Sunday School Teacher Fired Due To.. (1 Viewer)

[jfuh]

If the religion calls for the suppression of womens rights she should probably find a new religion huh? But she if she is a devout enough follower of this religion she will accept the decision, if not then she's not really a believer in the first place is she. Pathetic I agree, but it is the religion she choose for herself.

I agree with your assessment, but that is not the premise I'm trying to present. This is not just the aspect of her facing unjustices or unfair treatment. This is about the fact that in America we're having such instances like this going backwards. That there is still such ignorance and suppression of women.

 

[Puella4465]

The issue is not the fact that a verse in the Bible said that women cannot teach, or that she was aware of such tenets of Christianity; the issue at hand, at least IMHO, is that she taught there for over fifty years with no problems, and suddenly the priest ups and decides "Oh, oopsies, I forgot that she can't teach here because I just realized now that she should be silent and not teach men!" If you're going to be a sexist in the workplace, do it 54 years ago when it was accepted.

 

[RightOfCenter]

I agree with your assessment, but that is not the premise I'm trying to present. This is not just the aspect of her facing unjustices or unfair treatment. This is about the fact that in America we're having such instances like this going backwards. That there is still such ignorance and suppression of women.

Well to your premise I have to say as long as there is religion there will be ignorance. :ranton: But to tell the truth it's always bothered me that Christians seem to follow the Old Testament more than the New. Instead or preaching and practicing love, tolerance, and charity they seem to follow ignorant 10,000 year old rants. :rantoff:

 

[RightOfCenter]

The issue is not the fact that a verse in the Bible said that women cannot teach, or that she was aware of such tenets of Christianity; the issue at hand, at least IMHO, is that she taught there for over fifty years with no problems, and suddenly the priest ups and decides "Oh, oopsies, I forgot that she can't teach here because I just realized now that she should be silent and not teach men!" If you're going to be a sexist in the workplace, do it 54 years ago when it was accepted.

It's not actually a workplace, sunday school teaching is a volunteer position.

 

[Muddy Creek]

..being a woman.

This is just wrong.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/21/menonly.sundayschool.ap/index.html



It's scary what a literal interpretation of the bible looks like...

At least American Christian women can be glad they don't live under Muslim rule where women are considered second class and have no rights in any of the adminstering of the religion and no rights to decide their own medical issues of pregnancy.

 

[tryreading]

Separation of Church and State.

She has no legal foundation for a discrimination suit, because anti-discrimination law has no authority in the church....without violating the Wall of Separation, that is.

If she doesn’t like it she should find a different church.

Well since it's their religion and sunday school teaching isn't really a paying job anyway, yes they can do whatever the **** they want with regards to their religion..

Both of you are wrong. What if they were banning her from teaching because she's black? I bet if you read the Bible, there is a phrase somewhere that would tell a preacher blacks shouldn't be allowed to do certain things in his church. Think nothing could be done legally? I hope this caring, giving, wonderful old lady puts the ACLU on their asses.

 

[Caine]

Well to your premise I have to say as long as there is religion there will be ignorance. :ranton: But to tell the truth it's always bothered me that Christians seem to follow the Old Testament more than the New. Instead or preaching and practicing love, tolerance, and charity they seem to follow ignorant 10,000 year old rants. :rantoff:

Hey!
Jewish people follow those 10,000 year old rants!!!!!!!!!

.......but, at least they do it with style....

 

[RightOfCenter]

Both of you are wrong. What if they were banning her from teaching because she's black? I bet if you read the Bible, there is a phrase somewhere that would tell a preacher blacks shouldn't be allowed to do certain things in his church. Think nothing could be done legally? I hope this caring, giving, wonderful old lady puts the ACLU on their asses.

It's a volunteer position in an organization she joined voluntarily. If the bible said blacks couldn't be preachers, than you're right nothing could be done legally. That's like me suing to try and get a scholarship from the United Negro College Fund, ACLU PLEASE HELP ME! What are they going to do, make the government change the religion so it's more inclusive?

