Gay teacher fired by Catholic school claims discrimination

Apr 23, 2013 Full story: World Magazine 1,746

Carla Hale, 59, a lesbian P.E. teacher, has filed a grievance against the diocese of the Ohio Catholic school where she worked for 19 years until administrators fired her for "violating moral law." According to The Columbus Dispatch , Hale's sexual orientation became public when an obituary for her late mother published Hale's name along with the ... (more)

Full Story

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#547 Apr 25, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think Obamacare will continue to stand?
It's not going anywhere as long as the Kenyan is in office. The public should be up in arms, but the MSM will never touch this:

Congressional leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, sources in both parties said.

The talks — which involve Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Obama administration and other top lawmakers — are extraordinarily sensitive, with both sides acutely aware of the potential for political fallout from giving carve-outs from the hugely controversial law to 535 lawmakers and thousands of their aides. Discussions have stretched out for months, sources said.

A source close to the talks says:“Everyone has to hold hands on this and jump, or nothing is going to get done.”

Yet if Capitol Hill leaders move forward with the plan, they risk being dubbed hypocrites by their political rivals and the American public. By removing themselves from a key Obamacare component, lawmakers and aides would be held to a different standard than the people who put them in office.

Democrats, in particular, would take a public hammering as the traditional boosters of Obamacare. Republicans would undoubtedly attempt to shred them over any attempt to escape coverage by it, unless Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) give Democrats cover by backing it.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/obamaca...

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#548 Apr 25, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a logical conclusion.
Nope. Just a possibility. It's happened to us before. A lot.

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#549 Apr 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because a Hospital closes doesn't mean that the M.D.s and R.N.s suddenly vanish.
Remember, most of a hospital building is just empty space dedicate to other things. In the event of an emergency, as long as supplies are available, most of the activities of a hospital can be carried out in a gymnasium. SO little is sterile-field work.
Sure...just plug that MRI machine into the 120 volt outlet by the bleachers. And just put a curtain up as a biohazard barrier for that table in the corner. No need for lab hoods and PAP systems.
You're not a deep thinker on real world situations, are you?

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#550 Apr 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Just a possibility. It's happened to us before. A lot.
Suddenly you can't follow logic or understand "equal protection"?
Again...how convenient.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#551 Apr 25, 2013
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>Sure...just plug that MRI machine into the 120 volt outlet by the bleachers. And just put a curtain up as a biohazard barrier for that table in the corner. No need for lab hoods and PAP systems.
You're not a deep thinker on real world situations, are you?
Never seen a modern MASH have ya! lolol
IRYW

Malvern, PA

#552 Apr 25, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the logic that flew right over your head:
"If gay marriage were legalized, then polygamy would have to be. Once you begin to alter the traditional definition of marriage, under ‘equal protection’ you can’t stop at one alternative situation and then deny others."
It is you that has lost any connection to logic. The logic of legalizing gay marriage isn't to legalize particular sex acts between partners or to legally allow any number of people to form various unions. It is to apply the same civil rights that are accorded heterosexual married couples (shared property rights, inheritance rights, insurance coverages, guardianship of minor children, tax deductions/benefits, etc.) to gay couples. How hard is that to understand?

“WOOF ! ”

Since: Apr 13

Laramie, WY

#553 Apr 25, 2013
And Frank Stanton is BACK ! BIGGER & BETTER THAN EVER !

:)

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#554 Apr 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Never seen a modern MASH have ya! lolol
Au contriare, sparky. One of the clients my company services:
http://www.army.mil/info/organization/natick/
And the name is now Combat Support Hospital.
Now, let's see how private enterprise, under the watchful eye of the local, state and federal governments replicate specialty equipment, protocols and limited patient loads. Try running under typical inner city conditions, with civilians as staff and patients under those conditions.
Lotsa luck.

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#555 Apr 25, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
It is you that has lost any connection to logic. The logic of legalizing gay marriage isn't to legalize particular sex acts between partners or to legally allow any number of people to form various unions. It is to apply the same civil rights that are accorded heterosexual married couples (shared property rights, inheritance rights, insurance coverages, guardianship of minor children, tax deductions/benefits, etc.) to gay couples. How hard is that to understand?
Civil unions. Most Americans have no issue with that. But you people just won't quit shoving your perversion down our throats, so you demand "marriage."

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#556 Apr 25, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Suddenly you can't follow logic or understand "equal protection"?
Again...how convenient.
Anybody commits a hate crime, they're equally liable to the provisions of the applicable Codes.

I follow logic quite well.

I have no taste for the Ignoratio Elenchii, nor Petitio Principii.

I just don't follow you and yours.

(Did you like my application of "Eqivocation" in the use of "to follow" ?)

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#558 Apr 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Anybody commits a hate crime, they're equally liable to the provisions of the applicable Codes.
I follow logic quite well.
I have no taste for the Ignoratio Elenchii, nor Petitio Principii.
I just don't follow you and yours.
(Did you like my application of "Eqivocation" in the use of "to follow" ?)
You mean, "thought crime."
Oliver Canterberry

New Albany, OH

#559 Apr 25, 2013
Liberals just don't get it.

Perversion is defined as a sexual practice or act considered abnormal or deviant. In the church that definition is defined by Holy Scripture as includes the behavioral choices of the fired teacher.

This teacher is not setting a standard that is consistent with family values as defined by the church.

Why is that so hard to understand?

