Christianity has different denominations partially because of different interpretations and approaches to Christianity. Therefore, this isn't about discussing Christianity and WWJD but instead about what it means to sign a contract (that I assume people read before they sign) for a private (insert any religion) school.

I guess IMO the better example would be to show their students what it means to care for others and forgive by being compassionate towards her. But that's the Christianity I was raised in. Every religion has different shades.

That would mean talking about sex with children and we can't have that ;)

But in the end, as has been pointed out several times, she apparently signed a contract and agreed to it. Her failure to do so, even if the contract was ridiculous, means the firing was probably legit.

About 15 years ago, this happened to a woman in my hometown. She left town, married, had children, and then divorced. She came home to help her ailing mother, but before she left, she got pregnant by a man that she was dating. They broke up before she found out she was pregnant and she wanted to keep the baby. The principal gave her an ultimatum--either get married or get fired.

I don't remember what happened, but it was all over the national news as well.

I find it funny that the school is asking her to drop the lawsuit because it would be the "Christian" thing to do.

If it did indeed specifically list premarital sex as a firing offense.

If I were her I'd be pretty riled up about the fact that her personal business was broadcast to the entire school. I know they'd have to come up with a reason to explain why a well-liked teacher was fired, but there HAS to be a more tactful way to do it.

Now THAT is funny.

Yes, the details of a contract if it existed are crucial here.

And I agree, but the details of that are also iffy here.

Does the Bible admonish Christians to obey the laws of the land, or is that just the Quran?

There's the whole render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's thing.

And Romans 13: 1-7 (NIV I believe)

As someone who attended an albeit liberal Christian school I think the school was in the right. They have rules and they were enforcing them. My school didn't allow teachers to marry someone who was divorced without an annulment. It made for a set of teachers who had been "dating" 20+ years while I was in school, but whatever.

3 months before I would understand....
but 3 weeks? no one would have ever even known she conceived 3 weeks before her wedding had the man not asked her. Its unethical. I don't go around asking pregnant women when they conceived just when they are due. And out of curiosity.

Hey, public schools pull this crap, too. The school where I had my first teaching job had a "morals clause" as a part of the contract, and did the school board looooooooove to point it out to the teachers.

Not only were we not supposed to do the nasty unless we were married, drinking was highly frowned upon as well. Example: A teacher and his wife went to a local tavern for dinner. He ordered a beer with his dinner and one of the school board members saw it and went off on him - IN THE RESTAURANT. Was the teacher trashed? Absolutely not - it was ONE BEER. But the school board member yelled at him for "being a bad example" for students. Um, this place was a 21+ establishment...and what was the board member doing there if the place was such a bad influence in the community?

I only lasted two years in that hellhole...

It's still sexual harassment even if she didn't object at that moment to the question. Whether or not she chooses to report it is the kicker, and it seems she sailed right over sexual harassment to discrimination.

Well, it seems she was pretty discrete about the conception date, so, had she not asked for FMLA (which many times a man will not for a pregnancy) the question never would have been raised. Don't know that for a fact though - I mean, I'm sure people would start asking the due date once she started showing.

In my opinion, "getting pregnant" equals the status of being pregnant. I'm not a judge but the two are fairly indistinguishable in my mind. Had she not been pregnant (or had she had it terminated without telling anyone that she was pregnant), she would probably still have her job. The only other way one could be fired for premarital sex and have proof would be pictures/tape or documented talk.

In my constitutional knowledge (and I will admit, I don't have much), the first amendment protects people from the government, but does not place religion above the government. Federal law still should apply.

In my opinion, religious edicts do not supercede federal law but in cases of religious objection (for things like mandatory conscription, etc) and therefore religious organizations should not be able to hire/fire based on (legal) sexual practices but for specific positions (in my mind, only members of the cloth). Because this teacher was not a sister, what happens in her bedroom and her body is her business and no one elses. Furthermore, the school principal added insult to injury by telling the parents of the children in class/coworkers why she was fired. Her bedroom should not be on display to that many people unless she chooses to put it out there.

That's ridiculous...I don't think a teacher should be getting trashed in public but it is ridiculous to be like that about one beer. Damn. I don't think I would have lasted two years...

I wish MC, SCOGC Chief Justice would come in and school us about this.