Teacher Sues Catholic School After Claiming She Was Fired for Using…In Vitro Fertilization
- Posted on April 26, 2012 at 7:36am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
INDIANAPOLIS (The Blaze/AP) — An Indiana teacher who says she was fired from a Roman Catholic school for using in vitro fertilization to try to get pregnant is suing in a case that could set up a legal showdown over reproductive and religious rights.
Emily Herx’s lawsuit accuses the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend and St. Vincent de Paul school in Fort Wayne of discrimination for her firing last June. Herx, 31, of Hoagland, Ind., says that the church pastor told her she was a “grave, immoral sinner” and that a scandal would erupt if anyone learned she had undergone in vitro fertilization, or IVF.
(Related: Teacher to Sue After Being Fired From TX Christian School Over Unwed Pregnancy)
The Roman Catholic Church shuns IVF, which involves mixing egg and sperm in a laboratory dish and transferring a resulting embryo into the womb. Herx said she was fired despite exemplary performance reviews in her eight years as a language arts teacher.
Diocese officials said in a statement issued to The Associated Press on Wednesday that the lawsuit challenges its rights as a religious institution “to make religious based decisions consistent with its religious standards on an impartial basis.”
As The Blaze previously reported, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in January that religious workers can’t sue their employers for job discrimination because anti-discrimination laws allow for a “ministerial exception.” But the justices failed to define who was and who wasn’t a religious employee.
“The Supreme Court didn’t give us a kind of neat little on-off test as to who‘s a minister and who isn’t,” said Rick Garnett, associate dean and professor of law at Notre Dame Law School.
In a similar case in Ohio, a federal judge last month gave the go-ahead for a trial in a lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Cincinnati by a parochial school teacher who was fired after she became pregnant through artificial insemination, which the church is also against. The archdiocese fired Christa Dias in 2010, saying the single woman violated church doctrine.
U.S. District Judge Arthur Spiegel said in his March 29 ruling that the ministerial exception did not apply because Dias was a non-Catholic computer teacher with no role in ministering or teaching Catholic doctrine.
However, Garnett said he believed the ministerial exception cited by the Supreme Court could be applied to most parochial school teachers.
“A lot of Catholic schools, including my own kids’, every teacher brings the kids to Mass, is involved in sacramental activities. … It’s not just one teacher who teaches religion, religion is pervasively involved,” Garnett said. “The key question is whether it would interfere with the religious institution’s religious mission, its religious message, for the government to interfere in the hiring decision.”
Herx’s attorney, Kathleen Delaney of Indianapolis, disagreed.
“She was not a religion teacher. She was not ordained. She was not required to and didn’t have any religion teaching. She wasn’t even instructed about the doctrine that she violated,” said Delaney, noting the ultimate decision would be up to the courts.
Emily Herx (Image Credit: ABC News)
The school found out that Herx was using IVF because she told them about it when she used sick days for the treatments, according to the lawsuit. School officials didn’t indicate until later that there was a problem, the lawsuit says.
Delaney would not say if Herx was able to get pregnant using IVF.
The diocese said that teachers, even those such as Herx who aren’t Catholic, are required by their contracts to abide by Catholic tenets and “serve as moral exemplars.”
Pope Benedict XVI as recently as February urged infertile couples not to use in-vitro fertilization or other forms of artificial procreation, which the church views as an affront to human dignity and the dignity of marriage.
The church believes that procreation should be limited to marital sex, said Dr. John Haas, director of the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia. Also, clinics routinely fertilize more eggs than are implanted, and extra embryos may be destroyed. The church believes those lives are sacred, Haas said.
“To have a child by in vitro almost invariably results in the death of a number of embryos as one works to bring one to term,” Haas said Wednesday.
Herx’s lawsuit, filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Fort Wayne, alleges the diocese violated the Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act by discriminating against Herx based on gender and on infertility, which is considered a disability. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission upheld Herx’s complaint in January.
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 587 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 414 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 375 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 372 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 414 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 372 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 303 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (93)
conservativewoman
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 5:28pm@JROOK
You said, “Perhaps her families offerings fell below average. That would be a better rational.”
For your information, the Church does not sit around counting how much each person gives.
Also, Catholic schools take a FINANCIAL LOSS EVERY SINGLE YEAR! But continue to serve children of all denominations due the Churches tenant to spread the faith.
I just love how people who know nothing of what they are talking about blab nonsense in forums about the Church, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN AXE TO GRIND. I suggest you do some research before you start on the Catholic bigotry, otherwise you may sound silly. I will say a prayer that you find the truth.
