skip to main |
skip to sidebar
"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide." John 15:16
About Me
- mel
- I'm a CPA. I work in Manhattan. And New York City often makes me realize how much of a southerner I really am.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(218)
-
▼
August
(16)
- If you live in Greenville--read this!
- Rainy days and Mondays...
- Frittering Away
- 118
- Was that a hint?
- Inciting jealousy
- Statistics
- News Flash!
- Hmm...
- Public Service Announcement, 8/22/06
- Public Service Announcement 2
- Public Service Announcement
- Not that!!!
- I'm back!
- Moving day!
- If you don't hear from me for a while...
-
▼
August
(16)
3 comments:
Well, I can definitely see how they can arrive at the conclusion (on biblical support) that women should not teach men in the ecclesiastical setting, but it does seem suspect that this firing came after 54 years and a sudden hermeneutical change in the church (one wonders how they were reading the Bible before), especially when the pastor alludes to "other reasons." They seem to be skirting a potential employment discrimination suit.
Legal question: Does it have any effect on the potential lawsuit if she was teaching on a volunteer basis (rather than being paid)?
It would also be interesting to know how long the pastor has been at that church, whether there have been any other changes, etc., that could have caused them to change the way they interpreted the Bible.
Indeed. From what little I know about employment law and non-profits, yes it matters a lot. Of course, "compensation" does not have to be money. If she can demonstrate that she was deriving other material benefits from the position she might be able to argue that she was employed. Otherwise, I think this might fall under freedom of association, and Title VII discrimination laws would not apply. All nonofficial observations not to be taken as actual legal advice, of course.
Yeah, you have to wonder what the real story is.
Post a Comment