Topic: Baby worth legal fight with [Catholic] church [schools]

[Jetavan]

“I didn’t think it would be a problem.”

But it was for her employers, Holy Family and St. Lawrence schools in East Price Hill, who fired Dias in October 2010 because the single woman was 5½ months pregnant and wanted to discuss maternity leave. She is still unemployed.

She sued in April, accusing the schools of pregnancy discrimination and breach of contract.

Her case, filed in the Cincinnati-based U.S. District Court, is on hold while the U.S. Supreme Court decides issues in another, similar case.

Dias was fired for being pregnant not from premarital sex, but as a result of artificial insemination.

For Dias, the case is about what she believes is a rigid religious institution that refuses to adapt to modern life punishing her for celebrating life with birth.

For the schools that hired and fired Dias, the issue is less about her beliefs and more about Dias keeping her legal promise.

“She has a right to her opinion, but she doesn’t have a right to violate her (employment) contract,” said Archdiocese of Cincinnati spokesman Dan Andriacco.

That contract calls for her to act and comply with Catholic teachings, including not participating in what the church calls the “grave immoral” act of artificial insemination.
....
Dias counters that contract is invalid because it isn’t applied equally to men or enforced on them. Her physical state made it obvious she was pregnant, but that’s not so for men who participate in artificial insemination, she said. “It’s a double standard. I’m suing so they can’t do this to any more women.’’
....
Contract clause Dias agreed to when hired

The teacher will “comply with and act consistently in accordance with the stated philosophy and teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and the policies and directives of the School and the Archdiocese.”

Does Orthodoxy see artificial insemination as immoral?

[Aindriú]

While no official positions have been formulated on these topics by the Church, theological opinions by Church theologians are beginning to be formed. In an encyclopedia article on these topics, there is a good general statement on bioethics. The common denominator of all the issues discussed is the high regard and concern of the Church for human life as a gift of God. Orthodoxy tends to take a conservative approach to these issues, seeing in them a dimension of the holy, and relating them to transcendent values and concerns. An intense respect for human life is needed to hold the reins upon those who would attack it. The human person, from the very moment of conception, is dependent upon others for life and sustenance. It is in the community of the living, especially as it relates to the source of life, God in the Trinity, that life is conceived, nurtured, developed and fulfilled. The trust we have in others for the continued well-being of our own lives forms the basis for generalization. Eastern Orthodox ethics, consequently, functions with a pro-life bias that honors and respects the life of each person as a divine gift which requires development and enhancement.

To put it briefly, the views expressed by some theologians (without official sanction) on these controversial topics follow, though in an abbreviated form because of the lack of space:

-Scarce medical resources should be allocated on the basis of justice and need, and not only on the ability to pay.
-Patients have rights which should be honored by the medical profession.
-In principle human experimentation cannot be prohibited, for the sake of the patients themselves and the well-being of others, but great care in respecting the dignity and integrity of the patients must be maintained, while the use of experimentation should be governed by strict rules of scientific necessity and informed consent.
-Organ transplantation cannot be prohibited, but the chance of success should be high, taking the real need into account, evaluating carefully the impact on both donors and recipients.
-While no one is obligated to give an organ, such a donation should be encouraged as an expression of Christian love; on the other hand, organ transplants from the dead involve different problems - in particular, the hastening of the death of the potential giver for the sake of the potential recipient, which is considered wrong.
-Artificial insemination by a husband (AIH) is not rejected, but artificial insemination by donor (AID) is considered an improper intrusion of a third party in the sanctity of the marital relation.
-In vitro fertilization is looked upon with great doubt because present methods cause the destruction of numerous human fertilized ova and even developing fetuses; this is still a form of abortion.
-Genetic counseling and screening cannot be objected to in principle and in fact should be encouraged.

http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith7101

[NicholasMyra]

"artificial insemination by donor (AID) is considered an improper intrusion of a third party in the sanctity of the marital relation."

Well, I would hope it would be.

[Alveus Lacuna]

"artificial insemination by donor (AID) is considered an improper intrusion of a third party in the sanctity of the marital relation."

Well, I would hope it would be.

LOL. Here's some sperm!!!

[NicholasMyra]

"artificial insemination by donor (AID) is considered an improper intrusion of a third party in the sanctity of the marital relation."

Well, I would hope it would be.

LOL. Here's some sperm!!!

If it doesn't look sorta like me, I won't love it.