The U.S. Constitution is the inspired word of God. Problem solved because you can never prove me wrong, and if you do, you're disproving the bible.

Take taxpayer money (and yes, that includes vouchers)? Then no, you don't get to nullify federal law by hiding under your favorite superstition.

Wait..., wait.... Are schools abt to be declared as people?

/dnrtfa

I was expecting her sin to be gluttony, turns out it's (medically related) sloth.

DamnYankees: But what happens when a parochial school fires a teacher because she invokes her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the law that bars discriminating against the disabled?

Why - in gods name - would a religious institution have an exemption from the ADA? I understand them having exemptions from certain religion-specific anti-discrimination laws, but nothing else.

Just like every other job, you can't discriminate based on certain types of traits unless those traits are critical to actually doing the job (like hiring a paraplegic to be a lifeguard). I don't see any reason to exempt religious institutions from this.

From what I've read, this is piggy-backing on the exemption that clergy have that allows religious organization to actively discriminate in hiring and firing practices (as in the Catholic Church is legally allowed to discriminate on the basis of gender in their hiring of clergy members). This exemption carries over to other forms of discrimination as well: A Church of White Supremacy would be legally allowed to discriminate in hiring clergy on the basis of race.

Surprise! The people who run supposedly Christian organizations are a bunch of unChristian assholes.

/hope they get sued into oblivion

Big Man On Campus: The U.S. Constitution is the inspired word of God. Problem solved because you can never prove me wrong, and if you do, you're disproving the bible.

Thank you Trolly McTrollson

MisterTweak: Taken to its logical conclusion, Dellinger contends, it would mean that a religious organization could bar its employees from reporting to civil authorities that children are being sexually abused, or that health and safety violations are taking place. "A religious organization has no such constitutional entitlement to become a law unto itself," he argues.

No, that would never happen. Typical strategy, painting the most extreme, implausible case which clearly is outside the bounds of reality.

not five minutes ago i would have questioned the plausibility of a churchschool firing a teacher because she developed narcolepsy but there you go.

DamnYankees: But what happens when a parochial school fires a teacher because she invokes her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the law that bars discriminating against the disabled?

Why - in gods name - would a religious institution have an exemption from the ADA? I understand them having exemptions from certain religion-specific anti-discrimination laws, but nothing else.

Just like every other job, you can't discriminate based on certain types of traits unless those traits are critical to actually doing the job (like hiring a paraplegic to be a lifeguard). I don't see any reason to exempt religious institutions from this.

Amen.

I could see why a public school in a Mahareshi-Vedic-only town could require all its teachers to be Vedic, but I don't see why that would also exempt them from things like wheelchair access or age discrimination.

I cannot see why this is even being discussed. The teacher wins. I guess some lawyers got involved and messed it all up.

Dang. Meant to include this link to the Mahareshi Vedic town: linky (new window).

Perich was hospitalized and went on disability leave. In December, she told the school principal that she had been diagnosed with the sleep disorder narcolepsy, that treatment had begun, and that her doctor expected her to be able to return to full-time work in two to three months. The following month, the school changed its health insurance policy, hired another teacher and suggested that Perich resign. When she refused and threatened to sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act, she was fired.

i know if jesus were alive today he would approve of this

This whole alleged 'separation of church and state' is nothing but a pain in the *** for Americans... the only ones who truly win are the GDMF lawyers.

Judd Nelson's Nostrils: Douglas Laycock, representing the Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church school

His porn name is Bill Wilson.

Wow, I was expecting to be firmly on the teacher's side here, but it's actually a complicated issue.

I imagine the SCOTUS will try and keep their decision as narrow in scope as possible. Lots of "in this case" wording.

Um, yes, and it's a damn shame we allow religious institutions to discriminate in such a manner.

The only possible exception I can think of is ordained and trained ministers, like Catholic priests, and even then, it's high time the Il Papa gets off his butt and just says "Woman priests? Thatsa ok with God"

MisterTweak: Taken to its logical conclusion, Dellinger contends, it would mean that a religious organization could bar its employees from reporting to civil authorities that children are being sexually abused, or that health and safety violations are taking place. "A religious organization has no such constitutional entitlement to become a law unto itself," he argues.

No, that would never happen. Typical strategy, painting the most extreme, implausible case which clearly is outside the bounds of reality.

What you did there, my son, I see it. Perhaps we can discuss this later in the privacy of my study.

Highway61Revisited: DamnYankees: But what happens when a parochial school fires a teacher because she invokes her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the law that bars discriminating against the disabled?

Why - in gods name - would a religious institution have an exemption from the ADA? I understand them having exemptions from certain religion-specific anti-discrimination laws, but nothing else.

