Are we pretending this isn’t about money? This didn’t become a real problem until a small group of parents threatened to pull their kids. All thoughts Of Christian sacrifice went right out the window when the possibility of a loss of revenue came up.
It’s especially irritating, I know, when the atheist has a better sense of what Jesus was about than the Christian does.
A situation all too common these days, I’m afraid. 
Here’s an idea: perhaps the diocese could employ Ms. Charlesworth in some other capacity. This would protect the schoolchildren without adding to her victimization.
What makes you think an atheist’s views on what Jesus would do are any less valid?
I see where you’re going with that, but it’s hardly the same thing. She isn’t a danger to the students.
I’m thinking there’s more to the story too, although I’ve worked at places that dismissed someone because their SO was dangerous, because their employment put other people in danger too. It’s not right, it’s not fair, but that’s the way it is.
And honestly, women who get involved with men like this are often not the most stable themselves. (grabs flameproof suit).
What the school did was legal, I agree with everyone.
Ethically though… let’s just say the teacher’s situation is improved in that she no longer works for assholes.
However true that is (and honestly, I think that happens way more often than sweet innocent girl accidentally get involved with bad boy), if the woman is unstable then fire her for that, not for her poor choice in men.
They should have moved her to another position (that didn’t involve teaching) in another location. She could still have a job, albeit not the one she was originally hired for, and the kids would have been safe. She doesn’t deserve to lose her job over her shitty ex, but honestly as a parent if I knew that one of the teachers had an ex-husband who had already proven a danger to my child and they didn’t get rid of her my kid would be in another school immediately. She might not like filing papers for the superintendent or bishop or whoever, but it would pay her bills and she wouldn’t be putting the kids in danger.
Best solution - they remove her from the school and help her with both counseling and financial support to move to new area and find employment, then get a restrining order againt the ex, hire a security guard, and then shoot his stupid ass when he shows up at the school and then bring her back.
I know - pie in the sky
The atheist does not arrive at his conclusions by the same method as the theist. Because the agreed-upon factual record regarding Jesus’ life and teachings is sparse, any meaningful calculation of “What would Jesus do” in a given situation is infuenced greatly by the religious tenets of the person asking the question. The atheist is generally not in a position to accurately answer that question, as the responses here illustrate. Would Jesus argue that the children attending the school be placed in danger to succor the employment needs of the woman? On what historical grounds might you answer that?
If you seek to answer on religious grounds, by what religious tradition will you be guided?
No, but her presence is. It doesn’t seem particularly plausible to imagine that the ex-husband’s murderous, stalker impulses will be thwarted because she’s at a new school, nor is it plausible to assume that her new school is some closely-held secret that he’ll never learn.
If such a job was available, sure.
If such a job wasn’t available…?
It’s not clear to me why the atheist would feel so confident about his judgement.
If Jesus was in fact a divine being whose very presence on the planet was a supernatural event, then the atheist’s denial of that rather critical fact suggests he doesn’t understand Jesus at all, at least in any meaningful way.
If Jesus was not a divine or supernatural being, of course, it’s the atheist whose understanding is the right one.
But the reason religious people ask themselves, “What would Jesus do?” is generally because they subscribe to the divine, supernatural theory. The atheist’s understanding of what Jesus would do is not particularly useful to reaching conclusions in the framework of Jesus being a divine, supernatural being.
No, all thoughts were focused on the safety of the children.
And bonus points for those good Christian parents that threatened to take their children out if the teacher wasn’t removed.
The failure here is with the state. Seriously, if you commit a (felony) violent crime, you should be put away for years not months.
Having said all that, was said jackass threatening the kids at the school? I agree that kids don’t need to be exposed to that kind of drama, but were the kids ever in any real danger?
That’s a cheap response. What’s your view, as a theist, regarding what Jesus would do?
So if this guy was the father of a student at the school and had the same history of violence at the school, would you support the school’s expelling that child to protect the other students?
Does this sort of thing happen to other teachers who have domestic violence problems?
[last post in hijack] So Jesus’ teachings aren’t worth pursuing on their own merits? [LPIH]
Really?
Maybe you have a point there.
Could a Christian please step up and tell us-“WWJD”?
Is that a statement of fact, or just a layman’s opinion? The way you phrased it made it sound like you have knowledge about this case.