Pro-Abortion Union Is Violating A Woman’s Rights. Here’s What She Did In Response.

( – A Tennessee Catholic woman has filed a lawsuit claiming that a labor union continues to force her to pay dues despite a request she made for a religious exemption.

Dorothy Frame claims the Laborers’ International Union of North America (LiUNA) is a pro-abortion activist organization, and she doesn’t want to pay dues because of it. She filed a federal discrimination lawsuit as a result.

Last year, Frame said she learned of the labor union’s support of pro-abortion politicians and initiatives, and requested a “religious accommodation” as a result. That would have put a halt to union dues that Frame paid to the union as part of her employment with J&J Worldwide Services.

A month after her request was made, the LiUNA denied it. Not only was her application denied, but the union demanded she provide evidence that her union membership not only violated her religious beliefs, but that the union also supports initiatives that are pro-abortion.

According to the lawsuit filing, in response, Frame got a letter from her priest “in support of her religious objection.” However, that evidence was rejected by the union. They also asked her to provide “evidence supporting [her] conclusion that any portion of [her] Union dues supports ‘pro choice’ organizations or candidates.”

“Ms. Frame is a Catholic, and she believes that she should not support a labor union that supports abortion, because abortion involves the unjustified destruction of human life,” the filing reads.

The labor union represents a half-million members, and has an affiliation with the AFL-CIO, which in the past has voiced support for the Planned Parenthood organization. It has also joined forces with Planned Parenthood to go after Republican politicians when they have run for state office.

According to OpenSecrets, the union has also given money as donations to pro-Hillary Clinton Priorities USA PAC as well as the pro-Democratic House Majority PAC, but union officials would not comment on those supposed donations.

The filing further states: “The Union never responded to this further proof, has not accommodated Ms. Frame, and instead continued to have dues deducted from her salary in violation of her religious beliefs.”

Frame’s complaint was filed with the EEOC, and the National Right to Work Foundation is representing her in the case. Patrick Semmens, the foundation’s vice president, criticized the actions and reactions of the union, which he said are forcing Frame to choose between violating her religion and retaining her job.

He said, in part, “Countless workers have been able to obtain religious accommodations like the one that Ms. Frame is requesting. Yet rather than simply respect her rights, Laborers Union bosses are making it necessary for her to turn to the EEOC to end this illegal religious discrimination, demonstrating once again that union officials are far too willing to violate the rights of the very workers they claim to represent just to fill their coffers with forced union dues.”

And as Mark Mix, the president of the National Right to Work Foundation, said, “while such religious discrimination is a blatant violation of federal law, union boss demands, in this case, serve as a reminder why no worker in America should be forced to subsidize union activities they oppose, whether their opposition is religious-based or for other reasons.”