Results 1 to 40 of 3366

Thread: 2012 U.S. Presidential Election

Threaded View

  1. #10
    Master Trainer
    Master Trainer

    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    9,430

    Default Re: 2012 U.S. Presidential Election

    Why did you edit your post? You initially cited "The court, however, used Perich's case to show how to weigh the relevant factors. It agreed that even though the bulk of Perich's time was spent teaching secular classes like math and science, she still qualified as a minister. The court noted that Perich led her students in prayer each day, escorted her students to chapel, taught a religious class four times a week and was what the church designated as a "called teacher," as opposed to a contract teacher. ", to which I replied:

    Yes. Those are examples showing that she is specifically a commissioned minister, even though she shares some of the responsibilities of the lay teachers. The "called teacher" that you specifically cite is the term indicating her special position.

    Perich held herself out as a minister of the Church by
    accepting the formal call to religious service, according to
    its terms. She did so in other ways as well. For example,
    she claimed a special housing allowance on her taxes that
    was available only to employees earning their compensa-
    tion “ ‘in the exercise of the ministry.’ ” App. 220 (“If you
    are not conducting activities ‘in the exercise of the minis-
    try,’ you cannot take advantage of the parsonage or
    housing allowance exclusion” (quoting Lutheran Church-
    Missouri Synod Brochure on Whether the IRS Considers
    Employees as a Minister (2007)). In a form she submitted
    to the Synod following her termination, Perich again
    indicated that she regarded herself as a minister at
    Hosanna-Tabor, stating: “I feel that God is leading me to
    serve in the teaching ministry . . . . I am anxious to be in
    the teaching ministry again soon.” App. 53.
    This is not a standard which would be applicable to all employees of secondary religious institutions.

    Consider from your article:

    Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged both the interest of society in enforcing anti-discrimination laws and the interest of religious groups in "choosing who will preach their beliefs, teach their faith and carry out their mission." The Constitution, he said, strikes the balance in Perich's case by requiring that the church be free to choose those who will guide its way.
    You have to specifically be preaching and teaching faith to warrant this kind of exemption. This won't apply to everyone.
    Last edited by kurai; 10th February 2012 at 12:47 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •