225 Comments
User's avatar
Joe King's avatar

π‘…π‘’π‘™π‘–π‘”π‘–π‘œπ‘’π‘  π‘œπ‘Ÿπ‘”π‘Žπ‘›π‘–π‘§π‘Žπ‘‘π‘–π‘œπ‘›π‘  β„Žπ‘Žπ‘£π‘’ π‘›π‘œπ‘€ 𝑏𝑒𝑒𝑛 β„Žπ‘Žπ‘›π‘‘π‘’π‘‘ π‘Ž π‘π‘œπ‘€π‘’π‘Ÿπ‘“π‘’π‘™ π‘™π‘œπ‘œπ‘β„Žπ‘œπ‘™π‘’ π‘‘β„Žπ‘Žπ‘‘ π‘‘β„Žπ‘’π‘¦ π‘π‘Žπ‘› 𝑒𝑠𝑒 π‘‘π‘œ π‘π‘–π‘Ÿπ‘π‘’π‘šπ‘£π‘’π‘›π‘‘ π‘™π‘Žπ‘€π‘  π‘‘β„Žπ‘’π‘¦ π‘‘π‘œπ‘›β€™π‘‘ π‘™π‘–π‘˜π‘’.

And we all know they will use it. This is just one more step toward unfettered theocracy. One more brick removed from the wall of separation. One more example of how the far right pushes the narrative that the Free Exercise Clause is absolute for them, and any other civil rights protections are second tier, at best.

Yes, there will be janitors fired for not being the right sort of Christian. Before that happens, I hope this gets appealed to the full Ninth Circuit. Perhaps there will be enough judges who still respect true religious freedom to reverse this ruling.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

We're no longer talking about religious freedom here. We're talking about religious license, an unencumbered license to do as they please without consequence.

And keep in mind: the average American knows nothing about this.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

β€œAverage American.” I don’t even know what that is anymore, Troublesh00ter.

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

Right, I’m tired of listening to the β€œaverage American” opinion as well. They need to stop talking in fact.

Expand full comment
Larry Desmond's avatar

The "average american" would be Trump supporters.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

β€œFull 9th Circuit?” How many are there in that court? This is just nuts.

Floor sweepers are ministers. Cafeteria workers are abbott’s and the guy mucking out the john is a freaking bishop.

Get used to life in the Upside Down.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

There are currently 29 judges on the 9th circuit. Going to the full 9th circuit would mean asking the entire court to reconsider, and not just a three judge panel.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

I see. Thanks, Joe.

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

Come on - you know that THAT janitor doesn't clean that toilet the way Our Jeebus would. He is not a real christian... and of course we cannot have Lesbians on church property or the payroll! I don't recall the Jesus in the Gospels ever commenting on other christian sects (although he had it in for Samaritans - an ultra-strict Jewish sect. And he never uttered a word about LBGTQ people.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

If Jesus really lived there were no other christian sects at the time...

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

A. I subscribe to the Mythicist school's take on the reality of Jesus. B. I suspect that the Mythicists are right about the contention that Christianity is actually a hybrid Greek and Jewish Mystery Religion which likely started in a messianic Jewish congregation like the Ebionites or the Essenes who arose 100 years before 'the time of Jesus' That would account for all the preachers besides Paul, in the 40s acting as what he described as Christ Mongers.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

"The world may never know." - Mr. Owl

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

"Perhaps there will be enough judges who still respect true religious freedom to reverse this ruling."

I hope so. If it's not reversed, other stupid discriminatory rulings will follow. We'll end up in a world where the kkkrister cloud minders swan about in their Stratos City, looking down on the rest of us toiling in the fields and mines below.

Expand full comment
oraxx's avatar

There is no horror that cannot be, and has not been, justified in the name of a dearly held religious belief. I think her biggest mistake was going to work for a Christian organization with the expectation they would somehow be more ethical than non-Christian entities. The courts have opened up a can of worms and there is no easy way to put the lid back on

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

β€œI think her biggest mistake was going to work for a Christian organization with the expectation they would somehow be more ethical than non-Christian entities.”

Huge mistake. HUGE.

Expand full comment
Straw's avatar

And you are spot on.

Expand full comment
John Smith's avatar

Religions was humanity biggest mistake ever! Religions have caused so much misery and pain, yet humans continue to think an imaginary person will come and save us or solve all our problems for us.

Until humanity outgrows the need for imaginary friends, this planet will never unite to solve any of the PLANETARY issues that need solving. If humanity finally stop having imaginary friends; human have a vast potential of creativity, imagination and will to solve the problem affecting the world. One can only be optimistic about our future!

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

I’d like to be optimistic about our future. Instead, I dread the sickening world we are turning over to our children. Whether there is religion or not, ain’t nobody ethereal or otherwise coming to save our dying planet…though I imagine there will be a huge uptick in β€œtots and pears” when things start getting really nasty.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

I realized years ago that I was living in the decline of a civilization as I watched people vote to stop pushing the boundaries of knowledge while pushing for people to have to go back to hiding from the zealots. Now I know I was wrong. This isn't the decline of a civilization, it's the collapse.

Expand full comment
XJC's avatar

"The stupid shall inherit the earth." --Jeebus

Expand full comment
oraxx's avatar

I'm no optimist when it comes to the long term prospects of the human race. I think our species is just too deeply flawed for long term survival.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

I think we'd stand a better than even chance without the mind-poison that is religion. Yes, we're flawed as a species, but religion makes it all exponentially worse, by destroying science, creativity and free thought. We might have been so much further along recognizing the peril to our planet and coming up with scientific solutions to mitigate it had it not been for knuckle-dragging religionists lying to their congregations, telling them to vote for horrible people, and throwing up roadblocks to progress at every turn.