Report Post »jeanr
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:44pmAnd the Roman Catholic church still has enough to make hush payments to all of those boys abused by priests. Amazing! I guess that’s why there have been so many double collections lately.
Report Post »Kerstile
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 5:25pmSince there was a contract and the employee violated the contract, she may be terminated. Can she argue that the employer must provide training so that she is ABLE to follow the contract perfectly? Sure, but when you sign on the dotted line, it is YOUR responsibility to KNOW WHAT YOU SIGNED. Argue and complain all you want. Won’t help.
Tough luck lady. Life is not fair (and legally, this is quite “fair”. She violated her contract.). It is simply life. Read and understand the contracts you sign. Those contracts are the basis of much of our Western civilization. Two parties making a legally binding agreement that is none of my business, your business, or our (the government’s) business..
Still. this sounds like a set-up and does not pass the smell test. I smell the Church being “Flucked”….. again.
Report Post »Constantine Ivanov
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 4:22pmOn February 17, 1600, an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician and astronomer Giordano Bruno was sentenced by the Catholic Inquisition and burned at the stake for believing that the Earth is rotating around the Sun and other scientific heresy.
On June 22, 1633, Galileo Galilei was found guilty of believing in Copernican heliocentrism and and was forced to recant in order to escape execution at the stake. The Heliocentrism was consequently termed heretical by the Qualifiers, since it contradicted the literal meaning of the Scriptures.
Today, even pupils of Catholic schools know that the Earth is round and rotates around the Sun.
When and if the Scripture is being interpreted by Christian Fundamentalists, religion in their hands may sometimes cause more harm than good.
Nowhere the Bible says that life begins at conception. On the other hand, Exodus 13:2 says: “Sanctify to me all the first-born, whatever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, [both] of man and of beast: it [is] mine.”
There is not enough place here to prove that IVF is moral, but it helps women to produce life; hence – it’s moral.
Catholic zealots must remember that fanatical obscurantism didn’t produce anything good, but did contribute to spread of atheism.
DEEBERJ said that Emily Herx “was just stupid” revealing that she underwent the IVF.
Report Post »Stupid because she said truth? Wow! Does saying truth deserve being called “stupidity”?
conservativewoman
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 5:44pm@constantine
We Catholics don’t have to remember anything you might suggest. And by the way, your history is innacurate. Galileo was never going to the stake.
More Catholics have been martyred in the 20th century alone by non-Catholics than all the deaths that happened in any inquistion by the Catholic Church in ALL PREVIOUS CENTURIES COMBINED!
But of course you wouldn’t KNOW THAT because you contribute to Catholic persecution.
Report Post »Papist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 5:48pmYour logic is as weak as your argument. The bible need not explain when life begins. Biology tells us that life begins at conception. Of this, there is no debate. In vitro fertalization destroys embryos. Of this, there is no debate. Hence it is IMMORAL as abortion and murder are. The stance of the Catholic Church with regard to IVF is the same as it is on abortion. An innocent life (or lives) are terminated. This is evil and cannot be tolerated.
Report Post »Constantine Ivanov
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 6:09pm@CONSERVATIVEWOMAN:
1. Not only have I nothing against Catholics, I support religion in every post of mine.
But I am strongly against fanaticism and obscurantism.
2. I did not say that Galileo was burned at the stake; please read carefully what I wrote, just to avoid unfounded accusations.
Report Post »Constantine Ivanov
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 6:27pm@CONSERVATIVEWOMAN:
Report Post »One thing more:
Unfortunately, you managed to (intentionally?) misinterpret my brief “excursus” into history:
I was not writing about the NUMBER of victims of obscurantism; I was writing about some delusions that later were undeceived.
This is exactly the analogy needed to emphasize that lack of knowledge of human physiology may cause huge social problems.
And I stay with every word I said. Please note that I am a very strong opponent of late term abortions.
But I am happy that my daughter, after several barren years of marriage, eventually underwent IVF and gave birth to my two absolutely charming grandchildren.
catholicschoolmom
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 3:25pmShe is a hypocrite. Im glad she was fired for not being a good role model and not following the morals of the church she claimed to be a part of.
Report Post »DrFrost
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 4:11pmI don’t think I could disagree more strongly. I don’t agree with every doctrine of the church I attend. If there is someone who agree‘s with the entire doctrine of their church they’re probably the founder. Even priests occasionally speak out against church policy. This does not in any way make these people hypocrites.
