Abby Nurre was fired from a Catholic school for being an atheist:
A math teacher fired from a Fort Dodge Catholic school because she joined an atheist website and noted on Facebook that she didn’t believe in God said Friday she never imagined it would lead to her losing her job.
Abby Nurre, 26, was fired last December from St. Edmonds Catholic School. She was hired in August.
Nurre said she was called into the principal’s office just before winter break and asked about Atheist Nexus, a social network that bills itself as site for “nontheists.”
She said she registered on the site on her personal computer at home. She noted a New York Times’ article reporting the government had spent $2.3 million on prayer research since 2000 and added the link.
“I never thought something like that would jeopardize my job,” she said Friday from Phoenix, Ariz., where she was applying for teaching jobs.
Nurre was suspended by Monsignor Kevin McCoy and later fired by the school board for violating a policy that prohibits employees from advocating”principles contrary” to the teachings of the church.St. Edmonds took the “appropriate action,” Kristie Arlt, spokeswoman for the Sioux City Diocese, said of the math teacher.
“The main thing is that she stated she didn’t believe in God,” Arlt said. “It’s pretty hard to put that same teacher in front of students in a Catholic school system.”
Nurre said her views constantly evolve and that she is constantly trying to expand her knowledge, whether on religion, astrology, fitness or politics.
“I just like learning about it. I don’t see why that should cause someone to get fired,” she said.
I think the craziest part is what the school’s business manager said:
The Register said that during her unemployment hearing, the school’s business manager Tim Hancock testified that Nurre had violated the principles of the Catholic church by joining Atheist Nexus.
“She should be denied unemployment benefits for being a member of an atheist Web site,” Hancock said.
Denied unemployment for being a member of an atheist website? WTF?
She doesn’t consider herself an atheist though, even though she doesn’t believe in God:
After she was hired by St. Edmonds but before school began, Nurre said she filled out a list of 100 “Truths” questions on Facebook, using her personal computer. One questions asked “Do you believe in God.” She replied “no.”
Her Facebook page was accessible to designated friends but not students.
Nurre said she doesn’t know how school administrators learned about the atheist website or her Facebook page. [...]
“I’m not an atheist. I’m not a Catholic. I’m not a Christian. I’m somewhere in between.”
If she doesn’t believe in God, I’m not sure how she can be in between atheism and Christianity. Atheism is not believing in a god, so if she doesn’t believe in a God… Well, whatever. It’s just semantics at that point.
I think this whole situation is a shame, but I am surprised Nurre didn’t realize not believing in God would jeopardize her job at a Christian school. Of course it would! When I worked for a Christian organization, I knew that if I went public with my atheism I would be fired. That’s why I waited until after I found a new job that didn’t require me to believe in fairy tales.
How could a teacher that young not know that schools, apparently all schools, are all up in ur internets bsns?
It seems she’s heard that atheism is denying that a god could exist (compared to agnosticism, which is not believing in a god). That’s always the definition I hear from Christians back home.
yeah… this is one of those, “well, DUH!” moments. as for…
i partly sympathize with this view only because i’ve been there. all she’s really saying at this point is, “i don’t like organized religion,” just in a really roundabout way…
This is bullshit. I know some people are going to say “well she was at a Catholic school, waddya expect?”. That’s irrelevant. Perhaps if she was a rampant militant Atheist who was preaching non-theism in a Catholic school, then yes, I’d agree she should be disciplined. But you can’t fire someone just because of an opinion. She’s a maths teacher, not a chaplain; she’s supposed to teach objective mathematical facts. Where do her lack of religious views come into conflict? This is disgraceful.
at the entrance of the building. duh!
That’s not really true. It’s not the job of a teacher in a Catholic school to BE a Catholic, you can teach children about the faith even if you don’t believe in it, just like a teacher can, and should, be able to teach about any other faiths they don’t believe in. Just ‘being’ a Catholic (which she must be if she was baptised, and saying she does not believe in god doesn’t change that) isn’t relevant to whether you can dispense knowledge or anything else ‘in the faith’ unless you are trying to be a priest. When I attended a Catholic school we had plenty of Protestant teachers (who by Catholic logic are just as bad as atheists), some who had children out of wedlock and other such supposedly scandalous things, and a couple of teachers who pretty blatantly were atheist freethinking types, and it was never considered a problem so long as they were not taking students for Religious Education classes.
