County Sued: Teacher Says Background Check Fingerprinting is Against Her Religion
The state of Texas has been sued by a teacher in Dallardsville because of the mandatory background check on teachers which includes taking fingerprints. Pam McLaurin, a Christian, believes that fingerprinting is akin to the mark of the beast.
The Bible's book of Revelation is taken literally by her, which states that one is "tormented in burning sulfur" upon receiving the mark. McLaurin said any other background check is not in violation of her religious freedom. Her attorney explained:
"She just doesn't want to be fingerprinted. That's all she doesn't want to have to do. She doesn't mind her background being checked out. She just doesn't want to submit to that. But TEA is not allowing an exception and so she is in this predicament."
That is total bullshit and a cop-out because she has something to hide, be it a crime or hell maybe another identity. If she wants to be a teacher she has to get fingerprints, if the courts let her get away with it no one will want it claiming religion as the excuse. I could see an increase in those refusing fingerprints and an open door for child molesters both make and female having open season on schools and the children.
I actually looked it up because it had been so long ago that I was taught about it. I remembered it as the forehead which is one of the marks claimed, nothing at all about fingerprints AT ALL. Here is a few things I found:
Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: Revelation 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Revelation 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (666) http://www.bibleprophesy.org/...
She could be very well arrested and then her fingerprints would be taken with her claim of it being against her religion ignored.
#1 - they dont use ink anymore its digital, so no black marks there. #2 fingerprints have no reference in the bible(s) and there are millions of people out there that practice it and it doesnt bother them. #3 definatly hiding something. #4 more news coverage about this means more people now are looking at you when they find out what you´re hiding from. #5 what happened to when people dont like something they go somewhere else? i swear everyone thinks they have the RIGHT to do whatever they want .. these checks are there to protect others, so stop being such a baby. people sue these days for the smallest things because they have the "right" to, theres a difference between a "right" and "greed" where greed always looses. money earnt is money spent.
I agree that is a stupid excuse. I fought our company because I just didn´t want them to have my fingerprint. They ended up giving me a card (which they eventually went to). But honestly, I just don´t want some place that I am not working for for the rest of my life most likely to have any more than they need to perform their duties.
Why is she the only Christian to think that having your fingerprints taken is somehow unbiblical? I think she´s using this as a cover to not have prints taken.
Tara: point well taken. There is somewhat of a difference between ink on the fingerprints and a permanent mark on the forehead or right hand.
living in that Nazi-like society. Fingerprints to become a teacher? What has become of America, this is frightening. I can fully understand her. Your "if i have nothing to hide" attitude is just what big brother wants. I think you would even defend them creating checkpoints every 10 kilometers where you have to show your papers. Why not do it if you have nothing to hide, right?!
I wonder if she suddenly starts "burning in sulfur" if she gets ink on her fingers from a broken ball point pen? And does this mean her students can´t finger paint?
I was fingerprinted for a job and they didn´t use ink, I just put my fingertips on a computer scanner.
Besides, I saw this documentary called "The Omen" where the mark of the beast was a "666" birthmark on your head.
Cranky- Thank you, that is why I don´t understand the against my religion claim. I have heard of changing the meaning of the bible to fit your beliefs, but that one tops them all.
evilrat-"Fingerprints to become a teacher? What has become of America, this is frightening. I can fully understand her."
You can? This isn´t a new that was just put in place. Fingerprints and background checks for anyone working at a school has been in place for quite awhile. She knew this way before recently and would have had to supply them at her other teaching jobs. That isn´t done for Big Brother to ´watch´ you, it is done to keep child molesters and those with felonies from working in the school system. I shouldn´t even have to explain this but schools are a wonderland of delight for child molesters and it is better to not give temptation and the schools don´t want to face all those lawsuits that come after a teacher or staff molests a child.
If she´s willing to have a bckgrnd check, she may be concerned with not the past, but the future - of having her prints be placed in a government database. But it´s a govt job, what does she expect? Referring to a previous comment about taking the print from something she touched, if something like that was taken for a database without her knowledge or consent she would have a reason to sue. But this is just silly, we´re not talking RFID here.
Anything to deal with being a guardian over children at any job or over other people such as a nurse. Your fingerprints should be on record. Background check isn´t conclusive enough. And I don´t find this an invasion of privacy at all. Our country would be more secure if anyone entering/attaining citizenship, applying for a license, etc were fingerprinted.
Regardless, the price of safety can be very high. And people have to realize to achieve safety some freedoms would have to be compromised. I don´t know about you but I do value safety a lot more these days. And I don´t think it´s due to the 9/11 thing.
Look at all the shootings, murders, rapes, child molestation going on these days. Just never know anymore.
You have hit the nail on the head of the biggest going on in the US - privacy vs security. There are strong advocates on both sides and both have difficulties seeing the other´s point of view.
I´m conflicted on this - I have a hard time with required reporting - in sum, anyone working with children is required by law to report SUSPECTED abuse. So if someone´s on a crusade to eliminate spanking, they feel they have to report it as abuse. That causes me trouble.
If I were to live in Illinois, I´d probably be a criminal because I´d refuse to have a Firearms Owner ID Card. The state has no business knowing that. I do support instant background checks where the search record is immediately destroyed - under US law, convicted felons cannot own firearms.
It´s not an easy issue. I support background checks for teachers and childcare workers to keep convicted molesters and gang recruiters away. But too much can be intrusive and keep otherwise good caregivers away.
So under this view, I´d not agree to checkpoints every 10 km. But I would support pulling over drivers under reasonable suspicion.
those who choose saftey over freedom deserve neither. the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, I dont want to give up my freedom so you can sleep, wake up and watch your own damn kids teach them how to look after and protect themselves from the dangers in life, including molestors.
so much for america being the land of the brave and free, your lack of one makes you give up the other.
I have ´nothing to hide´ - I simply don´t agree with being fingerprinted as I know about the possible implications it could mean further down the road. Do a background check if you wish, just keep the inkpad away from my hands.
If she was told that she was going to have to be fingerprinted prior to accepting the job, however, tough shit. Woman up, get the fingerprint over with and go on with your life.
Cranky- It just isn´t someone who works with children that are mandated reporters and it isn´t just the US that has this. I do want to say that mandated reporters are not running around looking for people to report and it takes more than a simple spanking to start an investigation and if someone is using the system like that, THEY need to be reported for abuse of it and mandated reporters can face charges and lawsuits for false reporting. I am actually impressed with wiki on this explanation and I rarely use wiki for anything serious like this. http://en.wikipedia.org/...
"It´s not an easy issue. I support background checks for teachers and childcare workers to keep convicted molesters and gang recruiters away. But too much can be intrusive and keep otherwise good caregivers away."
You are right about it not being an easy issue, when is too much? Background checks and fingerprints do not bother me in the least, I have had several done throughout my life and all were valid requests.
"So under this view, I´d not agree to checkpoints every 10 km. But I would support pulling over drivers under reasonable suspicion"
I really like how you put this because I think that most of us are that way. I also think that people who enter or attend college for certain degrees are aware of certain requirements for gaining employment. Some jobs that do not require college, but do require fingerprints and background checks are working in group care facilities, working for elder care in any position. The last time I had a check done here we have to go to our sherrif´s office and get the prints done, then when the report comes out the shredded the fingerprint card and handed you a copy of the check and mailed a copy to the employer. Big deal, it´s over and you go on your way.
Veya-"the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, I dont want to give up my freedom so you can sleep, wake up and watch your own damn kids teach them how to look after and protect themselves from the dangers in life, including molestors."
You think that most of us aren´t already doing that? Or that we shouldn´t be able to take children to a school without there being sex predators working there? We do watch our ´damn kids´ as you put it, and we are supposed to be able to put our children in school and while they are there THEY need to make sure our kids are safe. They are rising to that occasion after years of not protecting them without having a background check. Plus a few lawsuits which the tax payers get to pay for and THEN they bitch and moan about why nobody was aware that they had a previous charge against them or that he was in prison or she. Why didn´t anyone know the teacher was like this or the coach was raping his players, the teacher is screwing middle and high school kids.
Your freedom is your own and if you want to be around children day after day as your job then you get your prints taken, the background check pops out and the fingerprints are detroyed. They aren´t keeping your prints so they can track when you take a leak. If you want to make it where fingerprints and background checks aren´t needed then change the law. The courts are the ones that let the molesters out time after time until they finally kill one of them and then everyone is hands in the air about how did it happen?
"so much for america being the land of the brave and free, your lack of one makes you give up the other."
I call bullshit. I have been through this shit before and I tell you what I found out. Raising my kids and teaching them about molesters and kidnappers and what to do to protect yourself, we did that and we still do. I can´t say the same for the school which our kids have to go to or we can get jailed and lose them. Not everyone can homeschool either and if you do they make all these things that you need to do. They don´t give the homeschooled kids the thousands per student the schools get, especially on count day. The schools that the states are in charge of hire in these assholes that are child molesters so if you want to bitch at someone for this shit happening don´t blame the parents that are doing all they can, blame the schools for NOT doing their jobs.
Vash- Hey Vash, good to see you commenting´ haven´t seen you around much. "If she was told that she was going to have to be fingerprinted prior to accepting the job, however, tough shit. Woman up, get the fingerprint over with and go on with your life."
She has been teaching for 20 years and the state of Texas is requiring this from all educators by 2011. She is actually the only case like this that has happened in the US according to her attorney.
I want to add this here because it is the same things I posted about Revelation earlier and it doesn´t apply to fingerprints, she is going to say the mark upon the right hand is what meant about fingerprints.
"Skelton said a preliminary injunction hearing is set in Beaumont on Nov. 12 to determine if the Texas Education Agency can terminate McLaurin´s license.
Revelation 13:16-17 in the King James Version states, "He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name."
Revelation 14:9-11 states, "A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of God´s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name."
in any faith that prohibits fingerprints. her lawyer is an idiot for taking this to court. just as dumb as the one where a woman wanted her drivers license picture to be taken with her hood on. no prints, no job.
There´s a ~huge~ difference between saying "I belong to a religion that prohibits fingerprinting" and "I have a religious paranoia that prohibits fingerprinting".
This shouldn´t have even made news, let alone a courtroom.
