SAN DIEGO (KTLA) — A woman is suing a Christian college for allegedly firing her because she engaged in premarital sex and became pregnant.
Teri James is claiming wrongful termination in her lawsuit against San Diego Christian College in El Cajon, where she worked as a financial aid specialist.
At a news conference on Thursday, James’ attorney, Gloria Allred said, “The HR director indicated that she was not being fired because she was pregnant.”
“Instead, she was being terminated because she had premarital sex.”
The 29-year-old received a termination notice stating she “engaged in activity outside the scope of the handbook and community covenant.”
The college contends that employees and some students have to sign a clause stating they won’t have pre-marital sex and will abstain from behavior inconsistent with Christian values.
James allegedly signed that clause when she was hired. Still, James says she was treated unfairly.
“I feel like what San Diego Christian College did to me was hurtful and un-Christ like,” James told reporters.
“I was unmarried, pregnant and they took away my livelihood,” James added.
Allred says the college will argue that, since it’s a religious entity, it can legally fire James. But she maintains that it’s a business entity, and the termination is illegal.
79 Comments to “Woman Says She Was Fired by Christian College for Pre-Marital Sex”
February 14, 2013 at 7:44 PM
Gloria Allred , yep, that screams loser trying to get attention right there.
February 14, 2013 at 8:01 PM
So, she acknowledges that she violated the terms of her employment contract?
February 15, 2013 at 1:18 PM
She should have claimed immaculate conception. If only men would fess up to their violation of contract as well. The problem is, they can take a shower. Women are stuck with the proof.
February 15, 2013 at 3:52 PM
Why didn't she just use some of that free Obamacare birth control?
February 15, 2013 at 10:14 PM
Ah yes, why didn't she use birth control? Perhaps she's a compliant Christian who believes it's a sin to use birth control. Now that would be ironic. Or perhaps this is one of the Christian organizations demanding the right to exclude birth control from their insurance plan. Who knows. Obviously it's the employer's business whether this poor woman was having sex or not, and it's the business of an awful lot of Christians out there as well, it seems.
February 14, 2013 at 8:09 PM
And her point is??????
February 14, 2013 at 8:16 PM
you are not supposed to be fired even if you signed and agreed to the term LOL
February 14, 2013 at 8:37 PM
And sleeping around is "Christlike"???? Geez you are stupid.
February 14, 2013 at 9:14 PM
I don't think she quite understood the lesson of "love thy neighbor".
February 15, 2013 at 11:05 AM
oh she did alright!
February 14, 2013 at 9:08 PM
Gloria Allred and Christian ….Are oxymoron's…
February 14, 2013 at 10:12 PM
Nope, just morons…
February 14, 2013 at 10:12 PM
Clearly stated in the policy she signed prior to hire. And check out the b representing her. Wonder if she'll throw her under the bus too.
February 15, 2013 at 12:57 AM
Gloria Allred clearly wants attention… Teri James is just the same, she signed a clause that clearly indicates individuals are to not have pre-marital sex and will abstain from behavior inconsistent with Christian values, yet she turns out and blames the Christian college from firing, dumb broad should've used a dildo?
February 15, 2013 at 3:22 AM
The reality is, in our society when people violate a sexual standard, as in this case with their place of employment, highly likely that women only will carry the economic and social cost for such violations. Men are held to a lower standard, not because they are less guilty, but because they are less likely to be found out. That is the injustice. What would Jesus recommend we do in Teri's case. John 8 1-11.
February 15, 2013 at 10:13 AM
True enough. With that said… Men usually don't get preggers. Therefore women are much more committed in *ahem* carnal acts then men. They are married to the results of their actions whether or not they are married to the guy that… well… took part.
It is like a ham and egg breakfast. The chicken was involved… The pig was committed…
February 16, 2013 at 6:51 AM
Read John 8:1-11 carefully. She was caught in the act, meaning the man was also caught. He was part of the Jewish faith community therefore was under the same punishment of death and he was not brought forth. In this woman's case, it is NOT stated the man this the woman had sex with was employed by the college. Big difference, so your Scripture has no application here.
February 18, 2013 at 3:08 AM
Glenn, I read the scripture very differently. This scripture leaps off the page for a present day Biblical application.
Your contention that the man was also being condemned to death was presumptuous. Is it not significant that her partner in sin was not also there being accused?
Jesus began to write on the ground and he said: “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her" He continued to write on the ground and they left from oldest to youngest refusing to carry out the sentence which they were so anxiously willing to do only a few minutes ago. They, by refusing to carry out the sentence to this serious sin let her off. What changed?
February 15, 2013 at 5:39 AM
Who would even want to work at a place like that? 17th century rules, and they say they are a god business, where is forgiveness and compassion?
February 15, 2013 at 7:48 AM
Not on the contract she signed.
February 15, 2013 at 5:53 AM
If she signed to the terms, she’s held to them. Didn’t she know that having sex carries a risk of getting pregnant? What is it with women today? They’re so stupid! She violated a contract and now she’s reaping the consequences. It’s a shame when stupid, emotion-driven people get to spread their genes. If she believed in God then she would know that He will help her when she turns to Him, yet she is suing instead. It shows where her faith lies.
February 15, 2013 at 8:07 AM
Would it have been better for her to have an abortion? Then no one would have know of her failure. Let us not temp women to resort to killing their child so they can keep from being found out. What is GRACE for?
Our Christian institutions are for needy failures who are looking to Christ for strength in weakness. There needs to be a policy change. Christ came for failures like me and you. Jesus Christ lived the perfect life that I could NEVER live so that I could have life with Him. This life is progress in holiness. We are not yet perfect. Let us ALL run to Christ for forgiveness and accept one another in LOVE.
Father forgive them for they know not what they do…
March 3, 2013 at 4:23 PM
Sarah, f— your God and f— religion.
February 15, 2013 at 7:24 AM
mark's silence is deafening.
February 15, 2013 at 7:30 AM
Father have mercy for they know not what they do…
February 15, 2013 at 7:40 AM
* did…
February 15, 2013 at 7:57 AM
Would it have been better for her to have an abortion? Then no one would have know of her failure. Let us not temp women to resort to killing their child so they can keep from being found out. What is GRACE for?
Our Christian institutions are for needy failures who are looking to Christ for strength in weakness. There needs to be a policy change. Christ came for failures like me and you. Jesus Christ lived the perfect life that I could NEVER live so that I could have life with Him. This life is progress in holiness. We are not yet perfect. Let us ALL run to Christ for forgiveness and accept one another in LOVE.
February 15, 2013 at 4:46 PM
Here's a thought I bet someone at the school already suggested: she have the baby and, if she decides she doesn't want it, any number of people at or associated with the college will adopt it immediately.
As it is, she broke her word – she lied – AND is arrogantly wanting to be rewarded for it. God has no place in heaven for liars, or those who love lies. As you do hers.
February 18, 2013 at 2:16 PM
You were doing so well with the first paragraph.
Can you say you have not broken your word, or lied. Even so, I still think Jesus has a place for you.
February 15, 2013 at 8:58 AM
It's possible she signed the contract when she processed her new employee paperwork. (This happened to a friend, who was outraged by the clause but felt she had no option at that point but to sign.)
February 15, 2013 at 9:16 AM
A contract is a contract and is legally binding. You violate it, you have no right to sue. Go find another job and stop blaming others for your screw ups!!
February 15, 2013 at 11:23 AM
If your wife was desperate for work and an employer offered her a job but only if she promise not to use any sort of birth control. Most people would find this offensive and not legally enforceable since it has nothing to do with the function of the job. The higher question is does an employer always have standing in what we do with our lives outside of the office.
It seems the Supreme Court has indicated churches enjoy abroad, defined exemptions from civil rights laws in firing of employees classified as ministerial. That is limited to churches and where the employees are involved in ministry. That is not the case here.
February 15, 2013 at 9:27 AM
Not sure why this is news. Oh, I forgot. Gloria usually takes up these crazy law suites, knowing little chance of going to court. But, happy for out of court cash settlement.
February 15, 2013 at 9:29 AM
As despicable as it sounds to fire her for something like that, because it is a private college, they make their own rules. If it states this is grounds for termination in the handbook, it doesn't matter what Gloria argues, the lawsuit will be dismissed. My advice is do not work at a private Christian college.
February 15, 2013 at 10:08 AM
Tough situation all around.
She was wrong. If she wanted to live that way, that is her business, but she signed an agreement.
The Church/college needs to forgive. I hardly thing Christ would turn this woman and her child out.
Nevertheless, the college needs to discourage this sort of behavior. There should be some sort of disciplinary action, but perhaps a bit of Christian mercy as well. Perhaps loss of bonus, or something.