This is one of these places where I see Dawkins’ point about the inordinate respect given to religious faith. If I set up a school or any other private institution and fired someone because I found out they were of a colour, gender or sexual orientation that I openly disliked (or even something silly like whether they believed in climate change), it would not be tolerated with the excuse “what do they expect?”. I also doubt one would get away with a secular school firing someone for admitting to some tacit belief in god. People should not have to live a lie to maintain their livelihoods and should not have to work in fear of reprisal because of their beliefs. The attempt to deny her unemployment benefits was particularly vindictive and I cannot see how any institution can claim the moral high ground in a case where their response is to try to make someone starve as a punishment for not agreeing with them.
Ja, and wasn’t all that information about her lack of belief fairly well hidden on her facebook site?
“Her Facebook page was accessible to designated friends but not students.”
Wouldn’t that suggest that only her friends could see her, and that one of her friends would have had to have betrayed her in order for someone to find this out?
“She said she registered on the site on her personal computer at home”
From that I’m not too sure if she used this network at work at all. If she did not, then how the hell did they find that out? Do they really monitor their employees so intensely? If so, that is a bit ridiculous.
“[...]fired by the school board for violating a policy that prohibits employees from advocating”principles contrary” to the teachings of the church.”
How is any of this considered “advocating”? Keep personal information isolated on a social networking site doesn’t seem like advocating.
perhaps at this particular school, it is in fact the job of a teacher at a catholic school to BE a catholic. that would seem abundantly clear to me given the circumstances.
But that has not been the case for many Catholic schools for a while now. About 13 years ago when I was still in a Catholic Grade school I had a friend who wasn’t Catholic.
You didn’t even have to be Catholic to go there. However, he did tell me that his non-theistic nature did cost his parents a lot. They had to pay a healthy sum each year for this reason alone.
Odd eh?
catholics demanding bribes? how is that odd at all?
It is sad, but I’m afraid it’s legally permissible. The Boy Scouts are allowed to call themselves “The Boy Scouts of AMERICA,” and yet they can prohibit atheist, agnostic, and openly homosexual children from joining. No camping out or merit badges for those evil brats!
Why should religious school kids study math anyway? 2 + 2 = whatever God wants it to be, and He scoffs at physics.
Here In OZ we have anti discrimination laws which would prevent this sort of thing. Except that religious institutions can apply for exemptions. So that they can dismiss people who believe the wrong thing. Or make lifestyle choices that the institution frowns on.
I know this is a really old comment, but i just had to add to it. We may have anti discrimination laws here in Australia, but this kind of behaviour is not only common, but actually expected among the religious community. In my small baptist high school a teacher was required to teach at least one class of RE a year, they had to express their religion on their application forms, and weirdly, they had to include their disdain for homosexuality. I knew of at least one teacher who lied on her application as she was actually an athiest, but she wanted the higher pay that is only available in private schools. She was found out and told to attend the schools favourite church or leave. She caved and started attending church. If she had been fired she would have had no legal standing, as her being a christian was part of her contract. Sickening, but true.
Isn’t religion a protected class?
Private schools should be able to hire and fire for reasons just like that. I support the Catholic school even if I disagree with their beliefs.
It sounds like no loss for the school, as Daniel states.
Yeah, I really can’t feel that sorry for her. If she’s teaching at a private Christian school, I mean really, what do you expect?
From Christians? Maybe compassion and understanding.
Mostly what I see coming from Christians is benevolent giving from time to time. Rarely do I see any lending of true compassion, charity or understanding, except to their own kind of course.
Yah, what world do you live in?
I went to a Jesuit high school. One of the requirements of hiring is being religious – you don’t have to be Catholic, but you do have to believe in a religion. They make it very clear and ask overtly about it during hiring. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were a similar requirement at the school in question, made plain during hiring.
In the UK this would be illegal. My Jewish friend teaches at a Catholic school, is open about her faith and has no problems.
