[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
If you want non-Catholics to leave the school alone, then do not hire non-Catholics and expect them to know and follow all your rules, especially if you do not tell them about or otherwise educate them about those rules. [/quote]
No sir, if she wants to go through RCIA that’s her decision. Just saying she’s expected to conduct herself in a way conducive to the Catholic mission of the institution is above and beyond. Stop trying to tell others they can’t be hired under OUR rules. Do you think your their parents?
[/quote]
I am saying that if the Catholic church wants to HIRE EMPLOYEES in the UNITED STATES that are citizens of the United States, especially if those employees are not themselves clergy members of the Catholic church, then they are required to abide by the laws of the United States in regards to how they treat and hire their employees and how that business is run (i.e. discrimination laws). The US constitution requires that the US government cannot interfere with your right to practice your religion, that is it. It does not give the Catholic church or any other church the right to set up a business in the United States and hire United States citizens as employees of that business and treat those United States citizens however the hell it wants. Any entity that operates a business in the United States is required to abide by the laws regulating business practices, including ways in which you can not discriminate against employees employees. If any Church or other entity, including yours, does not want to abide by those laws, then find some other place to run your businesses.
[/quote]
So you’d force free individuals, non-catholics, to basically sit through RCIA, in order to accept a job, when they’re perfectly willing to accept it on something as general as “conform to basic moral tenets of the faith.” Wow. Am I last the last self-governing, self-responsible adult in a country founded on limited government?
"WASHINGTON, D.C., January 12, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) ? In a breakthrough decision for religious freedom, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled Wednesday that religious institutions have a constitutional right to determine their ministers without government interference.
Although the High Court has long recognized churches? First Amendment right to choose priests and senior pastors, yesterday?s 9-0 decision marked the first time it upheld the ?ministerial exception? for religious schools and other parachurch ministries…"
So you’d force free individuals, non-catholics, to basically sit through RCIA, in order to accept a job, when they’re perfectly willing to accept it on something as general as “conform to basic moral tenets of the faith.” Wow. Am I last the last self-governing, self-responsible adult in a country founded on limited government?
[/quote]
That is not what I am saying at all. I have said in multiple posts that putting something as general as obeying the tenets of Catholic faith onto an employment contract is not good enough in the United States. If the Catholic church wants to make that a requirement to work at their schools, then they need to provide the proper training and education to employees. They cannot just put a general clause like that in an employment contract and arbitrarily decide when to use it without properly educating employees on what is expected of them. That does not work in this country, and there are very good reasons why that is not allowed. If they want to put a general clause like that in their contracts they either have to literally fire every employee who violates even one Catholic rule, such as using birth control and other things, or they cannot do it at all. Otherwise, it is discrimination which is illegal in the United States. If it would be too costly for the Catholic church to provide that training and education, which is why I think they put a general clause like that in the employment contract, too bad. If people who seek employment there do not want to go through the training that would entail or follow those rules when they learn about them, they can find another place to work, but they have to be fully informed and educated in what is expected of them.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
"WASHINGTON, D.C., January 12, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) ? In a breakthrough decision for religious freedom, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled Wednesday that religious institutions have a constitutional right to determine their ministers without government interference.
Although the High Court has long recognized churches? First Amendment right to choose priests and senior pastors, yesterday?s 9-0 decision marked the first time it upheld the ?ministerial exception? for religious schools and other parachurch ministries…"
The person wasn’t a clergy member, but a teacher.[/quote]
That does not apply to this case since this ruling is in regards to a ministerial exemption, and the teacher fired for receiving IVF was a lay teacher and not a minister. Lay teachers at religious schools are still allowed to sue for discrimination.
So you’d force free individuals, non-catholics, to basically sit through RCIA, in order to accept a job, when they’re perfectly willing to accept it on something as general as “conform to basic moral tenets of the faith.” Wow. Am I last the last self-governing, self-responsible adult in a country founded on limited government?