Herx has every right to have IVF.
And the RELIGIOUS school she works for HAS EVERY RIGHT to fire her. They’re a religious organization. They have the right to fire and hire based on religious beliefs and/or a person’s adherance to those beliefs. If you don‘t like it then don’t work for a religious organization. THE GOVERNMENT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO SAY IN WHO A RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION HIRES OR FIRES. (And, for the record, I’m not catholic and my church has no issues with IVF.)
The liberals want to preach separation of church and state when it serves their agenda and ignore it completely when it doesn’t.
Report Post »WINNEBAGOMAN
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 4:20pmPlease don’t take this as critisism of your post, as my knee-jerk reaction (as a Catholic) was the same.
When I first started reading the story I agreed with you (CATHOLICSCHOOLMOM) that the woman should have been fired. But when I weigh all the facts: 1.) she’s not Catholic [therefore it would be nearly impossible for her to know all of the Catholic tenants; and 2.) she told the school she was taking sick-leave to get IVF, and they said nothing. By saying nothing they are essentially saying “OK, good luck.” As silence is consent. So then she gets pregnant (by IVF) and now they admonish her and fire her.
I’m not saying that the school has to accept a woman that gets IVF. I am mearly pointing out that it wasn‘t fair that they didn’t warn her of the consequences when they knew her intentions, and then punish her when she follows though with her (then) unassuming plan.
Report Post »Constantine Ivanov
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 5:32pm@CATHOLICSCHOOLMOM:
“A good role model…”?
Role model in what? Do the Catholic school teachers teach how to get pregnant?
Or does the Catholic school morals teach students that pregnancy of a married woman is immoral?
As for Catholic dogma that “life begins at conception”, I have to ask you:
what life are you talking about? A human life? Or just LIFE in general, like animals or insects or plants? All those things are presenting LIFE IN GENERAL.
Almost all objects of flora and fauna begin their life after two living protein cells (with their specific DNA – male and female) join in a symbiosis.
But the new organism becomes a particular species only when it reaches a certain stage of development.
The same – with humans. Only after a zygote (a unicellular biological organism) becomes an embryo and then the embryo acquires specific features that make it a distinguishable human fetus, only then, I repeat, the fetus is a real human.
Full-fledged, valuable human embryo that looks like a tiny human being with pulsing heart, lever, kidneys, digestive system, umbilical cord, and very small head where there are signs of face, eyes, ears and mouth, develops only at the end of the first month to beginning of the second month of pregnancy. This is the deadline when an abortion becomes a murder.
I am sorry, dear Catholic Mom, but your post implies that you have no clue of human physiology. Or you are a hypocrite. Or both.
Report Post »Papist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 6:12pm@CONSTANTINE, You are being disingenuous to say the least. You said, “Only after a zygote (a unicellular biological organism) becomes an embryo and then the embryo acquires specific features that make it a distinguishable human fetus, only then, I repeat, the fetus is a real human.” It is a biological fact that when a human sperm fertalizes a human egg, the result is a human. Fertalization is therefore the begining of human life. It is truly that simple. “Acquiring specific features that make it a distiguishable human fetus…” is the cop out of the abortion proponent. What “distinguishes” it from any other life is that it is the result of the joining of a human sperm and human egg. It is human from conception. It is a human death when deliberately destroyed.
Report Post »Constantine Ivanov
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 7:01pm@PAPIST:
“disingenuous” (hypocritical) – you mean “insincere,’ “hypocritical”?
Wow! Where?
I am sorry, but your arguments resemble those of PETA, who are ferociously fighting for human/civil rights of fishes and now even insects.
Of course, out of a fertilized human egg, a human will – help God! – EVENTUALLY develop, not a crocodile or an oak.
But a biological organism that EVENTUALLY will (if nothing bad happens) acquire distinguishable human features is just a human life POTENTIALITY as long as it DID NOT acquire distinguishable human features.
So, when you can’t become pregnant in a natural way, but desperately want kids, you choose between a real possibility to get a child through IVF or remaining a fruitless unhappy woman who keeps the flag of Catholic dogma flying, but knows (or MUST KNOW) that out of almost 40 MLN spermatozoa only one fertilizes her egg while all other 39.99 MLN perish anyway.
So, frankly, who is a hypocrite?