 

[RightOfCenter]

Hey!
Jewish people follow those 10,000 year old rants!!!!!!!!!

.......but, at least they do it with style....

Yup, I can't recall the last time I heard a Rabbi quoting the Tora demanding that sodomy be outlawed...

 

[Jerry]

That's really juxtaposing. A man does not sacrifice any physical health whatsoever towards a pregnancy. The point is what she lost her job over. Religious intolerance and prejudice based on gender alone.

He sacrifices every day he goes to work to earn money that he will never keep. Say he's in construction: Every hammered finger, ever hour of overtime, every stress of generating finances for someone ells is a sacrifice.

Her focus of 40 years then seems not so much on the church, but to educate the youth. A very admirable cause, which her church group now denies her simply because she is a woman. It's very discerning. If this were some 3rd world country that practices such intolerance and suppression perhaps, but this is the US, we've come a long way from the days of total gender inequalities. It's sad that such a group chooses to go backwards.

We must tolerate their beliefs just as they must tolerate others. If they don't want women telling male children what to do, then we have no ground on which to force our beliefs on them.

IMO such belief structures are best destroyed by attracting members away. Then the belief system dies through lack of believers, ie, from within; not through external forces.

An external force will give the members of such a group a common enemy, and unite those who would otherwise likely leave.

The same is true for a church who discriminated against blacks, such as some chapters of the Asatrue, Arian Nation, the KKK or similar.

 

[Jerry]

Both of you are wrong. What if they were banning her from teaching because she's black? I bet if you read the Bible, there is a phrase somewhere that would tell a preacher blacks shouldn't be allowed to do certain things in his church. Think nothing could be done legally? I hope this caring, giving, wonderful old lady puts the ACLU on their asses.

I have read the bible, sir, and I do not recall any such passage.

Have you read the bible? Do you know the scripture upon which this church's anti-woman stance comes? Do you know what was misread, and how? Can you refute them with their own bible?

 

[Jerry]

It's a volunteer position in an organization she joined voluntarily. If the bible said blacks couldn't be preachers, than you're right nothing could be done legally. That's like me suing to try and get a scholarship from the United Negro College Fund, ACLU PLEASE HELP ME! What are they going to do, make the government change the religion so it's more inclusive?

Heh, at my collage the first "Women in Construction" scholarship ever was granted to a man.

Lesson: Apply for everything.

End of tangent.

 

[jfuh]

He sacrifices every day he goes to work to earn money that he will never keep. Say he's in construction: Every hammered finger, ever hour of overtime, every stress of generating finances for someone ells is a sacrifice.

Would he not do the same even if she were not pregnant? Do you not do the same if you were not married? Making a living is hardly comparable.

We must tolerate their beliefs just as they must tolerate others. If they don't want women telling male children what to do, then we have no ground on which to force our beliefs on them.

IMO such belief structures are best destroyed by attracting members away. Then the belief system dies through lack of believers, ie, from within; not through external forces.

An external force will give the members of such a group a common enemy, and unite those who would otherwise likely leave.

The same is true for a church who discriminated against blacks, such as some chapters of the Asatrue, Arian Nation, the KKK or similar.

I agree except for I can not tolerate those who are suppressive towards woman or minorities. I do not accept them, which makes me a hypocrite for tolerance indeed, the variance is mine is not out of prejudice.

 

[tryreading]

I have read the bible, sir, and I do not recall any such passage.

Have you read the bible? Do you know the scripture upon which this church's anti-woman stance comes? Do you know what was misread, and how? Can you refute them with their own bible?

Wrong is wrong, no matter who said it (sir):

"A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression." (1 Timothy 2:11-14).



The pastor just canned a friendly face, but hopefully there are still others in attendance:

From the PASTOR:
I encourage you to attend our Sunday Celebration; I know you will enjoy it and even find a friendly face or two.
http://www.nnyinfo.com/firstbaptist/

 

[Jerry]

Would he not do the same even if she were not pregnant? Do you not do the same if you were not married? Making a living is hardly comparable.