[/quote]
That is not what I am saying at all. I have said in multiple posts that putting something as general as obeying the tenets of Catholic faith onto an employment contract is not good enough in the United States. If the Catholic church wants to make that a requirement to work at their schools, then they need to provide the proper training and education to employees. They cannot just put a general clause like that in an employment contract and arbitrarily decide when to use it without properly educating employees on what is expected of them. That does not work in this country, and there are very good reasons why that is not allowed. If they want to put a general clause like that in their contracts they either have to literally fire every employee who violates even one Catholic rule, such as using birth control and other things, or they cannot do it at all. Otherwise, it is discrimination which is illegal in the United States. If it would be too costly for the Catholic church to provide that training and education, which is why I think they put a general clause like that in the employment contract, too bad. If people who seek employment there do not want to go through the training that would entail or follow those rules when they learn about them, they can find another place to work, but they have to be fully informed and educated in what is expected of them. [/quote]
So you want a law that forces non-catholics to sit through Catholic moral teaching, instead of leaving them free and responsible for themselves…
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Here HH we disagree! IVF requires multiple lives be created and when they do not implant in the uterine wall they die. The lives of children start at the moment the eggs and sperm are joined in a petri dish, special and unique lives are created every time this happens. The embryos that don’t attach are destroyed by default. Therefore when undergoing IVF multiple times, you create life and then kill the lives that do NOT attach.
Simple question though to the family that wants kids. Except there ARE options! gasp Dramatic intake of breath . . . . adoption.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The whole point is to have children. Who thinks up this insanity?
Anyone who thinks that this woman was immoral because she wanted to have a family is totally insane.[/quote]
[/quote]
The baby wouldn’t exist at all if the woman didn’t have IVF. There would be no child at all.
To deny someone their own child…
Didn’t Jesus excoriate the Jews because they made the rules more important than the people? I think Jesus would give the baby a hug, kiss the baby on head, and tell all the hidebound stodgy old priests to go re-read His teachings.
So you’d force free individuals, non-catholics, to basically sit through RCIA, in order to accept a job, when they’re perfectly willing to accept it on something as general as “conform to basic moral tenets of the faith.” Wow. Am I last the last self-governing, self-responsible adult in a country founded on limited government?
[/quote]
That is not what I am saying at all. I have said in multiple posts that putting something as general as obeying the tenets of Catholic faith onto an employment contract is not good enough in the United States. If the Catholic church wants to make that a requirement to work at their schools, then they need to provide the proper training and education to employees. They cannot just put a general clause like that in an employment contract and arbitrarily decide when to use it without properly educating employees on what is expected of them. That does not work in this country, and there are very good reasons why that is not allowed. If they want to put a general clause like that in their contracts they either have to literally fire every employee who violates even one Catholic rule, such as using birth control and other things, or they cannot do it at all. Otherwise, it is discrimination which is illegal in the United States. If it would be too costly for the Catholic church to provide that training and education, which is why I think they put a general clause like that in the employment contract, too bad. If people who seek employment there do not want to go through the training that would entail or follow those rules when they learn about them, they can find another place to work, but they have to be fully informed and educated in what is expected of them. [/quote]
So you want a law that forces non-catholics to sit through Catholic moral teaching, instead of leaving them free and responsible for themselves…Tyranny!
[/quote]
There is no law requiring that, and nor does there need to be, and I think you know that. People in the United States have the ability to choose whether or not they want to accept a job offer. If a person chooses to accept the terms of employment that the Catholic church would need to lay out in order to actually require their employees to follow Catholic morality and rules, then they can, but they do need to be fully informed. Just telling an employee, especially if they are not members of the church, that they have to abide by an arbitrary set of rules is not good enough in this country, and for good reason. They have to be properly educated. And yes, I know that doing so will probably bankrupt most Catholic schools, and I also know that if the Catholic church was required to tell potential employees about all their rules and morals they will have a hard time finding employees, but too bad. If you want to run a business in the United States then you have to follow the laws of the United States regarding how that business can be run.
