Who didn’t see this one coming?
(NJ.com) Parents, alumni and students are standing behind a Montgomery County Catholic school teacher after she was apparently fired for her same-sex marriage, according to a report by 6 ABC.
More than 100 people met at Jack’s Firehouse in Fairmount Wednesday to support Margie Winters, who was the religious education teacher at Waldron Mercy Academy.
Hey, there’s nothing that says Ms. Winters isn’t a good person and a great teacher, and even an inspiration to the students: however, gay marriage is against the teachings of the Catholic Church. If a teacher or school employee was pushing a pro-abortion position, they’d be canned too. Let’s not forget that Ms. Winters should have been fully knowledgeable about the policies of the religious school. If you’re a vegan, do you go work for a steakhouse?
State Senator Daylin Leach of Montgomery County said in the report that the school could not take state funding and discriminate. According to its website, the school received $270,000 from the state’s Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit Program.
The article forgot to mention that Leach is a Democrat, and a big supporter of SSM. Interestingly, it seems to be A-OK for schools that discriminate on the basis of race, otherwise known as Affirmative Action, to take state funding. Is it not also discrimination, and un-Constitutional, to tell religions how to operate?
Organizers said Wednesday’s meeting was just the beginning, and their ultimate goal is to get Winters her job back, according to the report.
You can bet there will be lawsuits, and Government intervention. SSM SJWs will be coming after religious organizations and churches.
Our esteemed host wrote:
Actually, there is something which says that Miss Winters isn’t a good person: the Holy Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Were she a celibate lesbian, the Church would have no problem with her, but as a homosexual woman who claims that she is “married,” she is setting the worst example for her students.
The bigger problem is that she informed the school of her “objective disorder” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2357-2359), and the school hired her anyway. Plain common sense ought to have told the principal and administrators that this was the creation of a problem down the road.
They will be coming after any organization that takes public money and then discriminates.
Leach is a big supporter of SSM Well MOST AMERICANS ARE
Even BEFORE the Supremes ruled it legal only 37% of Americans were against it http://www.gallup.com/poll/117328/marriage.aspx
Affirmative Action helps to promote a diverse student body, something your elite prep school was a bit slow in doing, well except for athletes.
Teach after the race mass murder in charleston do you still consider yourself to be a right wing extremist ?
Our esteemed host began:
Clearly, the school principal, the administration, and the supervising priest and bishop — it’s possible that the bishop was unaware — didn’t see this coming! That says a lot about the intelligence and common sense of those people.
No businessman, administrator, human resources department, none of them ought to hire people who are high lawsuit risks: homosexuals, women’s and gender studies majors, people who have sued other companies, people who have spent time on workman’s compensation and the like. The wise businessman wishes those people well in their job search, and hopes that they find jobs with other companies.
You beat me to it, Dana. She’s been “married” (if I’m not mistaken) for a number of years, and the school was aware of it. Now suddenly they’re all “Catholic?”
Adrienne, they’re all Catholic all of a sudden because some parents found out about the teacher’s homosexual “marriage,” and the parents complained.
Isn’t it amazing how if the school had done the right thing in the first place, they wouldn’t have a problem today?
The school accepts Muslims, atheists/agnostics, Hindus, Mormons and Buddhists but fires a married lesbian ’cause Bible. Aren’t atheists more immoral than lesbians?
Check out the Employment Application at the website. Equal opportunity employer – no discrimination on race, religion etc. No mention of Catholicism.
They could have fired her at any time for any reason except those reasons protected by law. Sounds like conservative/religious activists firing up a test case to me.
Archdiocese of Philly calls the school a private Catholic school with no obligation to the Church.
Jeff, some parents found out about the teacher’s bogus “marriage,” and complained. That brought more attention to it, and put pressure on the school to get rid of her. Had the administration any common sense at all, they’d have realized before they hired her that this would eventually become a problem.
First of all, she isn’t a “married lesbian,” because two people of the same sex cannot be married, not in the eyes of the Church.
But no, atheists aren’t (necessarily) more immoral that lesbians; an atheist could lead a perfectly moral life, while a non-celibate lesbian is engaging in a mortal sin.
Jeffrey errs:
Pennsylvania state law does not cover sexual orientation as a protected class, and neither does federal law. Under our idiotic current President, the EEOC is trying to include sexual orientation as covered under sexual discrimination under the law, but the actual law does not state that.