Report Post »Papist
Posted on April 27, 2012 at 4:16pm@CONSTANTINE, we now see where you are coming from – this is personal to you because your grandchildren are the result of IVF. However, your grandchildren make the point of the Catholic Church even more clearly than I could. They were selected, as living, human embryos, from a group of other living, human embryos, to be implanted in your daughter. Unfortunately, the rest of the fertilized eggs were killed – disposed of as trash. That’s disgusting, and immoral on its face. Your continued insistance of “distiguishable human characteristics” does not make your point any stronger simply because you repeat it. Life does not begin when human characteristics are visible. If that were the case, your daughter would not have cared about the fertilized eggs implanted inside her from the minute they were implanted. I have no doubt she treated them as her babies from that very moment. And just as those fertilized eggs were so extremely valuable once they were implanted, so too are the fetilized eggs which were killed once they were found to be useless to the doctor and your daughter. The value of the human life does not come at implantation, but at fertilization. As Dr. Seuss once said, “A person’s a person no matter how small.”
Report Post »Constantine Ivanov
Posted on April 28, 2012 at 5:53pm@PAPIST:
Your and Dr. Seuss’ fundamental delusion is that you both in your arguments substitute quality parameter for quantity: “A person’s a person no matter how small,” you cited Dr. Seuss.
“Small” characteristic is a matter of size, quantity.
I am talking about quality – presence in a biological organism such essential, integral parts as heart, lungs, lever, spleen, stomach, pancreas, kidney, digestive system, extremities, nervous system, and – FIRST OF ALL – head with face, eyes, ears, nose and BRAIN.
NOTHING of that is presented earlier than at the end of the first month to beginning of the second month of pregnancy.
Before that, you won’t be able to distinguish between a human embryo and that of a pig or lizard.
I would recommend you to take a look at http://www.google.com/imgres?q=animal+embryos&hl=en&sa=X&biw=1184&bih=679&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=NN6bZigofBD6gM:&imgrefurl=http://m.eb.com/assembly/121620&docid=Qlm6ShhHLb_M6M&imgurl=http://media.web.britannica.com/eb-media/73/94773-034-CF083BB1.jpg&w=250&h=300&ei=X2WcT5XJM4XJ0QHErZntDg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=329&vpy=169&dur=12542&hovh=240&hovw=200&tx=82&ty=146&sig=100960551798844444780&page=1&tbnh=147&tbnw=123&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:85
You definitely didn’t see anything like that at all.
Report Post »Being religious is good. Being a fanatic is not. Sorry.
Arcangel Michael
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 3:00pmJesus, I trust in You
http://thedivinemercy.org/message/devotions/chaplethistory.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AySdEJx50Z0&feature=related
Report Post »Gita
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 3:27pm“In atonement for our sins and those of the whole world” To my catholic brothers and sisters, pray the Divine Mercy daily.
Report Post »andyv11
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 2:53pmThis teacher was fired for violating her contract for employment with the Catholic Church. I sympathize with her for needing IVF, but she knew what she was signing up for. If she didn’t, then ignorance is not a valid defense. If she wins this lawsuit, I pray that the Catholic Church takes a hard stance by closing the school and allowing everyone to lose their jobs. Lets see how the community will feel about that. If she wants to live her life as she wishes then keep she should have kept her mouth shut. There is no need to full disclose why you are seeing the doctor, I would have supported her fight if she was fired for not disclosing the truth behind her needing the time off. But in this case, I side with the Catholic Church.
Report Post »mcsledge
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 2:18pmIf you truly believe in the separation of Church and State (which is not stated in the US Constitution), then Church has no influence in the State AND the State has no influence in the Church.
You can’t tell a Church that they have the freedom to worship according to their conscience unless it disagrees with your own opinions. You can’t tell a Church that they have the freedom to define their own doctrines, but they have no right to restrict who they hire to teach/exemplify these doctrines.
If can’t live by all doctrines of the Church for which you work, look for another job.
Report Post »LibertarianForLife
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 2:36pmUsually its the church attempting to force their nonsense on everyone else.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:17pmI did find an article that said she was married. Now I think she was just stupid. If she didn’t like the IVF part of the Catholic teaching, she could have kept her mouth shut and just got herself pregnant. She didn’t have to tell them she was doing IVF when she took days off. She could have just said dr. visit.
Report Post »cliffattheblaze
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 4:39pmSo, let’s get this straight. She’s Catholic and married. She can’t have children. She decides to commit what the Church teaches is a mortal sin to conceive. So, it looks like you advise her to stack another sin on top of that by lying about how she conceived. Ok, I got it.