I think "against his will" is the operative term.

What I do, I do voluntarily.

 

[Jerry]

Wrong is wrong, no matter who said it (sir):

"A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression." (1 Timothy 2:11-14).



The pastor just canned a friendly face, but hopefully there are still others in attendance:

From the PASTOR:
I encourage you to attend our Sunday Celebration; I know you will enjoy it and even find a friendly face or two.
http://www.nnyinfo.com/firstbaptist/

I wish I had one of those memories where I could memorize and call up text in an instant.

My born-again Christian mother taught me that a woman can speak/etc. on her own when "her head is covered". When she is married, her head is covered by her husband, who's head is covered by Christ, who's head is covered by God.

A single woman can speak/etc. if she accepts Christ, because then her head is the covered just as a man's. A Christian woman can speak/etc just as a man. The 2 are equal.

A single Christian woman speaks/etc with authority and legitimacy, where as any man who does not accept Christ speaks with absolutely no authority or legitimacy what so ever. His head is not “covered”.

If I understand this correctly, it is the non believing husband who must remain silent to a believing wife.

I'll have to call her for clarification.

 

[jfuh]

I think "against his will" is the operative term.

What I do, I do voluntarily.

How would it be against his will?... forget it, this is going off topic.

 

[tryreading]

I wish I had one of those memories where I could memorize and call up text in an instant.

My born-again Christian mother taught me that a woman can speak/etc. on her own when "her head is covered". When she is married, her head is covered by her husband, who's head is covered by Christ, who's head is covered by God.

A single woman can speak/etc. if she accepts Christ, because then her head is the covered just as a man's. A Christian woman can speak/etc just as a man. The 2 are equal.

A single Christian woman speaks/etc with authority and legitimacy, where as any man who does not accept Christ speaks with absolutely no authority or legitimacy what so ever. His head is not “covered”.

If I understand this correctly, it is the non believing husband who must remain silent to a believing wife.

I'll have to call her for clarification.

I'm not sure how this applies to the sunday school teacher. She obviously believes in Christ. I didn't catch whether she is a widow, I assume she is, but if so, is that considered single? The people she was teaching are Christian. If these points are right, then she shouldn't have been teaching (men), according to scripture, if the preacher's interpretation is true.

I just can't agree with the subordination to her husband, or other men.

I'm don't mean to be disrespectable to Christians, but there are some beliefs and scripture that I think are wrong. The same with other religions.

 

[Jerry]

How would it be against his will?... forget it, this is going off topic.

Girl: I'm pregnant. It's yours.

Guy: I don't want to have children, I'll pay for an abortion....

Girl: I'm going to keep it.

Court awards child support, bio-dad either pays or goes to jail;
Bio-dad marries girl, resents being "forced" into his present situation, marriage doesn't last, the couple becomes part of the divorce statistic I hear about from GM proponents when discussing "The Sanctity of Marriage";
Bio-dad and girl agree to go their own ways, child is raised without a father (my sister chose that one last week)......

 

[Jerry]

I'm not sure how this applies to the sunday school teacher. She obviously believes in Christ. I didn't catch whether she is a widow, I assume she is, but if so, is that considered single? The people she was teaching are Christian. If these points are right, then she shouldn't have been teaching (men), according to scripture, if the preacher's interpretation is true.

I just can't agree with the subordination to her husband, or other men.

I'm don't mean to be disrespectable to Christians, but there are some beliefs and scripture that I think are wrong. The same with other religions.

Its part of the consequence of changing the way we did in the garden. The wife follows the man’s lead and men have to work their assssses off for a few dollars.

She believes in Christ, her head is thus “covered”. Just because an apostle had an opinion on a woman’s place/etc. doesn’t mean that that opinion stands as God’s word. God didn’t say it, the author of Timothy did; and that’s just not the same.

 

[FallingPianos]

I certainly would never belong to a church that did that, but as far as I'm concerned they can do whatever they want so long as it doesnt effect me.