[r9etb]

Uh, that's not what's at issue here. She did so after having signed an employment contract, in which she specifically bound herself to avoid that behaviour. Nice try, but no.

I guess you've got a nice supply of rocks at home, too. Just in case you need them.

What's really at issue is whether or not the school reflects the image of Jesus Christ. It purports to do so; but does it really?

That's the by far the most important question. You should put away your rocks for a while, and reflect more fully on the school's actions. Just because they call themselves "Christian" doesn't mean that they automatically act in a Christ-like manner.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

That's the by far the most important question. You should put away your rocks for a while, and reflect more fully on the school's actions. Just because they call themselves "Christian" doesn't mean that they automatically act in a Christ-like manner.

Again, I reiterate - if the members of the school administration had also engaged in pre-marital sex while employed by the school, then you'd have a case. See, when Jesus confronted the Pharisees about the woman caught in adultery, what He did was basically confronted them with their own like sins. They were hypocritical, because they were going to stone the woman for doing something that they themselves had done.

Which, of course, you have no possible clue to be the case in this case with the school.

Sorry, but the Bible certainly says that there are standards of behaviour for those involved in Christian service. Somebody is not "unChristian" for expecting people to abide by those standards or else face certain consequences. Please, don't peddle a dumbed-down Christianity to us.