The official statement by the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend:
?Sean McBride (260) 744-0012 Office (260) 744-1473 Fax (260) 417-6452 Cell
Diocese of Fort Wayne ? South Bend
Archbishop Noll Catholic Center
915 S. Clinton St.
Ft. Wayne, IN 46802
The Secretariat for Communications
4/24/2012
Statement from the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend
The Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend is saddened by the lawsuit filed against it by a former teacher at one of its grade schools. The claims made against the Diocese in the lawsuit allege matters of sex, pregnancy and disability discrimination. The Diocese denies any such discrimination occurred. Rather, the Diocese views the core issue raised in this lawsuit as a challenge to the Diocese?s right, as a religious employer, to make religious based decisions consistent with its religious standards on an impartial basis.
The Catholic Church has a deep pastoral concern for husbands and wives struggling with infertility. The Church promotes treatment of infertility through means that respect the right to life, the unity of marriage, and procreation brought about as the fruit of the conjugal act. There are other infertility treatments, such as in vitro fertilization, which are not morally licit according to Catholic teaching. The Church teaches that every individual embryo has the right to life. 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. Furthermore, the Church teaches that it is morally unacceptable to ?disassociate procreation from the integrally personal context of the conjugal act? and insists that procreation not be reduced to mere reproduction.
The Diocese has clear policies requiring that teachers in its schools must, as a condition of employment, have a knowledge of and respect for the Catholic faith, and abide by the tenets of the Catholic Church as those tenets apply to that person. The Diocese requires that its teachers serve as moral exemplars. Those requirements, and others, are expressly incorporated into Diocesan teacher contracts.
The Diocese does not intend to comment on the specific allegations raised in the lawsuit that was filed against it. However, Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades believes it important that the Faithful understand that the Diocese does not take its obligations as an employer lightly. At the same time, the Diocese understands its obligation to uphold Church teaching and defends its freedom to do so. Bishop Rhoades asks the Faithful to join with him in prayer for the swift and just resolution of this matter ? - one that affirms the Diocese?s ability to exercise its lawful rights consistent with Church teachings.?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Folks, if you don’t like religious based institutions actually being able to resemble their belief system, just say it. It’s our school. It’s our donations. It’s our volunteerism, planning, and structure. It’s our community monitoring them. Our clergy, our parents, our parishioners. Our values. Our initiative. Send your kid somewhere else, please. Take a job somewhere else, please. This isn’t the public’s institution. This is our institution.[/quote]
Good for you. Now make every new employee be a devout Catholic who agrees to 100% adherence to all the tenets and make sure that each employee thoroughly understands that they have to remain childless (or in her case, never have another kid) because your faith says so.
Nice to see the rules are more important than the people the rules…were meant…to serve???
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
…And yes, I know that doing so will probably bankrupt most Catholic schools, and I also know that if the Catholic church was required to tell potential employees about all their rules and morals they will have a hard time finding employees, but too bad…
[/quote]
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The official statement by the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend:
?Sean McBride (260) 744-0012 Office (260) 744-1473 Fax (260) 417-6452 Cell
Diocese of Fort Wayne ? South Bend
Archbishop Noll Catholic Center
915 S. Clinton St.
Ft. Wayne, IN 46802
The Secretariat for Communications
4/24/2012
Statement from the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend
The Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend is saddened by the lawsuit filed against it by a former teacher at one of its grade schools. The claims made against the Diocese in the lawsuit allege matters of sex, pregnancy and disability discrimination. The Diocese denies any such discrimination occurred. Rather, the Diocese views the core issue raised in this lawsuit as a challenge to the Diocese?s right, as a religious employer, to make religious based decisions consistent with its religious standards on an impartial basis.