I wondered this too. Aren’t there restrictions on hiring/firing based on race, color, gender, creed, etc?
Is there a legal eagle out there that can address this point?
From the EEOC website:
“The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person’s race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.
Most employers with at least 15 employees are covered by EEOC laws (20 employees in age discrimination cases). Most labor unions and employment agencies are also covered.
The laws apply to all types of work situations, including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages, and benefits.”
http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/index.cfm
More from the EEOC on religious discrimination:
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm
It seems pretty clear that (if the facts are as presented) the school has engaged in an illegal practice. If that is the case, then I hope that they get smacked hard with a lawsuit!!!
I don’t think it applies to non-profits or religious organizations.
Really? Are they not employers like any other? (I’m asking seriously because I don’t know)
I’m not sure of the legal reasons (but I’m guessing elemnope does), but religious organizations are allowed to discriminate based on creed. Maybe on more than that.
Wow, you are correct sir! It looks like it has to do with interstate commerce. From Christianity Today:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/yc/churchlawtaxupdate/judge_dodiscriminationlaws.html
Apparently the church CAN discriminate against a person “because of the person’s race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information.”
How very Christian of them.
…And so the USA with its revered Constitution and all the protections, freedoms and inalienable rights which it affords to its devoted citizens really isn’t so perfect after all. I’m thinking of starting a new religion here which worships crude oil on the water. I bet I could get tax exempt status and the right to discriminate in no time. Combine all that with my freedom to engage in Brandenburg Standard compliant inflammatory speech and I can’t help but exclaim, “Isn’t SlimeGod great?!”
There are a couple of things at play.
First, because of the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, any regulation of church practices is difficult, and any legislation seeking to do so must meet a nearly insurmountable burden.
Second, as you alluded to, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which establishes the no-discrimination rule in public accommodations, relies on the Interstate Commerce clause in Article I of the Constitution. Since at least US v. Lopez, schools have not been thought of as direct participants in interstate commerce (that case involved overturning a federally established Gun-Free School Zone using the Interstate Commerce clause as justification), even though they are generally considered public accommodations.
why wouldn’t religious organizations be allowed to discriminate based on creed? if they weren’t allowed to do so, then it would be all but impossible to guarantee homogeneity within their group. in my mind, it comes down to the purpose of the organization. if the purpose is to cater to a specific group of people, then anyone who doesn’t fit that profile simply has no business being there (excepting, of course, special cases such as guest attendance).
i keep hearing the word “discrimination! discrimination!” just stop it, people. if discrimination were absolutely wrong in every case, then even something as benign as a women’s book club at the local barnes and noble would be, in effect, illegal.
None of their damn business. If its not interferring with her ability to teach objectively… ugh, stupid. But not surprising in the least.
Yeah, it’s a “no shit” type of problem that someone who isn’t Catholic would get fired from their teaching position at a Catholic school.
Here’s the kicker though:
“Nurre said when she was hired at St. Edmonds, she was asked if she was a Catholic. She said she wasn’t.”
Why would they hire her after asking this question? That’s where it falls on their accountability. They completely misled her.
From my point of view I highly doubt this would have turned out well for anyone involved. I wouldn’t apply at a place of work that was not open to my beliefs differing from theirs.
Is her firing legal, ya know, being that it is a private school. does that matter, the private school part. Hope she finds a new job.
I think the courts wouldn’t even hear the case, if she attempted to, based on precedent: The schools actions would be (i think) supported under the free excise clause and the right to assemble, which is why the boy scouts can get away with their anti-atheist and anti-gay policies.
free exercise*
The way she describes herself, she’s not an atheist, but a deist.
The government is not allowed to discriminate against people on the basis of religion. Churches, on he other hand, are. And when you come right down to it, she’s not being fired for being a deist, she’s being fired for being a ninny, If she can’t figure out that you don’t make fun of your employer on a public website, she’s not smart enough to be teaching coloring inside the lines, much less high school arithmetic.
How can you not believe God exists (atheism), and also believe God exists but is not involved in his creation (deism)? I don’t see how she could be a deist if she doesn’t believe God exists.
I suppose someone could believe that God existed once-upon-a-time, but not anymore. That would fit the seeming contradiction.