Oh, and (forgive my candor) Allred needs to go fuck herself.
February 15, 2013 at 10:19 AM
Another example of today's insane push to crush everything moral and everything Christian.
If I got hired as a police officer but I refused to wear my uniform, I would get terminated. Why? Because when I was hired, I signed a contract saying that I would abide by the rules of the police force and my employment would rest on that!
So when Teri James signed the contract stating she would not engage in pre-marital sex among other things, she effectively agreed that if she was to break that contract, she would be subject to termination.
This is a ridiculous case that would never have even made news if it had been for another reason such as 'not wearing earplugs in a factory' or 'speeding in the company car'. You might as well file a lawsuit against the LAPD for discriminating against speeders. When you get a driver's license, you agree to abide by the laws of driving in your state. If you do not abide by them, you will have your license taken away.
Teri James did not abide by the contractual laws of her employer, therefore her employment with San Diego Christian College was taken away. Simple.
February 15, 2013 at 11:26 AM
It is not simple….
If your wife was desperate for work and an employer offered her a job but only if she promise not to use any sort of birth control. Most people would find this offensive and not legally enforceable since it has nothing to do with the function of the job. The higher question is does an employer always have standing in what we do with our lives outside of the office.
In seems the supreme court rulings indicate churches enjoy abroad, defined exemptions from civil rights laws in firing of employees classified as ministerial. That is church and the employees which are involved in ministry which is not the case here.
February 15, 2013 at 2:55 PM
Well, we can all come up with a long, endless list of what-if scenerios that sound unreasonable. But Ben's point is very simple, especially since this was a Christian seeking a job within a private, Christian organization. If the covenant was found to be too offensive by someone who shares Christian values, they have a choice to not work there. Simple. Many might think some simple things Ben mentioned such as speeding, uniforms (or any enforced dress codes- modest or revealing), are too restrictive, therefore offensive. A private organization has the right to its own hiring criterion. And even secular organizations have no problem with legal stipulations. I've actually heard of people from other countries declaring "discrimination" when they do not qualify for employment, educational funding, or many other benefits that only US citizens are entitled to. This young woman is obviously looking for a fast buck to help care for her child, and Gloria is also looking to benefit financially. But it was the one fired who reached out to that particular lawyer for representation. It says a lot.
February 18, 2013 at 3:35 AM
Decrement needed here, and the balance of grace and judgment. We all need Grace, but we have to admit we do not deserve it.
I contend it can be useful to reflect how much can an organization can insist what is acceptable outside the physical space of our employment. Sports celebrities have endorsement contracts that outline morality clauses. If one behaves badly, it damages the brand. In another case if you worked for a Muslim, could they force you to wear a hajaba, ( head dress outside of work? Just because we get paid for a job, it does not negate all our rights under the constitution. If this was the case one could justify paid slavery. In the end our courts will decide as they have in the past where this line is. Already the Supreme court has giving great latitude to churches when it involves people directly in ministry.
February 15, 2013 at 3:43 PM
Funny, I see the initial act as an insane push to turn everything and everyone Christian. How people do their job is one thing. What they do in the privacy of their own home, as long as it's not illegal, is none of anyone else's damn business.
February 15, 2013 at 10:43 AM
Here we go with religion again god forgive all your people.
February 15, 2013 at 11:02 AM
Contract means nothing to her.
February 15, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Oh yeah fire her for violating her contract but let those male teachers keep screwing the students behind close doors. Like the Boy Scous of America- ity is bad to be gay but they PROTECT the pedofiles.
February 15, 2013 at 11:34 AM
Please see the Bible at Hebrews 13:4; and read this verse saying " Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."
February 15, 2013 at 12:42 PM
LOL
February 15, 2013 at 12:51 PM
The college should forgive her (did she ask for forgiveness or just sue?), but allowing her to continue in her position when she violated her contract would also be dishonesty and a lack of integrity. To claim they shouldn't fire her is a case of focusing on only one aspect of the case. We also do not know if the college reached out to her to give her personal aid and help in having her child. Is she already preparing to marry her boyfriend? Wouldn't Christ want him to support her and the baby? Maybe if the college doesn't fire her, her boyfriend believes he has no responsibilities and splits so the college would be complicit in all of that irrisponsibility. I am not sure what the answer is, but to limit this to just choice A or choice B is lacking in knowledge.