Here’s the deal. Sex and Procreation is SACRED in the Catholic Church. Other’s may think otherwise, but doesn’t the Church have the right to determine its own morality? Shouldn‘t the school be able to say that their teachers are practicing Catholics or at least don’t do things that are contrary to Catholic teaching?
Report Post »Lee_in_PA
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 12:54pmAs I know someone who had IVF to get pregnant and was Catholic I can say with some certainty that 1. IVF requires a male to produce sperm, a sin.
2. As one poster mentioned, she doesn’t appear to be married, a sin.
3. The Catholic Church’s laws are well behind the science now available to persons.
4. Another poster mentioned the discarded embryos, also considered an abortion, a sin
The person I know was told she was a sinner also. Could be. The Catholic Church has always said HATE the sin. love the sinner. Seems this priest forgot that part.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:15pmWe don’t really know what the priest said to her. She says what he said, but that’s not proof. He may have said, “IVF is a grave immoral sin”. This is the teaching of the church, so what’s wrong with him saying it? If a priest can‘t point out a sin to someone working for him or attending his church I’d like to know who can.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 12:51pmI agree that as a parochial school teacher she can be fired. This is against Catholic teaching and would be part of the morality clause she signed to teach there. Even if embryos are saved and not discarded the Catholic church is against IVF. One reason is the murky ethics of what happens to these saved embryos, and the other is that ALWAYS more than one embryo is put in the mom’s womb, and not all of them “take”. So they don’t implant so they die. So if a procedure is known to cause the death of embryos, Catholics say don’t do it as it is essentially creating life and then killing it.
Report Post »drphil69
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 12:47pmSoon Catholic schools will be required to hire satan worshippers.
There is only one solution, on the day the contraception/abortion pill/sterilization DICTATE goes into effect, all affected institutions should close. Every Catholic hospital (1 of every 6 hospitals in the U.S.), every Catholic school and university (2 million students), and every Catholic charity. This would flood the public hospitals, public schools, and the unemployment lines and show how completely ineffective public institutions are.
Why is it that I can send my kids to a Catholic school for less than $5000 per year while public schools spend $13000 per student? Anyone dumb enough to argue that kids get a better education in public schools? Public schools have been run by LIBERALS FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS.
Report Post »orkydorky
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:21pmIf these ladies signed an agreement to abide by church doctrine, then they have no argument, if not , then it’s none of the churches business. My guess is that an agreement was signed, now the women want to change the rules. They need to go on with their lives and get another job elsewhere.
Report Post »mcsledge
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 2:27pmorkydorky – There is no need for a signed agreement. It’s implied by the employer. A Church run school is part of the Church. If you can’t live by the standards of the Church, you have no business being employed by the Church. It’s that simple.
Report Post »teddrunk
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 10:59amIt’s a woman, so of course, it’s all about what SHE wants.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:13ami wonder if the school would have fired a male teacher who was caught using IVF with his wife?
Report Post »teddrunk
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:28amSure, why not. The point would of been whether he’d whine about the outcome he knew had to happen.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:39amyou may be right, yet i’ve never heard of a story of a male teacher being fired from a Catholic school for a similar violation, such as having a vesectomy or cohabitating out of wedlock or getting a divorce. if you know of one, please point it out.
Report Post »3monkeysmomma
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:51amThe RCC is having a serious identity crisis. Two weeks ago at mass, our priest called all the children down to the front of the church and told them Jesus endorsed COMMUNISM!!!!!!!!!!!! Last year the theme being shoved down our throats was “acceptance of (illegal) immigrants.
The RCC has been invaded by leftists.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:07pmYes. As Lisa Simpson said, virtually anything a woman does is empowering.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:11pmAthiest – you haven’t heard of one because men keep their mouths shut about that kind of stuff. A man isn’t going to go to work and tell anyone he and his wife are using IVF or he had a vascetomy.
This woman told people at school. They had to act on the knowlege. Since she knew it was against the church teachings, what made her tell people? Is this another case in the media against the Catholic church to crumble their religious rights?
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:24pmperhaps she felt that as a Christian she shouldn’t lie (a Commandment) about why she was taking off of work, or about the nature of her situation.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 10:34amthe school very well may be within their rights here, which is a perfect example of the problems with Religion. no other organization is allowed to discriminate in this fashion. only Religions are allowed to do so. the breathtaking inanity of the RCC‘s doctrine’s and dogmas are on full display here.
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 10:48am“the school very well may be within their rights here, which is a perfect example of the problems with Religion.”
