?�¢??t make us unique at all. Plus, almost every human has different genes which leads to other wholes.
BUT even if we accept this, you are claiming that a fertilized egg IS special? And second, how would this “specialness” (that we share with every life form on the planet) logically result is special rights? Why don’t dolphins also get this specialness for their special DNA?
[/quote]
We are not special, I merely said we are unique from other species and a supernatural aspect is not required to say that[/quote]
Yes, we are unique, just like everything else.
So, you disbelieve human rights. [/quote]
No I personally consider human life above all others. I do not claim to be able to prove why I think we are
[/quote]
So you believe in something without proof or reason? Interesting.
Must be magic. But a soul is just silly.[/quote]
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Now, if the court finds against her, do you guys change your mind, end of controversy? She had no right to renewed contract after all? That’s it. Finished. Nothing more to say.[/quote]
Since I answered, will you change your mind if the court rules against the school?[/quote]
Nope. I perceive inalienable rights to be endowed by a creator.
[/quote]
So this schools admin has the inalienable right to run their school like a bunch of amateurs?[/quote]
I would look into schools run by the CC, the average cost per student and their overall administration costs and then…
bow my head in shame. [/quote]
Not really, I’m talking about this particular school not Catholic schools as a whole. Unless you’re saying wishy washy decision making has been the result of Catholic school success?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
Wow, you believe in revelation. You are more spiritual than many Christians.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
Wow, you believe in revelation. You are more spiritual than many Christians.[/quote]
Can you define spirituality for me?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
Wow, you believe in revelation. You are more spiritual than many Christians.[/quote]
I don’t know how you came to the conclusion I believe in revelation.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
Wow, you believe in revelation. You are more spiritual than many Christians.[/quote]
I don’t know how you came to the conclusion I believe in revelation.[/quote]
Because that is exactly what you described…?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
Wow, you believe in revelation. You are more spiritual than many Christians.[/quote]
Can you define spirituality for me?[/quote]
“Spirituality can refer to an ultimate or an alleged immaterial reality;[1] an inner path enabling a person to discover the essence of his/her being; or the “deepest values and meanings by which people live.”[2] Spiritual practices, including meditation, prayer and contemplation, are intended to develop an individual’s inner life; spiritual experience includes that of connectedness with a larger reality, yielding a more comprehensive self; with other individuals or the human community; with nature or the cosmos; or with the divine realm.[3] Spirituality is often experienced as a source of inspiration or orientation in life.[4] It can encompass belief in immaterial realities or experiences of the immanent or transcendent nature of the world.” - wiki
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
The Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend is very clear: ?The process of in vitro fertilization very frequently involves the deliberate destruction of embryos or the freezing of embryos, which the Church holds to be incompatible with the respect owed to human life.? Now anyone is free to disagree, but no one is free to accept a job at a Catholic school and make up his own rules. That is why it is so obnoxious to see Emily Herx, the ?victim? teacher, making the rounds on TV trying to gin up public support. She knew when she took her job that as a condition of employment she was expected to serve as a ?moral exemplar? as defined by the Catholic Church.
http://www.catholicleague.org/catholic-prerogatives/[/quote]
Their definition of “very clear” and the US legal system’s definition are likely two different things. The principal of the school did not know about it, so it couldn’t have been all THAT clear. If it was not specified in the contract and/or it was not made clear to her in her job training (maybe not even then since the contract will trump training in the court case) then it was not “very clear.”[/quote]
In Fort Wayne, Indiana the issue for busybodies is the termination of a Catholic teacher who violated Church teachings by receiving in vitro fertilization. Some may wonder what is wrong with this procedure.
^ that is the sentence before it. Sorry that I made it confusing. [/quote]
Sorry BC but there is still going to be a lot of gray. Not in the morals of the church (those are very clear and I am not disputing the beliefs). But if she was educated on what the church would terminate her for.
I’m covered under a contract and what I can be terminated, demoted or suspended for is covered in detail (probably more so than Mrs. Herx) and updated regularly. The first three days of the first week of employment are devoted to rules and regulations (which you are then tested on). After that you continue to cover SOP’s (Standard Operating Procedures) for the rest of your academy. And then after that you are tested on them annually (each grade test zero’s in on different SOP’s) until your 5th year of employment. After that any promotion requires re-study of the rules and SOP’s and another test.
That is why I said there is a gray area here, if the church has proof that this was covered with her then she doesn’t have a leg to stand on. BUT if it wasn’t it’s going to be difficult, but like DrMatt said this will never see a courtroom and end in a settlement.
In that though Mrs Herx also has to show that this wasn’t covered with her.
Forgive me if I rambled here.[/quote]
I think what Mr. Donahue was saying is that what is wrong here with IVF Ft. Wayne-South Bend makes “very clear” I don’t think it was a judgement on the contract or whatever. If it is, I need to get better reading comprehension because I suck.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
Yep I’m a fireman ;),
and thanks for your insight on this. That is why I keep saying there is more to this story than what we’ve seen so far.[/quote]
Firefighters are one of the very groups of people who always have my respect, no questions asked. And there is always more to these things then what is reported. As a famous TV character is fond of saying, everybody lies. That holds true for Catholic priests as well. I have no proof, but I would bet anything that the pope himself has told a fib or two in his life. In this case, it will be fairly easy to figure out the truth since their guidlines are required to be documented. The only real question will be whether this teacher, who had no religious responsibilities, claims to not be a member of the Catholic faith, and taught only secular classes can be legally considered a minister. I am leaning towards no if all those claims hold true.
[/quote]
Talking about Dr. Cal Lightman? I cried when they show ended (not really, I am a man so that of course is a total impossibility).
I’ve read his book (who Dr. Cal is based off and the main advisor for the show), and it’s very interesting. Though it is of course a little exaggerated than what the actual Doc says in his book it is mostly true that people lie every 10 seconds (from the science). Though he does make room for exceptions, and he also explained that most of these lies are not willful, but are lies in the sense that the whole truth isn’t being said and not in the manner of purposeful deceiving. Still very interesting.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
I wish I could have Jesus coming down and talking to me. The closest I have ever been to anything that could be remotely considered a “religious experience” was one day when I was riding the bus home from work when I thought I had this feeling in my gut that I was supposed to be a religious brother, specifically grow a long beard and become a CFR. Then I belched and realized it was the the meat sauce and beer from lunch.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
Wow, you believe in revelation. You are more spiritual than many Christians.[/quote]
I don’t know how you came to the conclusion I believe in revelation.[/quote]
Because that is exactly what you described…?[/quote]
I believe people have experiences they can’t account for.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
No I came to that conclusion through personal experience. Unfortunately I am unable to telegraph why to people outside of my own head.
It’s similar to people who have claimed to have had some sort of religious experience (jesus coming down and talking to them etc.) They can justify that particular belief to themselves. [/quote]
Wow, you believe in revelation. You are more spiritual than many Christians.[/quote]
I don’t know how you came to the conclusion I believe in revelation.[/quote]
Because that is exactly what you described…?[/quote]
Not divine revelation
[/quote]
Okay, I didn’t say it was, but since you bring it up, where was your revelation from? You have already admitted itâ??s not from a thought process, or logic, or reason. So where then?