Just like every other job, you can't discriminate based on certain types of traits unless those traits are critical to actually doing the job (like hiring a paraplegic to be a lifeguard). I don't see any reason to exempt religious institutions from this.

From what I've read, this is piggy-backing on the exemption that clergy have that allows religious organization to actively discriminate in hiring and firing practices (as in the Catholic Church is legally allowed to discriminate on the basis of gender in their hiring of clergy members). This exemption carries over to other forms of discrimination as well: A Church of White Supremacy would be legally allowed to discriminate in hiring clergy on the basis of race.

I'm not trying to be a smarty pants but, would you really want to work for the Church of White Supremacy if you were any other race? My point being, if you disagree with an employer's policies and practices, would you want to work for them.

Mugato: Has anything good ever come out of a religious school?

NSFW Catholic Schoolgirls

I'd give conservative odds of 5 to 4 that Jesus will approve of this decision.

To all those who are having trouble understanding the isssue in question:

There are exemptions in the civil rights laws that allow religious institutions to decide who their own clergy are even if it would normally violate the law. For example, as pointed out above, the Catholic Church is allowed to hire only male priests.

This church is arguing that the teacher was actually a member of the clergy who was also functioning as a teacher, and thus the church could dismiss her for any reason it wishes without violating the law. They liken her position as a "called teacher" to a Catholic nun.

The teacher's argument is that while she did have some religious training and engaged in some religious teaching, she was never acting in the capacity of clergy and was simply a teacher, and therefore the ADA bars the church from firing her in retaliation for her threatening to sue them.

So the key issue is whether she is considered clergy or not.

DamnYankees:
Why - in gods name - would a religious institution have an exemption from the ADA? I understand them having exemptions from certain religion-specific anti-discrimination laws, but nothing else.

because it is built right into the Bible. God does not want faulty people to worship Him. Handicapped people are not to go to church, not to be allowed the same rights as perfect, blemish free people. So, if a handicapped person cannot worship God, how can they teach in God's house/school/classroom?

Lev.21:17-23
Whosoever ... hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. ... Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries.

FTA: church doctrine teaches that all such disputes must be resolved internally, within the church.

Yes that is what Jesus meant when he talked about helping the disabled.

Even if (and I don't think so) they have the legal right to do this shouldn't their you know religion kick in and say you know what lets help her through this temporary set back.

I really would like to know if there are any Christians out there who actually follow the teachings of Christ.

hyper: I'm not trying to be a smarty pants but, would you really want to work for the Church of White Supremacy if you were any other race? My point being, if you disagree with an employer's policies and practices, would you want to work for them.

For some reason, some crazies do. Best example? The Mormons. They teach that being Black is wrong, more or less, it is a curse on them. So the Mormons wouldn't let them join the priesthood. Now remember in Mormonism, EVERYONE joins. So they'd just say "fark all y'all!" right? Wrong. They joined, complained, sued and so on. However, lucky for the Mormon church, the head guy has god's e-mail address and god has good timing. The courts were just about to hand down a ruling that would have taken away the church's tax exempt status when he said "Hey! Guess what? God contacted me and told me that the curse has been wiped away, and blacks can join the priesthood!"

Impeccable timing, that god, at least when cash is involved.

Don't ask me why people do it, but they do.

meat0918: Mugato: Has anything good ever come out of a religious school?

NSFW Catholic Schoolgirls

Damn ... I clicked on that about 20 times before I realized it is not a link!

scottydoesntknow: diaphoresis: This whole alleged 'separation of church and state' is nothing but a pain in the *** for Americans... the only ones who truly win are the GDMF lawyers.

Or you could take the best (worst?) of both worlds and go with Simmons & Fletcher: Christian Trial Lawyers!!

You know I can't unsee that, right? lol

Sangermaine: To all those who are having trouble understanding the isssue in question:

There are exemptions in the civil rights laws that allow religious institutions to decide who their own clergy are even if it would normally violate the law. For example, as pointed out above, the Catholic Church is allowed to hire only male priests.

This church is arguing that the teacher was actually a member of the clergy who was also functioning as a teacher, and thus the church could dismiss her for any reason it wishes without violating the law. They liken her position as a "called teacher" to a Catholic nun.

The teacher's argument is that while she did have some religious training and engaged in some religious teaching, she was never acting in the capacity of clergy and was simply a teacher, and therefore the ADA bars the church from firing her in retaliation for her threatening to sue them.

So the key issue is whether she is considered clergy or not.

Yeah, got it. Not much of a problem, though, seeing how she was hired as A TEACHER and NOT A MINISTER. See how I did that? Check please.

