Teacher fired for premarital sex?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by agzg

They don't cover it in name but sexual harassment laws (asking when a child was concieved and making employment decisions based on that information is certainly sexual harassment) certainly cover it, and anti-discrimination laws are just another rabbit out of that same hat.

Furthermore, a man would probably not be fired for the same offense, because there would be little to no reason to ever ask that question of a man, who would be less likely to take FMLA due to pregnancy. Hence, discrimination.

Was pregant=got pregnant in many ways. Had she been unmarried and pregnant while on a job interview and found out that they didn't hire her specifically for the reason that she was pregnant she'd have (IMO) a pretty strong case there, too.

It could fall under sexual harassment, but I'm not sure how that works if she didn't object to the question, but just the reaction to her answer to the question.

I agree that it's sexist in practice, however I suspect if this woman's husband had been a teacher as well he would have been fired. I don't know that, and I don't know if they're as "vigilant" about Joe Teacher talking about his pregnant wife who's having a six month pregnancy instead of nine.

You can't discriminate on the status of being pregnant, that is, you can't choose not to hire someone just because they're pregnant, but the school's objecting to the actions, not the state of pregnancy.

As a religious organization they have a lot of leeway to hire/fire based on their beliefs. Hypothetically if they were in a state that prohibited discrimination based on orientation they might not be able to discriminate against a gay man, but they would almost certainly be able to avoid hiring a non-celibate gay man as that is about morals not status.

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

Agreed, there's no actual moral difference, but most of the time, IMO, issues like this are more about the image of the institution/school/organization than the actual sin. From that viewpoint, it would make sense if this were a pregnancy that was know by all to be the result of a less stable set of circumstances to take action...though like I said, even then firing seems over the top.

I would've definitely just said the baby was three weeks early. That happens all the time, but I understand that she was caught off guard, because who has the balls to ask you if your baby was conceived before the wedding night or not?

Which is why in its own twisted way it's almost refreshing that this was treated as the equivalent to a one-night stand.

The issue is that the teacher is supposed to be a moral example at this school. So even though perhaps the "Christian" thing to do would be to help (generic) her choose not to have an abortion, get married, repent, whatever... this school sees her as having a large enough flaw that she shouldn't be an example to students.

Sometimes I hate understanding the point of view, but there it is.