Labor group asks bishop to talk gay rights in the wake of teacher's firing

Jun 13, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Daily Kos

Pride@Work, a group tied to the AFL-CIO, has joined the effort to get Carla Hale rehired by Ohio's Bishop Watterson High School, which fired her after her mother's obituary named her female partner .

Comments
61 - 80 of 214 Comments Last updated Jun 23, 2013

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65
Jun 18, 2013
 
dan wrote:
Hale hasn't contended (nor have her attorneys forwarded any claims to date) that her contract was "unconstitutional". Were this the case, I'd assume she'd have a judicial forum at this point to hear her case. I don't believe she's even filed suit anywhere.
Of course not, I have advanced the assertion that it was.
Have you even had an original idea in your whole life?
dan wrote:
Only people (like you) who dislike the Catholic view of SSM are braying anything of the sort.
Catholicism has a number of battles facing it, mainly because the faith is at odds with the law, and in many cases, they are straining at the end of their tax exemption. Catholicism will have to grow or pay, there is no middle ground. It can not grow political without voiding its exemption, plain and simple.
dan wrote:
So, while you think you're declaring it "unconstitutional" makes it so, Hale and her advisers have to resort to some labor group to act on her behalf as they know they don't have a court case.
Actually, the Catholic labor group has declined to support her, and she is still exploring other legal options. This case is absolutely a money loser for the church. Period, end of story.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#66
Jun 18, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not, I have advanced the assertion that it was.
Have you even had an original idea in your whole life?
<quoted text>
Catholicism has a number of battles facing it, mainly because the faith is at odds with the law, and in many cases, they are straining at the end of their tax exemption. Catholicism will have to grow or pay, there is no middle ground. It can not grow political without voiding its exemption, plain and simple.
<quoted text>
Actually, the Catholic labor group has declined to support her, and she is still exploring other legal options. This case is absolutely a money loser for the church. Period, end of story.
I don't think "pride@work", the group noted here in the story, is a Catholic labor group.

Again, you base your groundless assertions RE: their 501C status upon your dislike of their teaching. Their tax exempt status isn't in jeopardy. You want it to be, so they'll be quieted, but that's not the reality.

......and so much for YOUR "original idea" there-I've only seen that parroted on every gay/lesbian thread where the Church is mentioned.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67
Jun 18, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
I don't think "pride@work", the group noted here in the story, is a Catholic labor group.
Again, you base your groundless assertions RE: their 501C status upon your dislike of their teaching. Their tax exempt status isn't in jeopardy. You want it to be, so they'll be quieted, but that's not the reality.
......and so much for YOUR "original idea" there-I've only seen that parroted on every gay/lesbian thread where the Church is mentioned.
You initially accused me of being ignorant of the topic, however I have actually read other accounts about this. Central Ohio Association of Catholic Educators has refused to advance Carla's case. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/13/1216...

They are a catholic labor group. Do try to keep up.

The case is a loser for the diocese, they would be well served to settle quickly. If they don't, they will lose a lot of money. Period, end of story.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
Jun 18, 2013
 
Even after being informed that there are no state [OH] or federal employment laws with respect to sexual orientation...lides continues to advance stupidity to new levels.

Try being informed instead of just opinionated.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
Jun 18, 2013
 
-tip- wrote:
Even after being informed that there are no state [OH] or federal employment laws with respect to sexual orientation...lides continues to advance stupidity to new levels.
Try being informed instead of just opinionated.
There is a legal case here. The diocese would lose. Tiem will show that you are wrong.

Actually, it will illustrate the depths of your idiocy. Firing her for this reason violates here religious freedom, and free speech. It also illustrates the hypocrisy of the diocese.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
Jun 18, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a legal case here. The diocese would lose. Tiem will show that you are wrong.
Actually, it will illustrate the depths of your idiocy. Firing her for this reason violates here religious freedom, and free speech. It also illustrates the hypocrisy of the diocese.
You're entertaining.
You've got that.