Heard a blurb about a Christian school in Redford , and figured it was Detroit Catholic Central. Turns out that they have since moved to Novi...

...CSB

Mugato: Has anything good ever come out of a religious school?

I actually went to a Jesuit high school that gave me the best college prep and critical thinking skills I could ask for. 3 of the 4 years, the mandatory religion class was actually a class ABOUT religion, including world religions, with only one year of focus on Christian dogma. Even for that year, you were not required to believe, just to learn.

I am now an atheist, and I thank that in no small part to the role this Jesuit Catholic school played in teaching me how to think for myself. If done properly, parochial education can be a fine thing.

In the case of this particular issue, as some other commenters have noted it's a bit more complicated than "church fires woman with disability." That is indeed part of it (and a serious douche move, I might add) but the events afterword make it more interesting. If church doctrine really does say its clergy aren't allowed to sue, the case may hinge in part on whether this woman's job is considered more religious or more educational. There are a lot (a LOT) of other complicated pieces to this issue (How much discriminatory leeway do churches get above and beyond race, gender, and disfigurement? Does it extend only as far as being able to require self-detriment as a condition of employment? Does it even go that far?). Based on the facts given so far I'm inclined to think the woman has the legal "right of way" but I also admit that I am biased, and will be curious to see how SCOTUS rules. This may be one case where I actually make an effort to read through all the opinions they publish.

DamnYankees: But what happens when a parochial school fires a teacher because she invokes her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the law that bars discriminating against the disabled?

Why - in gods name - would a religious institution have an exemption from the ADA? I understand them having exemptions from certain religion-specific anti-discrimination laws, but nothing else.

Just like every other job, you can't discriminate based on certain types of traits unless those traits are critical to actually doing the job (like hiring a paraplegic to be a lifeguard). I don't see any reason to exempt religious institutions from this.

Most teachers at catholic schools sign employment contracts every few years.

Csb time:

Back in the day, at catholic highschool, one of my teachers told me that she had just been told that the diocese was not going to offer her the option to renew her contract, which was up at the end of the year. The reason why is because she did not get her first marriage annulled.
At that time my teacher was very pregnant with her first child; most places of employment won't touch pregnant women because of the associated costs.

She went to the assistant principle to get a recommendation. The assistant principle wasn't aware that my teacher was going to be let go. So, he let her stay on one more year; so she could get medical expenses paid for.

Sangermaine: To all those who are having trouble understanding the isssue in question:

There are exemptions in the civil rights laws that allow religious institutions to decide who their own clergy are even if it would normally violate the law. For example, as pointed out above, the Catholic Church is allowed to hire only male priests.

This church is arguing that the teacher was actually a member of the clergy who was also functioning as a teacher, and thus the church could dismiss her for any reason it wishes without violating the law. They liken her position as a "called teacher" to a Catholic nun.

The teacher's argument is that while she did have some religious training and engaged in some religious teaching, she was never acting in the capacity of clergy and was simply a teacher, and therefore the ADA bars the church from firing her in retaliation for her threatening to sue them.

So the key issue is whether she is considered clergy or not.

That is my understanding as well. The ramifications of this being decided against the teacher are that, should a church/church appendage want to have complete ability to hire and fire with discrimination, all they have to do is label everybody a pastor... i.e. the janitor becomes a sanitation pastor and you can fire his ass for being an asthmatic.

Big Man On Campus: The U.S. Constitution is the inspired word of God. Problem solved because you can never prove me wrong, and if you do, you're disproving the bible.

Step 1: Write constitutional amendment declaring you wrong.

I can see being allowed to hire based on the applicants faith, in terms of religious organizations, but not firing because of a disability. That has nothing to do with maintining the religious cohesiveness of the organization, it has to do with a legal dispute over health insurance.

Mugato: Has anything good ever come out of a religious school?

The Jesuits are pretty awesome, all things being equal. At least as teachers. I had one tutoring me in logic during grade school, much of it stuck.

/atheist.
//respects most religions, even if they ARE batshiate insane.
///no, the bastard never molested me
////*sniffles*

See, this is why you don't make exceptions to laws. You give someone an inch and they abuse the crap out of it.

Easy fix: Do you charge the students to attend? Congratulations, you're a for-profit business with all the restrictions that come with it. You want to be exempt, be a non-profit.

Um...aren't them religious folks supposed to be of the highest moral fiber? This sounds pretty low down and dirty if you ask me.

ProfessorOhki: Do you charge the students to attend? Congratulations, you're a for-profit business with all the restrictions that come with it.

You should probably learn what makes a non-profit a non-profit.

Hint: its not charging for something.