Pot calling Kettle black!

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yeah , and the cases during the civil rights thing showed that even local business is interstate business . Plus of course you have the other rulings that local business practice can fall under the protectionism thing which is against the interests of interstate business .
So unless you are one of those inbred shopkeepers from Royston Vasey they have you covered .

Yeah, I guess I should have stipulated that it's interstate business unless it's something that's bad for all of the nation. At least that's the way it's supposed to be. In todays US, it's more like "We the Fed shall rule over everything we deem fit to rule over". However, that is NOT the way the Constitution was written or intended. Which is why I commented to begin with. As someone stated earlier, we don't need to rip our Constitution to shreds, it's already been done for us by our elected officials and is in the process of being put into the burn-bag and incinerated.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

Here shows again my ignorance of 'faith based' education....

So it would be expected that the Christian math teacher would spout off about the Father, Son and Holy Ghost during a algebra lesson??? Even at a Christian school? Is that what happens???

I didn't see anything in the article about her wanting to convert anybody or that she was applying to teach Bible study classes. If either had been mentioned I would have sided with the school. It just did seem a shame that the possibility of her mere presence at the school, teaching secular subjects, was cause for such handwringing.

it would not be expected for a christian teacher to mention God during an algebra test- no

but it wouldn't be a surprise for such a thing to happeneither, thus no shock or no scandal.

I can promise you that the settlement this school might ever pay out to this woman - if any - would be insignificant compared to what they make in any given year off tuition.

Im sorry to inform you CaptZ... this is a world where little injustices occur every day - whether or not the school was justified is one thing, but they have their reasons which you or I cannot fully fathom.

[baggygreen]

I've been to a private catholic school in oz. I spent 9 years there. The reason wasn't religion, it was because private schools offer a significantly better education here than public ones.

In the ACT at least, to teach at a catholic school requires at the very least 1 years' theology at a university. It just so happens that the only unis i'm aware of which offer this course are the australian catholic universities, of which there are 3.

As far as I'm aware, unless she's completed these studies, she isn't welcome to teach in any catholic school in the country. I'm of the opinion, having read a couple of news articles, that the basis for her argument is that she feels she can't study at the ACU and yet should still be entitled to the job..

As far as I'm aware, unless she's completed these studies, she isn't welcome to teach in any catholic school in the country

But does the school in question have those requirements for teaching staff , or more importantly in this case does it have those requirements for temporary placements for student teachers .
We used to have lots of silly rules for hiring teachers over here ,like they had to speak Irish even if it wasn't used and if they were female they couldn't be married and be a teacher .

[Kapt Z]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Im sorry to inform you CaptZ... this is a world where little injustices occur every day - whether or not the school was justified is one thing, but they have their reasons which you or I cannot fully fathom.

Amen.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

So equality of opportunity for ALL is actually a bad idea? How did that happen?

No, I think it's a great idea. So is Communism. Neither can exist, though. The closest you can ever get to equal opportunity is maximization of individual freedoms. The second the state steps in and says you must or must not hire/train/educate/trade with/etc... this person, equality of opportunity gives way to equality of outcome.

Maybe I'm just a naive optimist, but I do like to think things are a little better between the races, genders, and religions than they were when my folks were kids. They thought so. I do think the 'state'(meaning us) helped with that.

That's possible, and is a difficult point to argue either way. The one thing I will give the state credit for is preventing the state from discriminating, more or less. In that way, the state expanded individual freedoms.

As a principal of whatever school I would tell the parents the same thing-
"Mr/Ms was the best qualified candidate in our judgement to teach these courses."
Really, what else would you say?

You're looking at it backwards. Demand, and therefore capital, flows from the consumer. A business must meet consumer expectations if it is to continue. As a private school, a Catholic school is vulnerable to competition, whether it recieves state funding or not. If it fails to satisfy the consumers, it ceases to exsist.
You seem to have a top-down perspective, in which what seems to be the most efficient choice is apparent. It would seem more "fair" to hire this teacher, and should she indeed prove to be the most qualified, she would appear to be the wisest choice. Unfortunately, that isn't how it works. In this particular instance, selecting a Muslim teacher would almost certainly cause drastic repurcussions amongst the school's consumer base, resulting in the loss of customers. Consider the nature of religion, and tell me that parents would not withdraw their children over such a slight.

The alternative is to mandate hiring policies and curricula in all schools. This, though, creates an even worse set of harms. Whereas fallacious religious or personal convictions about school selection may harm some students, a fallacious state policy on education harms all students and their parents have no choice in where they are schooled, no escape.
The U.S. itself is a shining example of the failure of state-monopolized education, for reasons I am sure you are quite familiar with.

In this case, or in any other, the goal should be to provide individuals with the freedom to choose, (even if they choose poorly) whilst preserving the individual rights of others. That means choice in employees, wages, consumer demographics, etc.. for all industries. That results in choice for consumers and employees.
It can be argued that that business can also create a monopoly, but to give power to the state is to simply skip everything and willingly create a monopoly right away. Contrary to your assessment, the state is not us. You don't have a vote, and though you technically have a voice, it is very, very faint. In a best-case scenario, you are subject to the tyranny of the masses, and in the worst case you just get tyranny.

Never confuse Equality of Opportunity with Equality of Outcome.