“Zuzu's Petals”

Since: Sep 10

Bedford Falls

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73
Jun 18, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a legal case here. The diocese would lose. Tiem will show that you are wrong.
Actually, it will illustrate the depths of your idiocy. Firing her for this reason violates here religious freedom, and free speech. It also illustrates the hypocrisy of the diocese.
Well, why don't you pay for her litigation?
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#74
Jun 18, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
You initially accused me of being ignorant of the topic, however I have actually read other accounts about this. Central Ohio Association of Catholic Educators has refused to advance Carla's case. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/13/1216...
They are a catholic labor group. Do try to keep up.
The case is a loser for the diocese, they would be well served to settle quickly. If they don't, they will lose a lot of money. Period, end of story.
I'm aware that the Catholic labor group didn't support Hale.

The group noted the in the thread article isn't that group.

Case looks like a winner for the Diocese to me. Hale thinks likewise, apparently. She hasn't tried to put this in front of a court.

She understands better than you that a contract you sign (likely signed 19 times if renewed annually) isn't voidable by virtue of one party not agreeing with you on SSM.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#75
Jun 18, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a legal case here. The diocese would lose. Tiem will show that you are wrong.
Actually, it will illustrate the depths of your idiocy. Firing her for this reason violates here religious freedom, and free speech. It also illustrates the hypocrisy of the diocese.
What "hypocrisy"?

Hale isn't contending that the Diocese didn't employ her, pay her, et. al. according to what they agreed to do contractually.

Projection is a poor substitute for an argument, lides.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#76
Jun 18, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
I'm aware that the Catholic labor group didn't support Hale.
The group noted the in the thread article isn't that group.
Case looks like a winner for the Diocese to me. Hale thinks likewise, apparently. She hasn't tried to put this in front of a court.
She understands better than you that a contract you sign (likely signed 19 times if renewed annually) isn't voidable by virtue of one party not agreeing with you on SSM.
It's a loser to be sure. They would be wise to settle.
Dan wrote:
What "hypocrisy"?
Hale isn't contending that the Diocese didn't employ her, pay her, et. al. according to what they agreed to do contractually.
Projection is a poor substitute for an argument, lides.
I'm pretty sure those who run the diocese are not without sin, yet they judge others, treat them not as they would be treated, and cast stones.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#77
Jun 18, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a loser to be sure. They would be wise to settle.
<quoted text>
I'm pretty sure those who run the diocese are not without sin, yet they judge others, treat them not as they would be treated, and cast stones.
LOL!
Another gift that keeps on giving.

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#78
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a loser to be sure. They would be wise to settle.
<quoted text>
I'm pretty sure those who run the diocese are not without sin, yet they judge others, treat them not as they would be treated, and cast stones.
We, the parishioners of the diocese, have made it known to the bishop that we would be extremely disappointed if he didn't stick to his guns. So far he's listening to us and to the attorneys working for the diocese as well.
Carla's letting this fade away. Too bad she didn't accept the inevitable from the start.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#79
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a loser to be sure. They would be wise to settle.
<quoted text>
I'm pretty sure those who run the diocese are not without sin, yet they judge others, treat them not as they would be treated, and cast stones.
Au contraire.

They absolutely were held to their terms of agreement. Had they failed to pay Hale or provide anything else they agreed to, Hale wouldn't be in the wrong to declare them in breach.

As is typical, you absolve Hale, who actually DID breach the contract, and vilify the school, who upheld their end of the deal.

I guess gay people should be treated differently under the law-is this your position, lides? People who contract with them should not have remedy if the gay person is in breach?

You seem insistent upon it, as you have yet to place any fault with Hale in this matter.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Au contraire.
They absolutely were held to their terms of agreement. Had they failed to pay Hale or provide anything else they agreed to, Hale wouldn't be in the wrong to declare them in breach.
As is typical, you absolve Hale, who actually DID breach the contract, and vilify the school, who upheld their end of the deal.
I guess gay people should be treated differently under the law-is this your position, lides? People who contract with them should not have remedy if the gay person is in breach?
You seem insistent upon it, as you have yet to place any fault with Hale in this matter.
As I said from the beginning that I believe the terms of the contract are unconstitutional, I believe this will be born out in court. I believe the position of the Diocese is utterly indefensible, and I believe that they would be wise to settle this quickly, or they will lose a great deal of money.

