Also insulting, James said, was that after firing her, the school offered a job to her then-fiancé – they are now married – even though it was known that he, too, engaged in premarital sex. He did not accept the job, she said.
Big difference ... I bet her fiance' wasn't pregnant.
If this is true, this school has no one but themselves to blame for getting sued:
Also insulting, James said, was that after firing her, the school offered a job to her then-fiancé – they are now married – even though it was known that he, too, engaged in premarital sex. He did not accept the job, she said.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that he intentionally applied for some job he was over qualified for without telling them who he was, just so he could reject their offer just to accuse them of being hypocrites.
I see the offering of a job to the fiance as a very Christian thing to do. They are attempting to help this couple establish themselves in marriage by providing them the financial security of a job. The gesture is not intended to suggest a double standard. Many Christian schools do not allow pregnant married women to continue to teach after their child arrives. They promote the idea of the mother being home to care for her children at least until they reach a certain age.
The rules state nothing about wether or not one has had premarital sex before their employ, just to refrain from it after. That in and of itself is very Christian, offering a chance for redemption from previous sin with the understanding of repententance of that sin.