Life is full of people whose parents got married after the fact. Neither the child nor the parent should be punished for this. Nothing reverses time, and all one can do is correct the error. I read that a huge percentage - in fact, the majority - of girls in 17th century New England were pregnant when they got married, so the shotgun wedding was with us even before the shotgun itself.
Once upon a time, even children were punished for being illegitimate: there were certain professions they couldn’t go into, or at least not without a lot of paperwork and special treatment. This was clearly wrong and excessive, and it did nothing about e central fact. But there’s nothing that can change that, so the best thing is for the parents to repent, get married if possible, or otherwise try to work out their situation as best they can (if one of them is already married, for example). Fear of having their lives ruined and their children rejected was what used to determine women to have abortions once upon a time, and we don’t need to go back to that.
However, the young children this woman teaches don’t need to know that or worry about it. I agree that she should have been out of the classroom that day before the kids started to notice or ask questions, but there should have been more kindness shown her in offering to help her resolve her situation.
It mentions that she already has twins. Whose are they, I wonder. She may be somebody whose life is a mess, and perhaps kind treatment would give her a chance to get it together, since there are now four lives involved.
I agree that it is quite common—I know of many cases both among my family and my ancestors. At the same time, it is worth asking in a given situation whether marriage will correct or compound the problem. Sometimes the answer is clear one way, sometimes it is clear the other, and sometimes it is unclear. Allowing a person to retain the job if they marry discourages the asking of this important question, and may encourage them to act against what is best.
In fact, all other things being equal, children are at a disadvantage when illegitimate, but a shotgun marriage is not always the answer. Adoption is sometimes a very good option.
The twins were born from the pregnancy that cost her her job. If she had applied for the job while single and had told them that she had a couple of kids at home, I doubt that she would have been hired.
This case goes to the heart of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Can a Church or any employer with a deep moral compass be compelled to act against their own moral teachings and feelings in order to be involved in ANY type of Secular activity? If they can be compelled in such a manner, is there a First Amendment at all?
I don’t think it’s true that a majority of brides were pregnant in 17th c. New England. The Puritans kept good records, and in researching my grandfather’s line (almost all Great Migration, 1630s through 1650s) I didn’t find any early first births, and only one obvious case of illegitimacy - four babies born to the Widow Trask.