February 15, 2013 at 2:51 PM
I saw on the news that she does not want her job back, but that she is sueing for damages.
February 15, 2013 at 1:05 PM
Even though I'm a liberal feminist, I have to go with the church on this one. Teri knew the terms. She should have been more careful. Now where is the baby-daddy? Why hasn't he stepped up to the plate and taken responsibility for this pregnancy? Did he bolt, too?
February 15, 2013 at 1:13 PM
You've got to be kidding. When they start firing the men staffers for having sex (oh wait, I'm sure NONE of the men there are having premarital sex) I'll be fine with this firing as well, and not a moment sooner.
February 15, 2013 at 1:09 PM
KathyS wins the prize for best comment thus far. Nice to see a voice of reason in a sea of hypocrisy.
"KathyS · Oh yeah fire her for violating her contract but let those male teachers keep screwing the students behind close doors. Like the Boy Scous of America- ity is bad to be gay but they PROTECT the pedophiles."
February 15, 2013 at 1:40 PM
If I'm a Police Officer and am convicted of a crime can I sue when they fire me?
If i'm a Doctor and illegally write prescriptions can they fire me?
In some cities if you smoke you can be terminated
February 18, 2013 at 7:53 AM
"If I'm a Police Officer and am convicted of a crime can I sue when they fire me?"
Yes, depends on the crime, if it is a serious crime. Your job description is enforcing clear secular
laws.
"If i'm a Doctor and illegally write prescriptions can they fire me?"
Yes, disciplined or fired for violating clear secular Laws.
"In some cities if you smoke you can be terminated"
I do not of people being executed for smoking in a city. If you know of any, let me know.
February 15, 2013 at 1:44 PM
But who is the father? Today on Maury
February 15, 2013 at 1:50 PM
You've got to be kidding. When they start firing the men staffers for having sex as well (oh wait, I'm sure NONE of the men there are having premarital sex) I'll be fine with this firing, and not a moment sooner. Love those Christian values.
February 15, 2013 at 3:58 PM
It's kind of like a rolling stop… you're fine as long as you're not caught.
Show that male employees have been known to have premarital sex and not faced consequences, and you have a case. You don't get to complain about a double standard without demonstrating that a double standard exists.
February 15, 2013 at 5:18 PM
Really, you actually doubt the presence of a double standard?! If men's bellies swelled up every time they deposited sperm pre-maritally, we'd have a nation of XXL young men.
February 15, 2013 at 5:23 PM
Yes, I doubt it.
Can you show that the college would not fire a man it knew violated the same clause?
I don't really care about your crying about being victimized. Especially if you're going to continue claiming that women get pregnant every time they have unprotected sex.
February 15, 2013 at 10:08 PM
No one said women get pregnant every time they have sex. I was just pointing out how much easier it would be to avoid a double standard if there were some way to tell when MEN have sex….
February 19, 2013 at 9:09 AM
Kimmy, this might help balance things out. In a effort to uncover hidden sexual sins, particiculary in single men, the college could mandate ALL men in that group submit to the installation of penile plethysmograph c/w data logger. That might get them to drop their stones. John 8: 7-11
Many of those that are all for "accountabilty" usally settle on an asymmetrictic model and then try to convice everyone else it is a symmetric model.
February 15, 2013 at 2:08 PM
Here's the question our justice system apparently now must answer, and based on what (some) Christian organizations seem hell-bent on enforcing, we need an answer soon: If we are adequately doing the job we are hired for, does a private employer have the right to dictate what we do IN PRIVATE, outside the office?!!!!! Scary.
February 15, 2013 at 2:54 PM
I don't know, I think once the college is asked to provide maternity time and supply health coverage to an unwed mother and infant, a decision which would affect all other employees (not to mention cost of tuition) that these so called "private" decisions might have some real public ramifications. Scary indeed.
February 15, 2013 at 3:24 PM
You're not paying attention, Steve. She wasn't fired because she was pregnant. She was fired because she had sex.
February 16, 2013 at 6:00 AM
sex can lead to pregnancy as I recall
February 15, 2013 at 3:33 PM
Furthermore, it is against the law to base hiring or firing on personal information such as number of children or a woman's intention to have more. What century are you living in?
