Last week, the High Court
decided in favor of a Lutheran school in its refusal to hire a teacher who was
not a Lutheran, or, at least,
was not teaching Lutheran doctrine in its school. While there is some confusion as to the
details of the case, the fact of the
decision goes to allowing a private parochial school and its administration to
maintain church doctrine and church autonomy. The godless AP has taken on the
assignment, apparently, of debunking this decision and it has done so
with this story:
DETROIT (AP) - Aleeza Adelman teaches
Jewish studies at a Jewish school, yet she considers herself a teacher whose
subject is religion, not a religious teacher. She's rethinking how to define
her job after a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling left her wondering what could
happen if she ever needed to defend her right to keep
The high court ruled last week that
religious workers can't sue for job discrimination, but didn't describe what
constitutes a religious employee - putting many people employed by churches,
synagogues or other religious organizations in limbo over their rights.
"I think of myself as a teacher who
is just like any other teacher," said Adelman, who works at the New
Orleans Jewish Day School. "Yes, my topic of teaching happens to be Jewish
stuff, but if I were to just think in general about it, am I different from the
teacher across the hall who is teaching secular studies?"
Understand, the woman is a
Jew; she teaches in a Jewish
school, but, somehow believes that she is not religious
teacher, that she is merely a teacher
who specializes in religion. To you get
the point? Maybe not. Look,
this woman is positioning herself as a free spirited teacher, with free speech rights, as she currently
agrees to teach the tenets of Judaism.
To agree is one thing; to be
forced is something else. That is what
is going on, here. Adelman is putting
herself in the same circumstance as the Lutheran teacher. Getting ready for a second assault???
No comments:
Post a Comment