Dnan errs,
That is absolutely a true statement.
In the eyes of “god”, two Catholic women French-kissing is more immoral than an atheist denying absolutely that “god” even exists? Or is it the marrying part? What is the origin of “god’s” sexual hang-up?
Where does “god” come down on oral sex between a married man and woman? How about anal sex between a married man and woman?
Can the Church ever be wrong in its dogma?
The Supreme Court has already ruled that an institution of faith does not have to hire or keep as an employee a person who is in a position of authority and who believes and acts contrary to the central teachings of the organization.
It is amazing that people on the left scream “separation of church and state!” and then demand that a church act in a certain manner under threats from the state.
Is priest on boy sex a greater sin than priest on girl sex by nature of the homosexual act?
It is amazing that people on the right scream religious freedom then demand that the state support the church without any responsibility on the church’s part.
Americans have subsidized churches for centuries, lately with cash payments, asking only that priests not diddle children. Americans are slowly catching on to the church scam and are starting to demand that if churches want handouts from the public they have to serve the public. Churches and similar cults can’t have it both ways.
Jeffrey shows his silliness:
Both are mortal sins, Jeffrey. In human terms, it could be argue that the homosexual nature of the second somehow doubles things up, but it isn’t man who assigns the punishments for sin.
Your question is like asking if a man can be execute twice, because he committed two murders.
So a god fired the teacher? A god banned same-sex marriage for so long? A god banned homosexual activity for decades? A god is enacting abortion restrictions? Who enforced the “blue laws” for so long? Porn laws?
It seems to me that the state has operated for many decades as the enforcement arm of the church.
BTW, what’s the age of consent in the Bible? And what’s the Biblical basis for mortal sin, or is it a man-made thing?
Of course, this is absolute non-sense and shows Jeffery’s ignorance.
But the interesting thing is that Jeffery claims that his wife is a Christian (and has called delusional.)
Wanna bet that the guy who is complaining about “subsidies” (using his definition, not the real one) deducts his wife’s donation to the church from his taxes?
This is just guttercraver’s favorite lie. I’ve called him delusional, accurately. Perhaps this is what confuses him.
He raises a good point, though. Not only are churches exempt from paying their fair share but contributions are tax deductible. Churches are exempt from property taxes. Ministers get to deduct their housing costs. Some churches receive government payments for social programs.
The crazies of the far-far right minority consider all taxes to be confiscatory and only consider direct cash payments to Negroes to be “subsidies”. This is a minority misinterpretation of the facts, and a silly one at that.
Jeffrey wrote:
Yes, in effect, God did fire the teacher; it is the Word of God on which Catholicism is based, and even you must admit that the Word of God states that homosexual activity is banned.
Many things are written in the Bible. Like most religions, Catholicism picks and chooses which writings are important; which are “mortal” sins. Blasphemy, the Sabbath, cursing one’s parents, adultery, idolatry, masturbation, lust, underpaying employees, fornication were all once considered grave offenses, often enforced with the help of the state. Do unrepentant masturbaters still go to hell? Sunday clerks at 7/11? And today the line in the sand is at homosexual activity. Do the gods’ moral laws change with the times?
Poor Jeffery. He cannot remember what he has said so he blames others.
With liberals, it is always projection.
Oh look! Jeffery changes the subject from what he does to what others do.
Did you deduct your wife’s cont5ributions to the church Jeffery? Yes or no?
As do other organizations who do work in the community.
So while Jeffery screams about discrimination, he is in fact happy to advocate discrimination against churches and people of faith.
You’re right. Your statement is a a misinterpretation of the facts and a silly one at that.
Once again, Jeffery has to make up a lie to deflect from his own actions and hypocrisy.
My sympathies about your health problems.
I do not deduct my wife’s charitable church donations. I did not call my wife delusional, you did.
In fact, this is how you always change the subject, by making personal attacks.
At one time you were worthy of respect. Now, you’re just another vile right-wing henchman. You’ve abandoned debate.
Americans bend over backwards for churches, including billions in subsidies. What is your objective in Denying even that?
Are you claiming that churches DO pay taxes on their incomes and properties?
In fact, this is how you always change the subject, by making personal attacks.
From lil’ jeffy, no less.
Fuck off, perv.