The Catholic Church has a deep pastoral concern for husbands and wives struggling with infertility. The Church promotes treatment of infertility through means that respect the right to life, the unity of marriage, and procreation brought about as the fruit of the conjugal act. There are other infertility treatments, such as in vitro fertilization, which are not morally licit according to Catholic teaching. The Church teaches that every individual embryo has the right to life. 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. Furthermore, the Church teaches that it is morally unacceptable to ?disassociate procreation from the integrally personal context of the conjugal act? and insists that procreation not be reduced to mere reproduction.
The Diocese has clear policies requiring that teachers in its schools must, as a condition of employment, have a knowledge of and respect for the Catholic faith, and abide by the tenets of the Catholic Church as those tenets apply to that person. The Diocese requires that its teachers serve as moral exemplars. Those requirements, and others, are expressly incorporated into Diocesan teacher contracts.
The Diocese does not intend to comment on the specific allegations raised in the lawsuit that was filed against it. However, Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades believes it important that the Faithful understand that the Diocese does not take its obligations as an employer lightly. At the same time, the Diocese understands its obligation to uphold Church teaching and defends its freedom to do so. Bishop Rhoades asks the Faithful to join with him in prayer for the swift and just resolution of this matter ? - one that affirms the Diocese?s ability to exercise its lawful rights consistent with Church teachings.?[/quote]
So the Catholic church doesn’t think it did anything wrong? I am shocked. SHOCKED, I TELL YOU! The statement is all well and good, but it does not change the fact that they provided no training to this woman, who is not a Catholic, on what was expected of her and that the clause in her contract was very vague and not very specific at all. A link posted earlier by someone quoted the clause in her employment contract on following the tenants of Catholic faith and I already addressed that in detail so I will not do so again.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The official statement by the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend:
?Sean McBride (260) 744-0012 Office (260) 744-1473 Fax (260) 417-6452 Cell
Diocese of Fort Wayne ? South Bend
Archbishop Noll Catholic Center
915 S. Clinton St.
Ft. Wayne, IN 46802
The Secretariat for Communications
4/24/2012
Statement from the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend
The Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend is saddened by the lawsuit filed against it by a former teacher at one of its grade schools. The claims made against the Diocese in the lawsuit allege matters of sex, pregnancy and disability discrimination. The Diocese denies any such discrimination occurred. Rather, the Diocese views the core issue raised in this lawsuit as a challenge to the Diocese?s right, as a religious employer, to make religious based decisions consistent with its religious standards on an impartial basis.
The Catholic Church has a deep pastoral concern for husbands and wives struggling with infertility. The Church promotes treatment of infertility through means that respect the right to life, the unity of marriage, and procreation brought about as the fruit of the conjugal act. There are other infertility treatments, such as in vitro fertilization, which are not morally licit according to Catholic teaching. The Church teaches that every individual embryo has the right to life. 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. Furthermore, the Church teaches that it is morally unacceptable to ?disassociate procreation from the integrally personal context of the conjugal act? and insists that procreation not be reduced to mere reproduction.
The Diocese has clear policies requiring that teachers in its schools must, as a condition of employment, have a knowledge of and respect for the Catholic faith, and abide by the tenets of the Catholic Church as those tenets apply to that person. The Diocese requires that its teachers serve as moral exemplars. Those requirements, and others, are expressly incorporated into Diocesan teacher contracts.
The Diocese does not intend to comment on the specific allegations raised in the lawsuit that was filed against it. However, Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades believes it important that the Faithful understand that the Diocese does not take its obligations as an employer lightly. At the same time, the Diocese understands its obligation to uphold Church teaching and defends its freedom to do so. Bishop Rhoades asks the Faithful to join with him in prayer for the swift and just resolution of this matter ? - one that affirms the Diocese?s ability to exercise its lawful rights consistent with Church teachings.?[/quote]
Such utter horse-hockey…how many teachers in that system are living together with members of the opposite sex, are fucking flaming homos, or fucking weed heads?
