cnn: Teacher who was fired after fertility treatments sues diocese

[twa]

I would assume it's because she wasn't ashamed of it, and wasn't aware that her employer would fire her over it.

Not being ashamed of breaking a doctrine you didn't bother to know seems a good reason for termination under her contract

but I'm biased

[Destino]

I agree.

Morality based on self serving short term needs is not a workable alternative to morality derived from human organizations with claims of divine authority. I am certainly not proposing that approach.

Both approaches would be inferior to morality based on science and reason.

Science and reason! What does science say about returning a wallet? What is the reasonable moral action to a situation where your family could use the money and the owner doesn't miss it? Humanism is what that is and it's a ever changing brand of popular rationalization for what we want.

[Larry]

Science and reason! What does science say about returning a wallet? What is the reasonable moral action to a situation where your family could use the money and the owner doesn't miss it? Humanism is what that is and it's a ever changing brand of popular rationalization for what we want.

Why do I feel like the slogan

Science flies you to the Moon

Religion flies you into buildings.

is the appropriate response to that?

[Destino]

One reason they are opposed to IVF and AI is that single women and lesbians would be able to have children without the penis in vagina sex that natural conception requires. Of course, they completely overlook the Immaculate Conception, which puts to the lie their policy against IVF and AI.

That's one way to put it though the church's position on children within a marriage structure predates such arguments. As noted here they even deny it to married women because creation is not to be turned into a industry which will without a doubt soon offer customization.

I fail to see the link between IVF and the miracle of Jesus' birth. Are you saying Jesus was born via IVF? This isn't some ancient aliens stuff is it?

---------- Post added April-29th-2012 at 05:24 PM ----------

Why do I feel like the slogan

Science flies you to the Moon

Religion flies you into buildings.

is the appropriate response to that?

Because making a joke is easier than answering the question?

[techboy]

I'm not a Catholic, but I suppose I should interject here, since it would appear that the Church's actual argument against IVF has been somewhat mistated. Here's text directly from a speech earlier this year by the Pope:

The human and Christian dignity of procreation, in fact, does not consist in a "product," but in its connection with the conjugal act, the expression of the love of the husband and wife, of their union that is not only biological but also spiritual. The instruction "Donum vitae" reminds us in this regard, that by its "intimate structure, the conjugal act, while most closely uniting husband and wife, capacitates them for the generation of new lives, according to laws inscribed in the very being of man and of woman" (n. 126). The legitimate parental aspirations of an infertile couple must, for this reason, with the help of science, find a response that fully respects their dignity as persons and spouses.

So it would appear that the issue underlying this particular objection is that IVF removes the physical conjugal act from the equation, something that Viagra does not do, and not that the Church is opposed generally to medical assistance in fertility. In point of fact, later in his speech, he says:

The Church pays much attention to the suffering of infertile couples, it cares for them and, because of this, encourages medical research.

[Larry]

Because making a joke is easier than answering the question?

I didn't see a question. I saw a rant, claiming that Science = Humanism = "popular rationalization for what we want".

[Thiebear]

Not being ashamed of breaking a doctrine you didn't bother to know seems a good reason for termination under her contract

but I'm biased

http://catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml

The Church teaches that medical research must refrain from operations on live embryos, unless there is moral certainty of not causing harm to the life or integrity of the unborn child and mother, and on condition that the parents have given free and informed consent to the procedure. Since stem cell research on human embryos, in practice, invariably causes the death of those embryos, it too stands condemned.

Doesnt this read that she is in the area of acceptance?

Is this real? This can't be real?

http://www.thecatholicviewforwomen.com/episodes/episode-1.aspx

The Kitchen Madonna:

Patroness of The Catholic View for Women

Mary was not only Jesus' Mother, but also a housewife. Her utensils are earthly and heavenly symbols. The key represents the safety in the house and also the way into heaven. The kettle symbolizes nourishment for body and soul. The broom represents cleanliness in the home and in thoughts and deeds.

[Destino]

I didn't see a question. I saw a rant, claiming that Science = Humanism = "popular rationalization for what we want".

Science does not equate to humanism. I am unaware of the scientific method and peer review being applied to the constant search for moral truth. When someone tells me however that science and "reason" are better suited to the development of moral truth it sounds like secular humanism and consequentialism.

[Larry]

Funny. I was under the impression that the application of reason to morality went back at least to Socrates and Plato.

But then, that's probably my liberal brainwashing from the Ethics class I took a while back.

(I'll point out that I just fed you a setup for a Princess Bride line, if you want some humor.)

[alexey]

Science and reason! What does science say about returning a wallet?

Science says that there is a neurophysiological benefit to returning the wallet.

Reason says that respect for property of others is necessary in order to have a well functioning society.

Humanism is what that is and it's a ever changing brand of popular rationalization for what we want.

I am not here to defend a label. Things do not happen the way you assert they would in dogma-free secular societies.

[Larry]

I am not here to defend a label. Things do not happen the way you assert they would in dogma-free secular societies.

You keep using that label. I do not think it means what you think it means.

See? SOME of us can recognize a Princess Brude setup, when we see one.

[Destino]

Science says that there is a neurophysiological benefit to returning the wallet.

Reason says that respect for property of others is necessary in order to have a well functioning society.

I am not here to defend a label. Things do not happen the way you assert they would in dogma-free secular societies.

Is returning the wallet the only action in that scenario that offers a neurophysiological benefit?

A lost wallet is not a situation encompassing contract law and property rights as a whole. This is a specific moral situation that does not alter the much larger issue you've tried to use to answer it. He NEEDS it and property rights aren't changed by this at all. Why not keep it?

---------- Post added April-29th-2012 at 07:29 PM ----------

Funny. I was under the impression that the application of reason to morality went back at least to Socrates and Plato.

But then, that's probably my liberal brainwashing from the Ethics class I took a while back.

(I'll point out that I just fed you a setup for a Princess Bride line, if you want some humor.)

Have you confused me with a conservative? Liberal brainwashing?!

Reason is an essential part of simply bing human. It's applied to everything in different measure, even if it doesn't feel that way at times... Especially while driving.

[Thiebear]

http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/topics/reform/documents/2006womenreproductiverightsandthecatholicchurch.asp

Looks like things change quite frequently over time and the Catholic men just adapt and move on to the next thing they will deny for a while before they give up on that also.

The use of condoms to prevent HIV/AIDS is another major area of controversy where Catholic power has a major international effect. Official Catholic teaching opposes any use of condoms even when they are being used not as a contraceptive, but to prevent the transmission of HIV [9]

The Pope in 2010: he told journalists accompanying him to Africa that condoms should not be used because they could worsen the spread of AIDS.

Why are you men trying to spread Aids? Have we fired all the men that use condoms?

I believe he relented on male prostitutes, but how many are teaching english in schools?

[alexey]

Is returning the wallet the only action in that scenario that offers a neurophysiological benefit?

A lost wallet is not a situation encompassing contract law and property rights as a whole. This is a specific moral situation that does not alter the much larger issue you've tried to use to answer it. He NEEDS it and property rights aren't changed by this at all. Why not keep it?

I did not refer to contract law or property rights.

There are many reasons to keep it and many reasons to return it. I thought you asked me to explain how I would derive a proper action for this situation in a religion-free context. I did that.

Now if you would like to discuss this particular situation further using reason and science, I am open to that. However, it seems you are more interested in proving something.

So let us see where you are coming from. Let's say your morals come from religion and God. If your God says finders keepers, then the conversation is over.

I, on the other hand, can keep the conversation going by discussing reasons. More over, you can actually get me to change my mind if you present good reasons for doing so. If my morals came from God, I would not be open to that.

[twa]

http://catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml

The Church teaches that medical research must refrain from operations on live embryos, unless there is moral certainty of not causing harm to the life or integrity of the unborn child and mother, and on condition that the parents have given free and informed consent to the procedure. Since stem cell research on human embryos, in practice, invariably causes the death of those embryos, it too stands condemned.

Doesnt this read that she is in the area of acceptance?

.

No, the normal IVF process results in the death or extended freezing of some of the embryos AND has the issue of not being a result of husband /wife copulation

What that covers is different procedures than IVF

IF she had a abnormal process done that did not have that result ,then presenting proof is needed AND the other issue remains

[Thiebear]

No, the normal IVF process results in the death or extended freezing of some of the embryos AND has the issue of not being a result of husband /wife copulation

What that covers is different procedures than IVF

IF she had a abnormal process done that did not have that result ,then presenting proof is needed AND the other issue remains

Again you go back to laboratory process as if the popes wrist/throat fixed itself or that the cardinals brain surgery was black magic?

IVF doesn't have to incur the death of an innocent... You read she killed some? Or assuming so? Did you read she gave up and egg that didn't take and then the next did?

I didn't read anywhere where it said she gave up batches (though i did read where she told her employer and that she was told she would be prayed for.. That is getting tacit approval in a Church correct?

The SECOND person she told in leadership fired her.

I was just quoting the catholic doctrine as described by the Pope, are you deciding to read it a different way? Two people read that two different ways? (my way didn't include adding words).

I notice you are fine with excluding all the men with condom/viagra/little boys etc. issues that are also forbidden?

I guess if you are a man you can break a few and get re-assigned, but an english teacher getting fertilization is an 'unforgiveable' fireable sin.

[Larry]

Again you go back to laboratory process as if the popes wrist/throat fixed itself or that the cardinals brain surgery was black magic?

IVF doesn't have to incur the death of an innocent... You read she killed some? Or assuming so? Did you read she gave up and egg that didn't take and then the next did?

I didn't read anywhere where it said she gave up batches (though i did read where she told her employer and that she was told she would be prayed for.. That is getting tacit approval in a Church correct?

The SECOND person she told in leadership fired her.

I was just quoting the catholic doctrine as described by the Pope, are you deciding to read it a different way? Two people read that two different ways? (my way didn't include adding words).

I notice you are fine with excluding all the men with condom/viagra/little boys etc. issues that are also forbidden?

I guess if you are a man you can break a few and get re-assigned, but an english teacher getting fertilization is an 'unforgiveable' fireable sin.

Uh, just observing that I think you're doing a lot of assuming about what issues twa is fine with.

[PeterMP]

http://catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml

The Church teaches that medical research must refrain from operations on live embryos, unless there is moral certainty of not causing harm to the life or integrity of the unborn child and mother, and on condition that the parents have given free and informed consent to the procedure. Since stem cell research on human embryos, in practice, invariably causes the death of those embryos, it too stands condemned.

Doesnt this read that she is in the area of acceptance?

The statement is and not or.

There is no way to carry out IVF w/ moral certainity that no harm will come from the embroy.

---------- Post added April-29th-2012 at 09:04 PM ----------

Science says that there is a neurophysiological benefit to returning the wallet.

And what about serail killers that get neurophysiological benefits from killing people?

---------- Post added April-29th-2012 at 09:08 PM ----------

The Cathollic Church position on this isn't difficult.

An embryo is life. In vitro is a difficult and experimental proceduere which unneccesarily puts the embryos at risk (and nobody carries out IVF on a single egg).

Vigra is fundamentally different.

Does the Church have issues with the behavior of Priest, absolutely, and does this firing seem misplaced giving those issues, yes.

But to not understand the difference in Church teachings with respect to IVF and things like wrist surgery and even viagra would seem to be an effort at intentional and woeful ignorance in this day and age.

[twa]

Fixing a wrist/brain or throat does not involve the creation of life,your ignoring their opinion on that and what are basic IVF techniques leaves me with no hope of you ever seeing their perspective

Feel free to continue the crusade,it is not my belief to defend.

Ah, Peter has arrived....have fun with him

[Thiebear]

Uh, just observing that I think you're doing a lot of assuming about what issues twa is fine with.

I don't know weve been going back and forth and he is only talking about her being ignorant of the doctrine... not a peep about other issues that are the same...

seems if he is the going to fight so hard to prosecute her, the least he could do is ensure the male population follows the same rules?

She told her boss and was not 'schooled' on what to do on the first attempt.

She told her other boss and was fired on the second?

any thoughts on that one?

[twa]

I don't know weve been going back and forth and he is only talking about her being ignorant of the doctrine... not a peep about other issues that are the same...

seems if he is the going to fight so hard to prosecute her, the least he could do is ensure the male population follows the same rules?

You must have missed Elka's posts....I almost always support the employer

Fire em all and let God sort it out ...if ya got one

[Larry]

The statement is and not or.

There is no way to carry out IVF w/ moral certainity that no harm will come from the embroy.

Course, there is no way to carry out SEX with that guarantee, either.

[PeterMP]

Course, there is no way to carry out SEX with that guarantee, either.

There is no embryo when you carry out sex.

We should be clear. The Catholic teaching on sex/children is that couples should have sex in the context of their relationship and be ready and willing to accept a resulting child if God is willing. The Church doesn't teach that people should only have sex to have kids.

In vitro is a run around that basic teaching added to the fact that multiple embroys are essentially always prepared in hopes that ONE will take (so the other empbroys are almost certainly NOT undertaken with the the idea all of the emobryos will not be harmed. The chances of an embroy emplanting properly decay as a function of time from the embroy was created).

http://catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml

"IVF violates the rights of the child: it deprives him of his filial relationship with his parental origins and can hinder the maturing of his personality. It objectively deprives conjugal fruitfulness of its unity and integrity, it brings about and manifests a rupture between genetic parenthood, gestational parenthood, and responsibility for upbringing. This threat to the unity and stability of the family is a source of dissension, disorder, and injustice in the whole of social life."

SCIENTIFICALLY children produced via IVF are different than those that are not.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2004668,00.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100614122026.htm

http://www.science20.com/news_articles/ivf_safe_review_current_evidence

It would be curious IF people were creating SINGLE embroys, and the emplanting single embryos what the Church's response would be, but since that NEVER intentionally happens its a moot point.

For IVF, extra embroys are created intentionally with the idea that some will be frozen (that means they will be harmed) and MANY times multiple embroys are actually inserted with hopes that one will take AND if you get multiples that harms (scientifically those kids have more issues) then if single births (and obviously when you emplant more embryos than you end up with births those embroys that weren't born died).

Larry just as there is a different moral judgement related to a person that hits somebody that steps off the curb in front of their car and a person that points a gun at somebody and pulls the trigger, there is a different moral judgement between a person that has sex with their spouse and somebody that intentionally and purposefully goes out of their way to create embryoes.

[Destino]

I did not refer to contract law or property rights.

There are many reasons to keep it and many reasons to return it. I thought you asked me to explain how I would derive a proper action for this situation in a religion-free context. I did that.

Now if you would like to discuss this particular situation further using reason and science, I am open to that. However, it seems you are more interested in proving something.

So let us see where you are coming from. Let's say your morals come from religion and God. If your God says finders keepers, then the conversation is over.

I, on the other hand, can keep the conversation going by discussing reasons. More over, you can actually get me to change my mind if you present good reasons for doing so. If my morals came from God, I would not be open to that.

You referred to respecting property, contract law and property rights are part of that. The devil is in the details right? These details bother you so you want to turn it around. Why? I'm simply exploring this morality you're sharing with the same tone you offered mine.

Your moral code has no foundation, everything is up for discussion. You seem to think this is a strength so I'm eager to engage this strength until I get an answer i want. There is really no code just group agreement... So why not engage it to ensure the outcome suits me? This is what people do. Was my premise not reasonable?

You are correct however, in my code offers no discussion. I insider that a strength. It offers forgiveness (in the next life) for those willing to repent but the rules aren't up for debate by those living within them.

[PeterMP]

You referred to respecting property, contract law and property rights are part of that. The devil is in the details right? These details bother you so you want to turn it around. Why? I'm simply exploring this morality you're sharing with the same tone you offered mine.

Your moral code has no foundation, everything is up for discussion. You seem to think this is a strength so I'm eager to engage this strength until I get an answer i want. There is really no code just group agreement... So why not engage it to ensure the outcome suits me? This is what people do. Was my premise not reasonable?

You are correct however, in my code offers no discussion. I insider that a strength. It offers forgiveness (in the next life) for those willing to repent but the rules aren't up for debate by those living within them.

Just to point out there almost absolutely no way you'd get a single code from a scientific/biological process.

That would be highly entropically unfavorable (a code would require order), and just evolutionarily/biologically unfavorable (evolution requires and therefore seems to ensure over longer periods of time variation in the population (also have ZERO variation would be entropically unfavorable)).

It would completely be expected that the moral implactions of most actions would be debated and even disagreed upon from such a system.