IRYW

Malvern, PA

#560 Apr 25, 2013
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>Civil unions. Most Americans have no issue with that. But you people just won't quit shoving your perversion down our throats, so you demand "marriage."
I'm sorry you are so dense you don't understand basic English. It isn't the word that I'm talking about, it is the law. I have no problem letting the words "civil union" refer to the legal rights conferred by individual states to 'legally-joined' couples and recognized by the federal government. Then the word marriage can be used by various religious organizations; when it come to membership in their churches they can choose to recognize marriage between some couples and deny marriage to other couples. Let the fundamentalist nutcase squabbling begin.

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#561 Apr 25, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry you are so dense you don't understand basic English. It isn't the word that I'm talking about, it is the law. I have no problem letting the words "civil union" refer to the legal rights conferred by individual states to 'legally-joined' couples and recognized by the federal government. Then the word marriage can be used by various religious organizations; when it come to membership in their churches they can choose to recognize marriage between some couples and deny marriage to other couples. Let the fundamentalist nutcase squabbling begin.
The lies you people tell are true whoppers. Your next step will be trying to force churches to "marry" you. So spare us the BS.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#562 Apr 25, 2013
IRYW wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry you are so dense you don't understand basic English. It isn't the word that I'm talking about, it is the law. I have no problem letting the words "civil union" refer to the legal rights conferred by individual states to 'legally-joined' couples and recognized by the federal government. Then the word marriage can be used by various religious organizations; when it come to membership in their churches they can choose to recognize marriage between some couples and deny marriage to other couples. Let the fundamentalist nutcase squabbling begin.
Same-sex activists are not clamoring for civil unions; they are clamoring for marriage.

04/16/13

"...This week a [Minnesota] Republican House member introduced a bill allowing civil unions instead of marriage. The main sponsor is state Representative Tim Kelly, who happened to be one of four Republicans that opposed allowing the marriage amendment from going to the voters when it came to the House in the spring of 2011.

Kelly’s proposal was denounced by several of the states gay groups as well as the sponsors of the same-sex marriage bill. The common complaint is that civil unions are nothing more than 'separate but equal,' creating a second-class system for gay couples...."

-- Dennis Sanders

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#563 Apr 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Anybody commits a hate crime, they're equally liable to the provisions of the applicable Codes.
I follow logic quite well.
I have no taste for the Ignoratio Elenchii, nor Petitio Principii.
I just don't follow you and yours.
(Did you like my application of "Eqivocation" in the use of "to follow" ?)
I looked around.
No one is impressed.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#564 Apr 25, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because a Hospital closes doesn't mean that the M.D.s and R.N.s suddenly vanish.
Remember, most of a hospital building is just empty space dedicate to other things. In the event of an emergency, as long as supplies are available, most of the activities of a hospital can be carried out in a gymnasium. SO little is sterile-field work.
No, they move on to where they have a place to work. Simple, no? Lose a hospital in an urban area, they lose their job. Either they are absorbed into another facility in the area or they move away. Happens all the time, in every industry. Medical expertise is only one factor in the equation. Others are supplies, specialty equipment, electricity, oxygen, diagnostic equipment, transport, medicines, the list goes on. Not a simple linear problem.
IRYW

Malvern, PA

#565 Apr 25, 2013
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>The lies you people tell are true whoppers. Your next step will be trying to force churches to "marry" you. So spare us the BS.
Who is 'you people'? I'm not gay. I simply think they deserve the same constitutional and civil rights that all other citizens enjoy. There is no right to recognition by a church; churches as private organizations set their own rules (within reasonable limits and especially if they they accept federal funding). Why would gays, once they have their legal rights, want to force churches to accept them?
IRYW

Malvern, PA

#566 Apr 25, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Same-sex activists are not clamoring for civil unions; they are clamoring for marriage.
04/16/13
"...This week a [Minnesota] Republican House member introduced a bill allowing civil unions instead of marriage. The main sponsor is state Representative Tim Kelly, who happened to be one of four Republicans that opposed allowing the marriage amendment from going to the voters when it came to the House in the spring of 2011.
Kelly’s proposal was denounced by several of the states gay groups as well as the sponsors of the same-sex marriage bill. The common complaint is that civil unions are nothing more than 'separate but equal,' creating a second-class system for gay couples...."
-- Dennis Sanders
Another moron that doesn't understand words. Words have legal meaning as well as colloquial meanings. You religious nutjobs think of marriage as something that Zeus (or whatever is the god-du-jour) ordained. But in the USA the work marriage actually appears in legal documents. So marriage (the legal definition) has specific connection to parental rights, property rights, inheritance rights, insurance coverages, guardianship of minor children, etc.). Civil unions for the most part do not. Gays are not obsessing over the word, they are asking for the rights. It is just like when you shriek "abortion is murder'. Nope. Not legally it isn't.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#567 Apr 25, 2013
03/13/13

via Denver Post

A bill allowing same-sex couples to form civil unions is on its way to the governor for his signature, but gay-rights activists say they won't stop until they get true equality, which is marriage...

Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver, who has sponsored the civil-unions bill for three years, said its passage is the high point of a decades-long struggle.

"Yet we're not there yet. I don't want anyone to think that we somehow reached the peak," Steadman said. "Civil unions are not marriage. They are something that are separate and distinct and lesser and unequal, and that really is not good enough."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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
Franklin Township trustees split on fire levy 11 min VOTE NO on Fire T... 1
destiny Gilliam/benbrook 29 min They cannot kill ... 2
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 1 hr Male 3,959
Lawyer booked on charges he stole from guardian... 3 hr the narrow and wi... 15
Breaking: Second Nurse w/ Ebola flies with 99.5... 3 hr Male 113
President Ebola 3 hr Male 620
McEbola's Bushmeat Sammiches 4 hr BizzyBee 9
Columbus Dating
Find my Match

Columbus Jobs

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 ]