February 16, 2013 at 6:13 AM
The original comment was about private lives' without any effect on the public, that is simply not true, I was not commenting on hiring practices. At a private Christian college it is both reasonable and lawful to hold employees to Christian standards of living, after all employees represent the institution they work for. Child bearing is part of a marriage commitment, the family unit is the chief building block of society. Thank you for your information on hiring practices for women, you are correct in your understanding of the criteria HR departments are instructed to work with.
February 15, 2013 at 2:49 PM
Maybe the people saying the college needs to forgive Teri are using a different definition of forgiveness?
Forgiving does not mean ignoring the infraction, but refusing to repay in kind or harbor bitterness. Forgiveness removes condemnation, not consequences. There is nothing in the college's response which would suggest they have not forgiven Teri. There is though some evidence which would suggest Teri is not admitting she should be held accountable for her own actions and that she is truly repentant for her wrongdoing.
February 18, 2013 at 3:44 AM
New Testament scripture says often that when infractions occur the penalty is waved. Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting" This is the basic reality of our faith. It goes beyond releasing "harboring of feelings". We are called to a much higher and more difficult ( to our nature) standard.
February 15, 2013 at 3:21 PM
What is written in the schol's employee requirements? What if it would have been someone other than you? How many people knew you were having a pre-marital relationship. Did you tell anyone?
February 15, 2013 at 3:24 PM
This is in the Community Covenant Hanbook for all employees: Biblical character is highly valued and desired at SDCC. Scripture describes character
qualities by what it is and what it is not. The positive traits we commit to included in our
character are love, joy, kindness, patience, humility, compassion, forgiveness, hospitality,
integrity, generosity, care for the oppressed, commitment to justice, and the recognition of
the rights and needs of others. The traits that should not inhabit our lives are identified as
abusive anger; malice; jealousy; lust; sexually immoral behavior including premarital sex,
adultery, pornography, and homosexuality; evil desires; prejudice based on race, sex, or
socioeconomic status; greed; idolatry; slander; profanity; lying; drunkenness; thievery; and
dishonesty.
February 17, 2013 at 3:50 PM
Forgiveness doesn't mean there are no consequences. We forgive our children but there are consequences when they break the rules of our home. She violated her employment agreement. If you dance you gotta pay the band.
February 18, 2013 at 3:48 AM
That is the gospel of Dodge City. An eye for an eye. The New Testament holds followers of Christ to a high standard than just the enforcer of legal contacts.
February 18, 2013 at 5:29 PM
Not at all eye for eye. All companies have standards that if you violate you get fired for. My company handbook has regulations. If I violate certain ones I get fired. If I don't like the rules then I should get a job some place else where I agree with the company regulations.
February 19, 2013 at 2:40 AM
Bringing a secular company into the argument muddles your point. Secular companies could not have this contract enforceable unless the offense had a direct affect on her job performance. The issue here is how far reaching can the regulations in this college's book extend to a person's private life. Your company cannot tell you not to have wine with dinner in your home, this is in keeping with very American "castle doctrine".
The courts may side with the College. The Supreme court has sided with churches in allowing them great latitude for firing people involved in ministry. This is understandable because they are in a teaching role and are the primary public representation of the faith at the highest level of the organization.
February 19, 2013 at 6:02 AM
When my daughter was a young girl, I choose to send and pay for her to receive a private and RELIGIOUS education. When a family chooses a religious education, students and teachers are ask and required to follow the rules set forth. I agree with the school firing the teacher, the teacher is aware of the rules and she is required to set an example for the students.
February 19, 2013 at 7:30 AM
I agree with you on standards for our children's education, but I see some disconnect to the agreement to fire this person based on this.
-This case it is a college of students, all of which have reached the age of maturity. They are not children.
-The women in this story is not a teacher in the institution.
February 19, 2013 at 6:27 AM
You who call yourselves Christian are amazing! You are judging before you even know any of the facts of this woman and the school! You think she is really just suing for a convenient? Ha ha typical Christian! Be a Christ follower and not a people pleaser. Be slow speak and quick to listen…I guarantee there is more to this story
March 1, 2013 at 3:46 PM
Alright, so I'm probably goin to be the only person who knows these two personally to comment. I attended this school. I graduated from this school. It should be known by her that she would be fired. Why? Because the students who break these rules are often kicked out. The baby daddy is still in they picture. They are married now. I hope and pray that this is settled civally, but she is supposed to be an example to the students. A lot of them knew her. So….
March 3, 2013 at 4:24 PM
To protest Teri James' harsh treatment by the Christian college, I think I'll defaecate on the Bible.