They cover up priests giving blowjobs to 12 year olds but go after a couple who want to bring a beautiful baby, to bring LIFE, into this terrible world.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
…And yes, I know that doing so will probably bankrupt most Catholic schools, and I also know that if the Catholic church was required to tell potential employees about all their rules and morals they will have a hard time finding employees, but too bad…
[/quote]
Thank you. Finally, we get to it.
[/quote]
I was hoping that you would bring that up so that I didn’t have to. The fact is that if the Catholic wants to hire lay employees, then they have to abide by US law on hiring and general business practices. If they cannot do that, too bad. They can either abide by the law or rely on actual clergy and ministers.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
…And yes, I know that doing so will probably bankrupt most Catholic schools, and I also know that if the Catholic church was required to tell potential employees about all their rules and morals they will have a hard time finding employees, but too bad…
[/quote]
Thank you. Finally, we get to it.
[/quote]
I was hoping that you would bring that up so that I didn’t have to. The fact is that if the Catholic wants to hire lay employees, then they have to abide by US law on hiring and general business practices. If they cannot do that, too bad. They can either abide by the law or rely on actual clergy and ministers.[/quote]
Oh, I’m confident the law has been followed. See you at the Supreme Court! Wonder if we’ll pull another 9-0 for religious freedom? We’ll see.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
…And yes, I know that doing so will probably bankrupt most Catholic schools, and I also know that if the Catholic church was required to tell potential employees about all their rules and morals they will have a hard time finding employees, but too bad…
[/quote]
Thank you. Finally, we get to it.
[/quote]
I was hoping that you would bring that up so that I didn’t have to. The fact is that if the Catholic wants to hire lay employees, then they have to abide by US law on hiring and general business practices. If they cannot do that, too bad. They can either abide by the law or rely on actual clergy and ministers.[/quote]
Oh, I’m confident the law has been followed. See you at the Supreme Court! Wonder if we’ll pull another 9-0 for religious freedom? We’ll see.
[/quote]
I highly doubt it. There is a HUGE difference between a minister, even a lay minister, and a lay teacher who did not teach church doctrine and was not even a member of the church that runs or sponsors the business. If the supreme court does not uphold the rights of lay workers, then there will be massive repercussions, and possibly even rioting. Also, everyone who wants to own a business will try to establish a religion to sponsor it so that they can treat employees however they want. It just plain will not happen.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
…And yes, I know that doing so will probably bankrupt most Catholic schools, and I also know that if the Catholic church was required to tell potential employees about all their rules and morals they will have a hard time finding employees, but too bad…
[/quote]
Thank you. Finally, we get to it.
[/quote]
I was hoping that you would bring that up so that I didn’t have to. The fact is that if the Catholic wants to hire lay employees, then they have to abide by US law on hiring and general business practices. If they cannot do that, too bad. They can either abide by the law or rely on actual clergy and ministers.[/quote]
Oh, I’m confident the law has been followed. See you at the Supreme Court! Wonder if we’ll pull another 9-0 for religious freedom? We’ll see.
[/quote]
I highly doubt it. There is a HUGE difference between a minister, even a lay minister, and a lay teacher who did not teach church doctrine and was not even a member of the church that does runs the business. If the supreme court does not uphold the rights of lay workers, then there will be massive repercussions, and possibly even rioting. Also, everyone who wants to own a business will try to establish a religion to sponsor it so that they can treat employees however they want. It just plain will not happen.[/quote]
Oh, I am more than confident. The Supreme Court will not dare tell us that we must knowingly renew the contract of folks in violation of our religious mission. This isn’t China or Cuba. Not yet, at least.
And, even if we did go ‘broke,’ we’d scrape enough together to instruct Catholics. We’re resourceful like that. It’d be all those poor, urban, non-catholic children your local government schools failed that would truly suffer.