Wife Threatened with Infidelity Exposure

[Ohiogal]

I probably should have been more clear. I didn't expect such a strong reaction to the infidelity issue (both online and offline).

The husband and wife participated in an alternative lifestyle. Both had experiences with other parties while married. He was the initiator after years to convince her to try, but that is irrelevant. She had one episode with a man and two online affairs without his approval. Yes, she is to blame for her indiscretions. She has taken responsibility and tried to make it up to him.

I was just asking if there were legal ways to stop him from forcing her to lose her job and maybe scar the kids. He has done numerous things this past year that quality as abuse, again, not the primary issue. But if she leaves, he will go public. If she doesn't do what he says, he will go public. She is so scared about the public stigma that she won't take any action to protect herself.

So... if there is nothing legally she can do to stop the public disclousure then she will have to live with the consequences of her past actions and any future actions. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

There is nothing legally she can do to stop him from telling everyone that she cheated.

If he is abusive, she needs to leave. That is plain and simple. There are consequences to her actions -- which include apparently losing her job.


And no one said ABUSE is okay.

 

[Ohiogal]

So it's ok for someone to abuse their spouse if it's because the spouse cheated? Hm does that apply to physical abuse too, or only mental/verbal abuse?

No one said that. Questions were asked. End of story.

 

[tuffbrk]

Frankly, it will be a he said/she said situation. It is all word of mouth nonsense. If she has confessed and/or made amends or whatever she needs to do religiously, I would think it would be sufficient to retain her job. Unless there is a morals clause in a signed contract.

She ought to end the marriage. The relationship is over and although hubby is entitled to be angry about her straying outside their agreement, his behavior is completely unacceptable.

 

[stealth2]

The husband and wife participated in an alternative lifestyle. Both had experiences with other parties while married. He was the initiator after years to convince her to try, but that is irrelevant.

She could, of course, fight fire with fire and tell him that, should he decide to go public? Their entire history will come to light in court during their divorce case. Including HIS indiscretions. (Assuming, of course, that she would be able to substantiate her accusations.) And suggest that they simply divorce based on irreconcilable differences and spare the children the ugliness the situation would cause.

Her job? Yeah - she may want to start looking for something else. Just for a fall-back.

 

[mary84107]

Thanks for confirming what we thought...

I appreciate the comments. And, yes, sometimes life catches up with a person and their are some serious consequences.

She is resistant to threaten him, partially for fear of his response, but more importantly it is not her nature. Plus the kids would suffer more. Again, thanks for responding.

 

[mistoffolees]

Frankly, it will be a he said/she said situation. It is all word of mouth nonsense. If she has confessed and/or made amends or whatever she needs to do religiously, I would think it would be sufficient to retain her job. Unless there is a morals clause in a signed contract.

She ought to end the marriage. The relationship is over and although hubby is entitled to be angry about her straying outside their agreement, his behavior is completely unacceptable.

Re: the bolded. Not necessarily. It's a church-run school. Some of them will fire a person over the least whiff of misbehavior. Others are more forgiving.

 

[Silverplum]

Re: the bolded. Not necessarily. It's a church-run school. Some of them will fire a person over the least whiff of misbehavior. Others are more forgiving.

These people simply don't belong in teaching at a parochial school, and here's why:

1 Timothy:3-5
If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?

Feel free to seek forgiveness, but don't mess with the kids' heads till afterward.

 

[Bali Hai]

These people simply don't belong in teaching at a parochial school, and here's why:

1 Timothy:3-5
If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?

Feel free to seek forgiveness, but don't mess with the kids' heads till afterward.

What law prohibits teaching at a church?

 

[Antigone*]

What law prohibits teaching at a church?

She didn't say anything about a law prohibiting teaching at a church. It was moral commentary and right on!!!

 

[mistoffolees]

These people simply don't belong in teaching at a parochial school, and here's why:

1 Timothy:3-5
If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?

Feel free to seek forgiveness, but don't mess with the kids' heads till afterward.

OTOH, there's "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"

Or, there's Paul (probably the premier example of Christian teachers) claiming to be the worst of all people because of his persecution of Christ.

Or maybe the one where Jesus forgave his persecutors.

I suspect that a pretty significant percentage of people teaching in religious schools have had affairs. That said, it's entirely up to the school administration. They can fire the person for having an affair. They can forgive them and keep them there. No legal issues involved.

 

[Silverplum]

Think whatever you'd like. But you'd likely need to keep your trap shut.

Of course, none of you have ever taught at a parochial school, and none of you have ever seen or signed a contract with one.

I'd imagine that the lot of you would've appreciated adherance to that Biblical command when the Catholic priests were humpin' boys right 'n left.

Ever-so-smart, aren't you?

 

[HomeGuru]

I'm staying out of this one.

 

[mistoffolees]

Think whatever you'd like. But you'd likely need to keep your trap shut.

Of course, none of you have ever taught at a parochial school, and none of you have ever seen or signed a contract with one.

I'd imagine that the lot of you would've appreciated adherance to that Biblical command when the Catholic priests were humpin' boys right 'n left.

Ever-so-smart, aren't you?

Actually, I HAVE signed a contract for a parochial school - as a parent of a student. And I wouldn't have any more expectation of being able to interfere in my daughter's teacher's lives than I have of interfering in your life.

The teachers are being paid to teach - not for their bedroom activities - or lack thereof. Please explain why we should choose to take your choice of gospel text as a command while ignoring the rest.

And comparing what a teacher does with a consenting adult in her own time with priests molesting young children is absurd. There is absolutely no comparison and it says a great deal about you that you'd try to make the two equivalent.

 

[Aspiration]

.....Well, speaking as a person offered a teaching job at a Christian school, there usually is something written in that addresses these things. The school is usually looking for people who claim to have their same beliefs which would mean they should be living them since a converted person would not live one way in public and another in private. They're setting the example of faith-based living. The Bible condemns any sex with anyone outside of the one-flesh marital union regardless of what liberties they want to take.

The reason the "cast not the first stone" or "judge not" wouldn't fit is because that applies to hypocritical judgment (Matt 7:5). If they're not doing the same sin, then they can speak out about it being sinful. Lev 20:10 required both the man & woman in adultery to be stoned, so just bringing the woman "caught in the act" showed they were not right demanding her death. Additionally, she would have died in her sins unable to receive salvation (condemned to a second death).

The church might be willing to forgive that behavior, but they can't forgive her if she doesn't repent. If it comes out later so the parents demand the school do something, then she'd probably be worse off than if she came forward. Plus, if she speaks up first, she takes the ability of her husband to use it against her. She'll wear herself out trying to figure out if or when he'll speak out, and he may be trying to hurt her since he probably has no intention of seeing his children have to transfer in the middle of the school year. They need to sit down, clear the air, get counseling or figure out where they'll go from here.

 

[Ohiogal]

And the church does NOT have to forgive her. They can fire her because of it. They can fire her for any reason the church sees fit.
United State's Supreme Court case -- unanimous decision issued THIS MONTH:
Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission