A Catholic-school teacher who was fired after she became pregnant through artificial insemination won her anti-discrimination lawsuit against the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati yesterday and was awarded more than $170,000.
A federal jury found that the archdiocese discriminated against Christa Dias, who taught computer classes, by firing her in October 2010.
Dias declined to comment after the verdict but said later in a telephone interview that she was “ very happy and relieved.”
The jury said the archdiocese should pay $51,000 in back pay, $20,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages. Dias had sued the archdiocese and two of its schools; the jury didn’t find the schools liable for damages.
Dias’ attorney, Robert Klingler, had argued that she was fired simply because she was pregnant and unmarried, a dismissal he said violated federal and state law. He had suggested damages as high as $637,000, but Dias said she was satisfied with the jury’s award.
“It was never about the money,” she said. “They should have followed the law and they didn't."
Steven Goodin, attorney for the archdiocese and the schools, had argued that Dias was fired for violating her contract. The church considers artificial insemination immoral and a violation of church doctrine, and the contract required her to comply with the philosophies and teachings of the Catholic Church, Goodin said.
Okay let me get this straight.
The Catholic church considers aborting an unwanted fetus a sin and will not tolerate it, and ALSO considers getting pregnant with a fetus that you plan to raise and nurture a sin and will not tolerate it, because science helps you achieve it?
Well thank God they're not trying to control women's bodies or anything, right?
Well good for this new mother. Hopefully with a couple more of these cases we can slowly bring the church into the 21st century with the rest of us.
Sometimes justice prevails!
ReplyDeleteoFf topic--- but I wanted to tell G and others about an NPR story that was just on, Hamas, who are the elected leaders of the Palestinians in Gaza just executed publically 5 people and dragged their corpses throyfpgh the street. The men were accused of collaboration with Israek, but there was no trial, no lawyer, nothing. Hamas does this to their people often and they also talked about their "re-education" program for youth. So those of you who believe radical Islam is not a problem may want to listen to the story. Everyone blames Israel but the Palestinians chose Hamas as their leaders and they are brutal murderers who use their children as human shields and indoctrinate them to hate Jews and the west.
ReplyDeleteYou might also want to watch Prisoners of War, a show on Hulu. It's amazing and it's the show Homeland is based on...
Well, the Jews haven't treated the Palestinians very nicely either, ya know, stealing their land and such and knocking down their houses to build their own kibbutzs. Just sayin', both sides are guilty and religion is to blame. Until they put down their religions there will be no peace. Nothing breeds hate quite like religion does.
DeleteOne of my best friends had a blessed wanted so badly child via artificial insemination. Because she used fertility treatments, the jackass priest refused to baptize the baby.
ReplyDeleteThe left the church and found a friendly church family where that was not an issue.
Ever hear of Mossad assassination squads? They don't require a judge or jury either. Yes, this is horrible, but you could at least pretend to be enraged about the mistreatment by the bad ones on both sides who commit crimes against humanity. Yes, Mossad is an official agency of the Israeli government, just as the US is responsible for the activities of the CIA. But there is a blackout among Israeli and American media of the crimes by the state, and it's been that way since right after WWII. To convict one side from doing what you condone for the other is hypocritical. Both sides practice barbaric torture and murder against the other, neither in the name of their god, as your faulty logic dictates. It's about power, intimidation, retribution, and propaganda, not religion, and that door swings both ways. Don't be so shallow as to parrot one side's talking points before examining the bad acts of the "victims". The Zionist state began the terrorism in the civilized world. Go ahead. Look it up and read. You will be enraged with "god's chosen people" from the Kazar region of Russian "Jewry" if you abhor inhumane treatment of the innocent.
ReplyDeleteThat is some serious hypocrisy coming out of that church.
ReplyDeleteThe Church tried to use as its argument against her that she had used artificial insemination. The reason why she won, IMO, is that there was a male teacher whose wife conceived by artificial insemination, just as this plaintiff had done – and the Church expressed no poutrage at all with respect to their family planning methods.
DeleteAnd if the Church's position were to be based upon the sexual preference of this non-Catholic teacher-plaintiff, then, considering the sexual orientation of most of the Church's hierarchy and priesthood, that position would not hold much water in any court room, either. Come to think of it, doesn't that statue that the Church worships (and the person upon whom all its dogma is allegedly based upon) depict a woman who got pregnant out of wedlock by means of artificial insemination??? ;-)
Perhaps the Church can get away with telling its nuns and priests how to live (well, I take that back: the priests can do whatever they darn well please); but when it comes to telling the rest of us how to live and what to do in our own bedrooms, the Church is going to lose big-time, both in the court room and on its own membership rolls.
Just keep those Catholic donations pouring in every week...this is where the money goes. Lawyer fees paying off pedophiles and this kind of bullshit. They have to keep buying their golden dresses and ruby rings,not to mention the palaces they call church.
ReplyDeleteYou said it! Pedophile pay-off amounts now number to the billions of dollars, sometimes within only one diocese alone!! One of these days the priests will have to hire themselves out for rent-boys just to raise the money to pay the tab. It's no WONDER they're in such an uproar about abortion and contraceptive use: isn't it a GREAT way to play 'change the subject'?????????? After all, who's talking about Church pedophilia NOW?
DeleteAs regards your last comment.........a jump that requires a millenia of upgrade may be a little to much to expect....
ReplyDelete"...because science helps you achieve it?"
ReplyDeleteYup. Science also kept hooked up to the ventilator long after their brains weren't generating enough current to kill a flea living in the Pope's robe.
I see a difference between a wife of a teacher, and an unmarried teacher. well, I can make a distinction.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me if you get hired on the condition you not be pregnant and single (or in the case of males, not impregnant anyone but your wife), then they can. No one has to agree to such contract provisions UNLESS the school receives government money, and then government rules & constitutional rights apply.
I think they (CC) have the right to uphold pregnancy within marriage - so long as they don't take local, state, or federal funds for the school. I may think their stance doesn't achieve what they wish, but I'm not in charge. We can't insist people hold the CORRECT opinion.
Lucy
Lucy, I wholeheartedly agree with you, but the Catholic Church will never EVER exchange having to pay taxes just because a woman chooses to become a mother without benefit of marriage. This case involved a teacher who may or may have not signed a "morality clause" as a condition of being employed in the church.
DeleteBut there have been cases where the Catholic Church hires women of other faiths, and who are not required to sign away their rights. This came out when the Church railed against the ACA and the need to cover birth control under their health plans. President Obama changed the laws wording giving the Church an "out" while guaranteeing the woman's right to paid birth control.
We can't inist people hold the correct option, but who's defining the correct options? And why is it ok to take federal money tax free then complain about it?
A really good grossly incorrect thought, Lucy.
DeleteThey didn't fire her because she was single and pregnant. According to the article, she was fired because she used artificial insemination. And since that was a method of pregnancy used by another teacher to get a pregnancy for the family, and they DIDN"T fire him, it's a double standard and the jury agreed with the single mother.
They sank their own ship!
I guess when people say the Church shouldn't do that, shouldn't believe that, and they are WRONG, I think they are basing it on what they think the correct opinion is. Perhaps I am in error. I just never hear that they can't discriminate because they took govertment money, I hear that their opinion is stupid - and it may be, but there is a constitutional right to be stupid. Lucy
DeleteIt's not hte Catholic's Church's choice. Well, it is. They could choose to pay taxes. Some churches do. But it's the government's choice whether to allow churches to not have to pay taxes. I don't think the tax code will be changed anytime soon. POssibly never. I still think that's a dumb decision.
DeleteThe point people are trying to get across in this is a gross lack of consistency!
DeleteYes, everyone has a right to be stupid. No argument at all, especially since we have so many stupid people. But this isn't about OPINION. This about goosey goosey gander.
The jury said they feel she was discriminated against. Based on the fact a MALE teacher got his wife pregnant using artificial insemination? Perhaps. Probably, actually, since juries have a tendency to be sharper than people believe when it comes to balance. (PLEASE! Let's NOT get into a side discussion.)
Are there times when juries are wrong? Of course. They are human. But I have found that a lot of times when people say the jury was wrong they are not privy to information the jury was provided.
There should be NO inconsistencies in situations like this, but with the church using the moral side of the argument as their defense they lost when they didn't fire the male teacher for the same moral failure.
Just another example of religion trying to put women down in my book.
And the CC has the right to appeal anyway, which I am sure they will do.
Mankind will either exterminate ourselves under the flag of religion, or we will all become enlightened. Those are the only two choices.
ReplyDeleteWhat did they expect her to do when they found out she was pregnant - have an abortion?
ReplyDeleteExcellent Question.
DeleteI just wish the jury would have held both schools culpable as well. The "I was just following orders" excuse never works out well.
ReplyDeleteIf one takes the bible literally, it's hard to "believe" they take the stances they do. Mary's virgin birth didn't involve "sex", so it had to be "artificial insemination" of some sort. Weren't women punished severely for being pregnant without marriage? And if Joseph and Mary had a baby without consummating the marriage, was the marriage legal? Yeah, everyone accepted it on "faith" because of an apparition from an angel, but how many others suffered banishment or death under similar circumstances?
It defied logic then, and I'm glad this woman won on principal. Her family is no worse nor better than everyone else's.
$170,000 ? Is that all? It's a drop in the bucket. At least hopefully this is a start. When will religious organizations ever be made to answer to the law the rest of us have to abide by?
ReplyDelete