What you have really pointed out is a problem with the state, not religion. People have rights too. People have the right to organize and practice their faith, the way they see that faith, not the way that you or the state sees that faith. The Catholic church, school, is private. This woman has no right to work there. She has a privilege to work there, and that privilege can be terminated.
Report Post »The state has no right to interfere. And, it is this continual state interference that is the problem.
JRook
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 10:57amWell given the fact that the Catholic Church has rid itself of all pedafiles they can focus on the extreme sin of a woman utilizing a procedure that implants her egg fertilized by her husbands sperm in her uterus. And they regard her as a sinner. Perhaps her families offerings fell below average. That would be a better rational.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:09amagreed, but no other private organization is afforded the priveledge of discrimination. THAT is where i have the problem. tax-exempt and special consideration – i may have to start my own religion. what a racket!
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:22am“no other private organization is afforded the priveledge of discrimination.”
Can a schizophrenic become a police officer… no. Can the visually impaired become a pilot… no. Can the morbidly obese even join the military… no. Factually, discrimination is a survival tool. Man has discriminated from the beginning of his time.
Report Post »As an atheist, and another liberal from Chris Matthews Philly, you are welcome to my house, my church, my organization, but that welcome can also be removed. I have the right not to associate with you. I have the right to discriminate.
phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:28am“Can a schizophrenic become a police officer… no. Can the visually impaired become a pilot… no. Can the morbidly obese even join the military…”
those are completely different things and you know it. discrimination, by definition is:
“…the prejudicial treatment of an individual based on their membership – or perceived membership – in a certain group or category.”
physical requirements as it pertains to job duties is not the same thing.
again, they are afforded the right to discriminate. i simply disagree that they should be able to do so. and frankly, i believe it to be immoral.
Report Post »SadButTrue
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:54amSeriously, what you don‘t know about ’RCC Doctrine” is considerably more than what you do know. So please educate yourself first. Otherwise, it’s too much like reading comments from Gomer Pile.
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 11:59amSADBUTTRUE – i was raised a Catholic. i was confirmed and everything. my mother and step-father are devout Catholics. what don‘t i know about the RCC’s doctrines again? please enlighten me.
Report Post »boiz
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:30pmShe signed a CONTRACT!
Report Post »phillyatheist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 1:36pmBOIZ – and your point is? read my previous statements, i believe that the school is within their rights to fire her without penalty. i also believe that the fact that they enjoy the right to discriminate, whereas no other private organization can do so in inherently wrong, and morally questionable. but hey, when’s that ever stopped the RCC from doing what they please.
Report Post »LemonyFresh
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 3:15pmUm, Philly… you do have a religion. You all organize and worship at the altar of anti-god. You have become what you are against. And I think it is just so amusing. Your tombstone will read: Here lies an atheist. All dressed up and nowhere to go.
Report Post »Canto
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 3:48pmAccording to the Oxford American Dictionary the first definition of “discriminate” is “to have good taste or judgement” which is a good thing.
Report Post »tzion
Posted on April 29, 2012 at 9:19am@phillyatheist
Report Post »A airline company once had a rule that flight attendants had to be tall enough to reach the luggage rack. They were sued for being racist against Asian women (who are often short) and the ruling was in favor of those who sued them. I assume based on your arguments that you’d oppose this ruling as much as I do, right?
conservativewoman
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 10:22amI am a Catholic and teach at a Catholic preschool. Anyone working with children (and other positions) whether they be paid employees or volunteers, have to be interviewed, read and sign diocese rules and regulations, get a background check, take classes on conduct, child safety, mandated child abuse reporting, and given all information up front. Everyone has a supervisor as well they can go to for guidance. Nothing is left out. We do not even allow temporary maintenance workers on parish premises without a chaperone.
Report Post »This teacher must have known full well what was expected of her when working at a Catholic school.
I know of a teacher who was Catholic and was fired because she had a Las Vegas wedding. Everybody knows what to expect when they work at a Catholic school.
catholicschoolmom
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 3:35pmI agree. I volunteer at my son’s catholic school. They did the background check on me, and I had to go to the classes for safe environment, etc.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 5:13pmToo bad the Catholic Church was not as rigorous with their sex offenders, given the countless examples of where they were reassigned and/or moved to another diocese.
Report Post »gramma b
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:29amThe Catholics should have the right to enforce their own standards in their own schools. Plain and simple. Having said that, I have many dear Catholic friends, and have worked closely with them on life issues, but this is one of the few areas where we part company. I certainly understand the logic of valuing an embryo as a full human being from the moment of conception. But, nature does not do that. Probably half of embryos never implant. And, the idea of in vitro fertilization is to create life, not destroy it. I know several families who have benefited from it, and I am all for it.
Report Post »tzion
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:47amThey do have that right but I think the woman’s contract should have specified what behaviors are seen as immoral. Failing to do that the teacher could breach their moral code without realizing it. If her contract had been more specific this wouldn’t be an issue, it would simply be a breach of the contract the teacher herself signed off on. If the woman can prove she was never made aware that this kind of action would lead to a termination of her contract she could be entitled to some compensation.
Report Post »teddrunk
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:24amWhy do people agree to a job that requires them to live a certain way, and then pout and whine when they’re fired for not complying.
Report Post »antrancher
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:08amNow tell me. Would this happen to a Muslim? They are exempt from Obamacare! No one dares do anything, say anything about their evil beliefs!
Report Post »isur5ed
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:20amWhat if the situation was flipped to – say . . . a waitress gets hired at Hooters and then gets fired because she won’t wear the outfit.
The waitress knew what she was getting into. She wouldn’t comply. She gets fired. End of story. No law suit. Same story as the school teacher.
btw I have never patronized Hooters, I despise their (and other similar and worse establishments) platform of selling the sexualization of dinner and women.
For a fuller context of my take on this read my post below. This is just an additional thought.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:56am“says that the church pastor told her she was a “grave, immoral sinner”
First of all, I’m not catholic but I believe they call them “priests” not “pastors”. Secondly, there is proven risk of birth defects in IVF but that’s the parents decision. These people are trying to have a baby, not kill one. Finally, the priest calling her a “grave, immoral sinner” without any Biblical support brings judgment down on his own head. If IVF is a sin because you are not letting God handle it ( as if God isn’t in control at all times ) then, isn’t heart surgery a sin too?
The religion of men is a dangerous, damnable thing. Just follow the Bible.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:09amLet me amend this by saying, I just found out that in using IVF that multiple eggs are implanted and a number of them will likely “conceive”, then only one is chosen to be implanted and the rest are discarded or “aborted”. I would be a pro-life hypocrite if I supported that.
However, I still stand by what I said about the priest calling her a “grave, immoral sinner”. He should have told her that their church believes it’s a sin and try to lovingly persuade her. Not pick up the stones to cast at her.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:18amYou’re kind of picking up the stones yourself, squid. We don’t know if this is what they told her. This pastor or priest could have just said that it is.
Now what’s that chapter and verse again and says we should “only” follow what is in the bible? It’s gotta be in there somewhere because I hear Christians mention “just follow the bible” all the time.
Report Post »Wilma
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:56amIf these allegations are true I believe this to be the exception rather than the rule for Catholic institutions.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:15amIt is. The bottom line is, this woman appears to be married and was just attempting to get pregnant. Although the church is against this type of procedure, they likely would not have done anything against her. My guess is she began discussing it with her peers and perhaps even the students. This is where she likely failed. Just keep it to yourself. These are private matters not something to be flaunting. I realize it’s an assumption on my part. But we have limited information. Everyone here appears to be making assumptions.
Report Post »isur5ed
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:21amI believe that in-vitro is a miracle that allows otherwise infertile couples to become parents. They are not doing it to end life, they are doing it with the intent to create life. Though I don’t subscribe to the same doctrine as Catholics, I side with the school.
This article’s issue is not about doctrine, it is about the entities of the Church setting up role models in the school setting. If it is a Catholic school, the leadership should be able to enforce the “Honor Code.” From the article: “Even those such as Herx who aren’t Catholic, are required by their contracts to abide by Catholic tenets and ‘serve as moral exemplars’.” Her contract with the school put her under obligation to know the tenets of the faith. She has no room to hold up ignorance to the tenets as a defense. It was her job to know such things.
Report Post »isur5ed
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:23amThey are a beautiful couple. I wish them the best. I know the pain of infertility.
Report Post »jujubeebee
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:41amSlippery slope. She can find another job. She no doubt signed a contract when employed and the Catholic school should be able to decide their criteria for employment. While they seem like a nice couple the Catholic church has their own set of religious rules and can set their standards for employment. They must be trying to get money out of the school to pay for it. Their law suit is a waste of money because this couple will not win it.