It may seem crappy that she got fired for her atheism but as others have said is it really surprising? You may not have to be strictly Catholic to teach at a Catholic school but it is a little naive to believe you could hold to atheism and keep your job; she would have been better off calling herself a Buddhist, that might have carried her.
Look at it another way. What if Dawkins, Wison, etc had a research assistant who suddenly found Dembski or Behe convincing. How long do you think that R.A. would have his/her job. My guess would be not very long and I wouldn’t hold Dawkins or whoever in lower esteem for doing such. How could he have someone on his staff who believes something so diametrically opposed to his own views. Some difference is always good, but too much interferes with the progress of any vision or work.
That’s not the same even by a long shot. If said assistant would let his new found fascination in fake science get in the way of doing the real kind then yes firing them is perfectly OK. however if someone who does work that is not affected by them being creationists and their performance is up to standard then I would think Dawkins is wrong if he fired that person just as the school is wrong in this case.
The fact is that in some jobs the ability to do the work is only half the criteria for having the job. These things usually naturally work themselves out through natural aversion to working for the “enemy”. For example James Carville is one of the greatest political strategist in recent memory but I doubt he would work for a top Republican or if they would have them. It doesn’t mean he couldn’t do a great job for them, it’s just that their overall visions lead them to different goals or policies.
i’m a atheist but i would have to side up wityh the school here!, don’t get me wrong i am as much an atheist as i am an anti-theist, but isn’t it common logic?? would you protest if a anti-inmigrants group didn’t hired inmigrants?
I think the reason they are suggesting she be denied unemployment is because of the reason for her dismissal. She did in fact advocate outside the principles they held. Just joining the group and stating you are not a theist is enough grounds to fall under advocating an opposite and alternative set of standards.
Whether or not she should be denied unemployment because it was her actions that led to her firing in the first place… I don’t think is up for debate. She wasn’t laid off. She violated policy. If I’m late for work twenty times and my employer is done with it, I can’t file for unemployment just because I screwed up on the job.
So I think it’s fallacious to argue the suggestion is because she joined the site. The *reason* that statement was likely made is because joining the site violated their policy. And she really should have expected it. If she didn’t, it is either because she never knew of their policy or that they just created one. If they just made it up, totally different. But if it was part of their set procedure, it’s on her that she didn’t make herself familiar with the expectations her employer had for her.
As to “how very Christian”: People lose their jobs everyday. Some because of their own actions. Being “Christian” doesn’t mean those actions need always be overlooked.
Mark said: “She’s a maths teacher, not a chaplain.”
Exactly. Since when did we have Catholic math? Oh never mind, I forgot. We do have Catholic math. Here, let Robert Ingersoll explain it.
“Christ, according to the faith, is the second person in the Trinity, the Father being the first and the Holy Ghost the third. Each of these persons is God. Christ is his own father and his own son. The Holy Ghost is neither father nor son, but both. The son was begotten by the father, but existed before he was begotten–just the same before as after. . . .
“So, it is declared that the Father is God, and the Son God, and the Holy Ghost God, and that these three Gods make one God.
“According to the celestial multiplication table, once one is three, and three times one is one, and according to heavenly subtraction, if we take two from three, three are left. The addition is equally peculiar, if we add two to one, we have but one. . . .
“Nothing ever was, nothing ever can be more perfectly idiotic and absurd than the dogma of the Trinity.”
On a side note:
“Nurre said her views constantly evolve and that she is constantly trying to expand her knowledge, whether on religion, astrology, fitness or politics.”
I wonder how her views are evolving on astrology. I hope at some point in her reading she stumbles on “The Demon-Haunted World”…
I am only going to speak once. People don’t know how she grew up. She join the school for she thought it would be good. The school knew when they hired her she didn’t believe in god when they hired her. Her family does believe in god. She went to catholic school until jr. high, things changed. I am not a catholic and therefore i can’t judge her. I went to catholic school knowing that catholic are are judgmental people, and believe EVERYTHING their priest says to them. GET A LIFE PEOPLE!! The crusades are over so stop judging.
“I am only going to speak once.”
Small mercies are all around us …