Ironically, they are hypocrites, because they would still employ her if she lied about her relationship status, which ironically would also be a violation of the morals clause.

This was a terribly dumb move by the diocese, and they will end up paying for it.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
As I said from the beginning that I believe the terms of the contract are unconstitutional, I believe this will be born out in court. I believe the position of the Diocese is utterly indefensible, and I believe that they would be wise to settle this quickly, or they will lose a great deal of money.
Ironically, they are hypocrites, because they would still employ her if she lied about her relationship status, which ironically would also be a violation of the morals clause.
This was a terribly dumb move by the diocese, and they will end up paying for it.
There is NO constitutional protection for sexual orientation.

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#82
Jun 18, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
As I said from the beginning that I believe the terms of the contract are unconstitutional, I believe this will be born out in court. I believe the position of the Diocese is utterly indefensible, and I believe that they would be wise to settle this quickly, or they will lose a great deal of money.
Ironically, they are hypocrites, because they would still employ her if she lied about her relationship status, which ironically would also be a violation of the morals clause.
This was a terribly dumb move by the diocese, and they will end up paying for it.
The Church has deep pockets and will prevail in this case. Why can't you people simply accept OUR beliefs and OUR rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment? And why do I have more than a sneaking suspicion that if Hale had been dismissed from an Islamic school, we never would have heard a peep from her, the gay mafia or the media?

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83
Jun 18, 2013
 
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>The Church has deep pockets and will prevail in this case. Why can't you people simply accept OUR beliefs and OUR rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment? And why do I have more than a sneaking suspicion that if Hale had been dismissed from an Islamic school, we never would have heard a peep from her, the gay mafia or the media?
The deepest of pockets won't help, and at some point, Rome is going to wise up. They will not want to funnel money back for legal fees for a dog of a case.

I suspect attorneys will come out of the woodwork to represent the teacher pro-bono simply for the publicity this is likely to create.

The reality remains their decision to fire her in the first place illustrates the hypocrisy of the diocese. They engaged in judgment, cast stones even though they are not without sin, and treated someone in a manner they almost certainly would not wish to be treated.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#84
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
As I said from the beginning that I believe the terms of the contract are unconstitutional, I believe this will be born out in court. I believe the position of the Diocese is utterly indefensible, and I believe that they would be wise to settle this quickly, or they will lose a great deal of money.
Ironically, they are hypocrites, because they would still employ her if she lied about her relationship status, which ironically would also be a violation of the morals clause.
This was a terribly dumb move by the diocese, and they will end up paying for it.
What's Hale's position here, if not "indefensible"?

She took action, of her own accord, to violate an agreement she made of her own accord. Her word is useless.

You not making note of that is..........hypocritical, isn't it?

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#86
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
The deepest of pockets won't help, and at some point, Rome is going to wise up. They will not want to funnel money back for legal fees for a dog of a case.
I suspect attorneys will come out of the woodwork to represent the teacher pro-bono simply for the publicity this is likely to create.
The reality remains their decision to fire her in the first place illustrates the hypocrisy of the diocese. They engaged in judgment, cast stones even though they are not without sin, and treated someone in a manner they almost certainly would not wish to be treated.
I see you haven't the courage to address my points about the First Amendment and the Islam scenario.

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#88
Jun 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Lilith_Sparkles wrote:
<quoted text>hey why is your god a murderer and rapist
Changed you name, did you "little wh#re"?
I'm not Muslim, dear.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Almighty God OR rabid allah??? 10 min You Choose 1
Where are all the original legacy posters? 11 min Catman Dave 78
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 29 min Pale Rider 3,196
OH Who do you support for Governor in Ohio in 2010? (Oct '10) 32 min Old Guy 30,458
Did You Vote 4 First Tran Fam? 44 min Sarno433 5
Was Bergdahl Planned ALL ALONG?? 45 min Sarno433 14
Chevrolet Malibu Owners: Problems & Solutions (Jun '06) 51 min boz 2,707
Bennett Smith gate stories from the victims poi... (May '13) Tue Truth 2,281
•••
•••
•••

Columbus Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••