Report Post »jujubeebee
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:53amShe can find another job and another church. She signed an employment contract and violated it. Whether a majority feels it is okay is not the issue. She can sue but she will lose. It is a waste of money.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:58amI legally side with the catholic school. I morally side with the teacher. Shame on that school!
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:10amLet me amend this by saying, I just found out that in using IVF that multiple eggs are implanted and a number of them will likely “conceive”, then only one is chosen to be implanted and the rest are discarded or “aborted”. I would be a pro-life hypocrite if I supported that.
The Blaze story could have included why they were against IVF.
However, I still stand by what I said about the priest calling her a “grave, immoral sinner”. He should have told her that their church believes it’s a sin and try to lovingly persuade her. Not pick up the stones to cast at her.
Report Post »isur5ed
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:35amSquid,
Report Post »Glad you are gaining insight in this forum. I have had to face the infertility issue and then I was spared having to face that difficult decisions involving weighing my inborn desire and calling for motherhood against the idea of knowing what to morally feel about discarded-fertilized eggs. I have a friend who wanted children with her husband of 8 years. They did IVF. The first 2 attempts were unsuccessful. These are lengthy, painful, daily hormone injection cycles that are all for the purpose of becoming parents. On their third attempt they became pregnant and then found out that 3 of the implanted eggs “took.” At this point the doc may offer to reduce the gestation to a smaller number of embryos. She decided to carry all 3 and later gave birth to 3 beautiful babies. Though the thought of those fertilized eggs needs to be considered, please consider the with a sympathetic heart those who are forced to face this conflict of desires. With more experience and understanding we are usually end up judging with a compassionate heart. And in the end it is only a prayerful communication with God and understanding of His will – and His judgments that really matter.
CatholicTexanGrandma
Posted on April 27, 2012 at 1:00amThe church teaches that thee end does not justify the means. Yes. the resulting child is a gift, but the price is too high to pay, the death of untold brothers and sisters.
In vitro fertilization invariably results in the death of children, hence it is illicit in the chuch.
If these children were, say 2 years old and an mother and father had to pick one, would the choice be as easy. The Church considers all pre-born children important.
Report Post »joeyps
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:06amI didn’t see any mention of her being married. Might that be another reason why she was fired?
Report Post »circleDwagons
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:20amread again… reading comp. poor
Report Post »joeyps
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 12:28pmI read it twice and there was no mention of husband.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 12:58pmThere is no mention of a husband or couple. I watched the video and it mentions no husband. All we see is a lovely picture of her standing next to a man. We aren’t told who he is or if she has a husband.
Report Post »hempstead1944
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:05amBet there is more to this story………
Report Post »EqualJustice
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:29amI tend to think so, as well. I’m not Catholic, but she IS teaching at a Catholic School. If she ate PORK in a Muslim school, same thing would happen, right? haha Well, maybe not just fired.. beheaded? The government can not dictate what religion teaches followers, love OR hate, so she will lose this law suit. If she does not believe in teachings of her church, she should find another religion. Maybe she is really a Protestant? I wish this couple the best of luck being with the child that is meant for them! BTW Most in vitro clinics are forced to place ALL viable embryos into the mother, so none are supposed to be destroyed or USED in other couples, which HAS happened.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 7:56am.
Report Post »In Vitro Fertilization? Is that where you get her to stand on her head, then you jump off the couch?…..
teddrunk
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 7:53amBingo
Report Post »KrebsCyclist
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 7:45amIVF typically results in conception in vitro of as many as twenty human children, and when implantation of the desired number of births is achieved, the rest of those children are discarded.
In other words, this is a story about abortion.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 8:56amI see your point, but without the procedure I assume that no child would be born. I would leave that decision up to the parents. I do support the Catholic church’s right to hire and fire whoever they please though, that’s a seperate issue.
Report Post »SquidVetOhio
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:00amI didn’t realize that. Wow, that changes my opinion. Is one child worth 19 abortions? Thanks for sharing.
Report Post »EqualJustice
Posted on April 26, 2012 at 9:54amMostly they do NOT discard them, they use them for research and many are IMPLANTED ilegally into other couples… it HAS HAPPENED many times. It’s complicated and many clinics now ARE SUPPOSED to place ALL the embryos into the mother. See now the government gets involved, again. They want to harvest the extra embryos for stem cell research but they aren‘t supposed to do that WITHOUT the parent’s consent. Many times the sperm or egg is from a donor, so how would that work? VERY COMPLICATED, indeed, and so many chances for abuse and fraud.
Report Post »