Do you have any idea the amount of drama that goes on at the upper levels of churches? Accusations fly, people entrench themselves trying to find any way they can to hold on to their positions, and these spaces can become some of the most uncomfortable places in the world when you have one person threatening to tear down the entire church with a legal threat. Then absolutely no one talks about it outside of rumours and that work area.
This woman is in the right, but this precedent will cause bloodshed.
Why does that apply any more to churches than other organizations? And is giving churches blanket immunity to any kind of employment law (which they can apparently easily extend to cover almost completely nonreligious teachers) really the way to prevent this "bloodshed"?
Churches have multiple complications in hiring practices, and the way they pay their employees already. I'm not arguing for blanket immunity, as obviously that's going to cause many more problems. What I
am arguing for is that this is not a cut-and-dry issue, and if not handled carefully could result in more problems than already exist.
So assuming she's taking treatment....what could POSSIBLY be the issue? Unless the Lutherans are anti-medicine. Are they?
Honestly, I have no idea why. I'm actually honestly surprised by this. Lutherans are pro-medicine as far as I knew.
That's... possibly true, but completely irrelevant? Why do churches need to ignore anti-disability discrimination laws in order to teach people about a certain religion?
They don't. They
do need to ignore some discrimination laws already though because it would not go over well if they could be sued for not allowing people who didn't share their beliefs to become ministers in the first place. Like I have said before though, this woman is being unfairly discriminated against.