Paradise Cafe Discussions - A Place For Bible Research And Christian Encouragement

Fired for fornication: Teacher conceived child before marriage

Jun 09, 2010 8:02 PM EDT

A former teacher claims she was fired after admitting that she conceived a child several weeks before marrying the baby's father.

Jaretta Hamilton was fired by St. Cloud, Florida's Southland Christian Christian School after asking for maternity leave.

She says when she made the request her boss asked if the child had been conceived before she was married.

Principal Jon Ennis says Hamilton committed an immoral act and that he does not regret the decision.

Hamilton is now suing the school.

Her attorney points out that there were nothing in the school's personal conduct policy barring sex out of wedlock.

http://www.nbc-2.com/Global/story.asp?S=12624701

Dear All

Our children likes those:



For my own part, I have told them what is important and how Jehovah he likes it to be, as described in Esaiah chapter 2 versus 1 to 4:

1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, [that] the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

I hate this kind of Christianity. The poor women was obviously already committed to her now husband, and with the child being completely innocent her boss takes on himself to punish the whole family including the baby and for what? An immoral act! Please, if this is Christianity count me out. I bet that principle has done far more immoral things than her, including excepting grace from God without giving it to others. The inappropriateness of the question also amazes me.

I see this as a tragic, misguided attempt to uphold standards for that school. Yes, the lady sinned -- but obviously she repented of the sin, doesn't that count for something???!!!

Instead of making her an example, the school should have used this as an opportunity to display forgiveness and acceptance.

I agree with you Melancholymuse but I'm not convinced the lady did sin. Seems to me she was within the spirit of the law in that they were already committed to each other. Sin to me is defined by not acting according to the spirit of love, with that definition the principle sinned not the women.

Dear Melancholymuse

I fully agree with you and at the same time taking the opportunity to pin out what is right and wrong, in question of relations between humans and follow what Jesus he said, it is easier to forgive than condemn.

I belive in the principles Paul he states in Ephesians chapter 4 versus 25 to 28:

25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.

26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:

27 Neither give place to the devil.

28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working wi th [his] hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.

Where it is interesting to understand the principles, what we have been doing is not so important, but as and when we have come to exact knowleddge, we then stop to be "thieves" against others and are carrying out the fruit of the spirit, by doing good against all instead :blush:

Here is another news article with more details.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/09/fla...on-claims/

"A former Florida teacher said the administrators of a Christian school where she was employed fired her because she became pregnant just before her wedding, MyFoxOrlando.com reported.

Now, she has filed a federal discrimination lawsuit against the private school in St. Cloud, Fla.

Jarrestta Hamilton said April of 2009 was the happiest month of her life. She was a newlywed and newly pregnant and teaching fourth graders at Southland Christian School. She said it was about that time when she approached by the administration to talk about "maternity leave."

She said when asked, she admitted that the baby was conceived three weeks before the wedding. A week later, she said the school fired her. Attorney
Ed Gay is helping Hamilton sue the school, claiming that her termination amounts to discrimination based on her pregnancy and marital status.

"If they're going to single her out because she conceived prior to marriage, but allow people to remain employed who conceived during a marriage, isn't that discriminating against her based on her marital status?" asked Gay, according to MyFoxOrlando.com.

School administrator Rob Ennis said the school had not seen the lawsuit. "At this time, we're going to seek legal counsel, and I really don't feel comfortable making any comment to be honest with you."

MyFoxOrlando obtained a letter sent to Hamilton from the school which asked not to return because of "fornication," sex outside of marriage. It also claims that Hamilton knew about the school's moral stance through the employment application
process.

"Just a vague reference to upholding standards and purposes of the school," said Gay. "That's what they're going on as a 'morals' clause."

Ultimately, it could be the federal courts that decide who is right and who is wrong. Hamilton also claims that the school violated her privacy by telling parents and students why she was fired."

Seraphim, seeing that you, "hate this kind of Christianity", I have a question for you:

Do you hate God’s decree? (Romans 1:28-32) Did this woman not commit fornication? Do you think that fornication isn't a sin? Do you think that fornicators will inherit the kingdom? (1 Corinthians 6 9-11) Why then do you give approval to her? (Romans 1:28-32)

I agree with the School. This isn't "discrimination based on marital status" it's upholding the moral standards of the Bible. This is a Christian school teaching Christian ethics. Fornication is condemned everywhere in the Bible. What kind of example do you think this sets for the children who have lots of pressure from the world already to have sex outside of marriage? How are we supposed to teach them that fornication is a terrible sin when their teachers are guilty of it?

"Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body. Flee from fornication. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the person who commits fornication sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. But because of the temptation to commit fornication, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband." - 1 Corinthians 6:13,18-20; 7:2-3

"Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming." - Colossians 3:5-6

"For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from fornication; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor." - 1 Thessalonians 2:3-4

That's only a few verses. This teacher not only gives evidence of a complete lack of patience and self control, (come on, she really couldn't wait three weeks?), but she also showed a complete disregard for God's moral standards. The school did the right thing and her congregation should also look into discipline. (Obviously not WT style shunning or excommunication, but discipline non the less).


Matt

Dear Seraphim

Don't you belive that it was a sin, when and in case they have seperated in a situation of pregnancy, even that they was equal in their behaviour, maybe you will reply with Joseph, but he was clearly instructed to stay.

What about the child, doesn't that count at all, even with or without a formal marriage against the authorities, where Jesus and Paul states wery clear in the Scriptures, that they become one flesh and there is only adultery and the death, that legally seperate a husband and a wife, but without a formal conection in front of wittnesses one of them could have abandoned the other part without any legal responsibility.

In our part of the world the father has no legal right to be together with the child, when a man and a women aren't married.

So it seems that more than principles are involved here, that they become one flesh and it is not only a question of laws but also to take responsibility and good morality.

In this case they repent, since they took the consequences of what they both have committed as man and women, where we can't cover upp every act, by just excusing us and use the word love, whatsoever we are doing and like to do in question of a good morality and what is obviously wrong in the eyes of Jehovah and the principles and examples Jesus Christ stands for and told us, what to do or not to.

well I am wondering --just wondering--if you decide you can judge someone else and judge them this harshly--do you get fired if you have ever told a lie? Lying is a sin you know-- should you be asked if you have ever told a lie as I understand lying iis also against Christian principles. How far should you go with this?..was this woman flaunting an immoral lifestyle? or--did she make an error --or lapse in judgement and fix it for herself--her husband and her soon to be born child? What more could she have done to 'repent' and isn't forgiveness extended to those who have repented? --how heavy are the stones used to throw against 'sinners' :(

I understand where you're coming from Wolfie. The articles posted here so far don't give us enough information to tell us of her repentance one way or the other. In fact, the articles presented here are biased towards the woman. I'd like to hear the school's perspective. If she indeed is repentant, then mercy should be extended, absolutely. Perhaps a small suspension without pay, or a fine, or public apology or something. But if she is not repentant, then perhaps the school was justified. Also, remember, that even repentance doesn't free us from the consequences of our actions sometimes. This is true in the case of King David and Bathsheba. David repented, and mercy was given, but there were still consequences for his actions. I do not mean to be judgmental at all, but sin is sin, and I refuse to make sin trivial. The media sees nothing wrong with what she's done. I see it as sin and a serious sin. Lying is indeed a sin also, but fornication is in a whole other category, viz. works of the flesh. Some sins are worse then others.

Matt

Another can of worms here!

Do I really have to explain my reasoning every time something like this comes up? Ive explained it before many times.

Marriage has many definitions. Classically marriage was only in affect once a couple had consummated it. A ceremony to prove a marriage, these days called marriage, was not always required even among Jews. Plus there were many Jewish forms of marriage we would call a sin today, which were not a sin back in the past even though some didn't accurately reflect Gods ideal. I could pick many examples in the bible of someone who acted righteously even though the reflex action would be to call it a sin.

The purpose of law, law being how many Christians define sin, is to protect society and people as best as possible, not to make things perfect. This is true of biblical law as well as the law we now live under in the country we live. Law is defined by the circumstances of its formation, not the law as it is written. Hence a trial is needed to determine guilt/sin, not the appearance of sin as written or miscarriages of justice will be the result. Circumstances always have to be determined, or the specific purpose of any law cannot be guaranteed to be upheld. In short honoring the spirit of any law is more important than the law itself, otherwise it will be misused, and abuse will take place.

Now in this case the woman was asked a question that was not the principles business to ask. It had nothing to do with him or the issue of maternity leave. So strike one for the principle. She answered him honestly. Good for her! He sacked her thus abusing his position as it was based on something not his business to ask in the first place. Strike two against him. He should have granted her grace as she was honest with him as he had been by God. So he went against Christ command to forgive others as we have been forgiven, as it is commanded in the Lords prayer, thus making him a Christian hypocrite irrespective of it not even being a sin against him personally. Strike three against the principle. According the the article the principle didn't even respect her privacy but gossiped about it which is a sin. strike four against the principle.

Who is more righteous here? Yet people are focusing on her so called sin when she has been the only one to demonstrate a fruit of the spirit, namely honesty. She was three weeks away from being legally married demonstrating that she lacked no commitment and integrity in what really matters, the spirit of the law! Christians need be careful to distinguish between when the letter and spirit of the law differ, and support the appropriate one. Common sense is enough to work this one out, love even more so, not to mention justice.

I would be more interested in how Jesus feels about this Matt than a school board and she certainly doesn't owe me an explanation so I can better judge her. I don't see this as anyone else's business as she is a married lady now and as far as outward appearances go done all that she can do when she got married. Sin is sin to a certain extent (let's face it--she didn't kill someone--David had a lot of explaining to do) but the real truth is we are all sinners. If only the sinless can work there then they should all be fired--today--including the Administrator who asked an illegal question and then dispursed private information to the public. (also illegal) Breaking laws is also a sin you know.
I know one thing for sure--I am the judge of no one as I have no right to be--I also cannot judge her relationship with Jesus who extended mercy to everyone on planet earth but we also can extend mercy as we all need it extended to us at times. That is more what I would want to emulate.... :heartbeat:

Dear Wolfie

It is not legally anymore to burn sinners at a stake in the fire, then we would have been seeing the pyres all over the world, lead by him and his lakeys :priest:

Its is only legally to issue and follow doctrines of men, who have and are still sending thousands and other thousands into a premature death :cry: