Last week, the High Court decided in favor of a Lutheran school in its refusal to hire a teacher who was not a Lutheran, or, at least, was not teaching Lutheran doctrine in its school. While there is some confusion as to the details of the case, the fact of the decision goes to allowing a private parochial school and its administration to maintain church doctrine and church autonomy. The godless AP has taken on the assignment, apparently, of debunking this decision and it has done so with this story:
DETROIT (AP) - Aleeza Adelman teaches Jewish studies at a Jewish school, yet she considers herself a teacher whose subject is religion, not a religious teacher. She's rethinking how to define her job after a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling left her wondering what could happen if she ever needed to defend her right to keep
The high court ruled last week that religious workers can't sue for job discrimination, but didn't describe what constitutes a religious employee - putting many people employed by churches, synagogues or other religious organizations in limbo over their rights.
"I think of myself as a teacher who is just like any other teacher," said Adelman, who works at the New Orleans Jewish Day School. "Yes, my topic of teaching happens to be Jewish stuff, but if I were to just think in general about it, am I different from the teacher across the hall who is teaching secular studies?"
Understand, the woman is a Jew; she teaches in a Jewish school, but, somehow believes that she is not religious teacher, that she is merely a teacher who specializes in religion. To you get the point? Maybe not. Look, this woman is positioning herself as a free spirited teacher, with free speech rights, as she currently agrees to teach the tenets of Judaism. To agree is one thing; to be forced is something else. That is what is going on, here. Adelman is putting herself in the same circumstance as the Lutheran teacher. Getting ready for a second assault???