At the very least, we'd have a stellar public education system. We had the resources for it, but Christian right-wingers began undermining it decades ago because science threatened their narrow world view. John Lennon was onto something.

Nothing to kill or die for

And no religion, too

Imagine all the people

Livin' life in peace

Expand full comment
oraxx's avatar

Religion, and it isn't limited to Christianity, certainly exacerbates our worst human tendencies. Nothing divides people more effectively and unnecessarily than religion.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

I forget who said this, but there is no horrible situation anywhere that cannot be made worse by religion.

Expand full comment
Linda LaScola's avatar

If it weren't religion, it would be something else. I truly think my old psychologist boss was right - People are no damn good.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

I wish I could restack your reply it was so accurate.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Anything you want to restack is fine with me. What is restacking and how does it work? I'm a bit of a Luddite with a laptop. I can do basic functions like write comments and replies, but beyond that I'm kind of lost.

Expand full comment
Elise's avatar

"In a unanimous decision, the three judges (all Democratic appointees) said that World Vision’s customer service representatives qualify as β€œministers...”

All Democratic appointees. Sheesh. With friends like these, who needs enemies.

Expand full comment
Chris Titchmarsh's avatar

Same here in the UK. The Labour Party are Conservative with a small c. Centrist at best, certainly not left wing any more.

I voted Labour as it is the best we have got. That or extreme right wing.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

Gotta admit I can make no sense of various governments around the world turning to the right. How can we understand people voting against their own best interests if not for the constant drumbeat of disinformation?

Expand full comment
Linda Bower's avatar

True. Authoritarianism is rising globally. I believe ultimately it’s a reaction to climate change. The greed is at a fever pitch and they are clinging on and clamping down even if it destroys us all.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

These religious zealots cosplaying as judges are obviously non-representative of the majority of Americans. It’s the way of our judges and politicians…elected to represent…doomed to repeat the ignorant failures of their predecessors.

Elected officials - all admit - they spend 75% of their working hours chasing donations. They will say that, willingly, decrying the fact that they HAVE TO do it.

That leaves a whopping 25% of available time for insider trading, meeting with lobbyists who will write legislation for them, 2 martini lunches, obfuscation and bowing to Shitler.

There simply isn’t enough time in the day for governmenting!

Expand full comment
Shulgi Adad's avatar

So true. That hurt just a little.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

I hope people remember these Dems (Christians, all I’ll wager) come the midterms. Kick them all out and let them find out what it means to be poor.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

I am still not convinced that midterms will happen. At the rate things are going now, it may all be over but the crying by then.

Expand full comment
Eric's avatar

It will be interesting to see what happens should an actual World Vision "minister" get in trouble for "immoral behavior." I'm curious how'd they'd be treated. "Oh, so-and-so is just a receptionist (or janitor or what have you) and doesn't reflect the values of World Vision."

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

If they didn't have a double standard, they would have no standard at all.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

This appears to me to be one more step on the road towards allowing all religious organizations to be unaccountable to secular law enforcement.

And one more step towards Christian theocracy.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

Yes.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

The image in the article shows a slogan: "World Vision. Hope, Joy, and Justice for ALL Children". They're missing the asterisk for the word "all". All children unless that child is LGBTQIA+.

Expand full comment
wreck's avatar

I saw that too. And also the right wing creepy focus on children. Just like tRump, whose name is all over the Epstein files.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

What better way to lure in children than through their hungry bellies?

Expand full comment
vibing.'s avatar

So refreshing to see bigotry called bigotry tbh. So much of the legal world, mainstream media, etc tries to be "fair and balanced" and call bigotry "sincere religious beliefs" or whatever. Sure, it's a sincere religious belief, but it's also noxious bigotry. Acting like the association with religion makes it acceptable or worth accommodating is capitulating to bigots.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

It's bigotry all right. Problem is, the court decision essentially gave them carte blanche to be bigoted.

Expand full comment
Val Uptuous NotAgain's avatar

This is the top of a slippery slope, but unfortunately it’s at the bottom of a larger mountain that has already been traversed. We are living in a Christian nationalist country, we just haven’t acknowledged it yet. It’s been slowly building for fifty years or more. Campaigns like Project Blitz and the Reagan initiatives to bring religion into the executive branch, the National Prayer Breakfast and now Project 2025 have been successful in bringing our country to heel. Undermining the constitution is complete. And with the most recent unconstitutional overreach of the president, there’s very little we can do now without resorting to violence. Our government has given up, congress have abdicated their responsibilities, states are bending the knee and we the people are all that’s left to fight the tiny dicktator.

Expand full comment
cdbunch's avatar

I was thinking this morning maybe there should be a march in Austin with torches and pitchforks maybe a rolling guillotine. Don't say anything just stand peacefully outside the governor's mansion for an hour.

Expand full comment
John Smith's avatar

You would be declared terrorist and a threat to the public. Anyone standing up to this regime will declare traitors/terrorist, but supporters of this regime could become violent and destructive and those supporters would be declared patriots (remember Jan 6, 2020).

Expand full comment
cdbunch's avatar

And? That’s different from the Revolutionary War or any stand against fascists, how? That’s why I think we will end up under the boot, because until that happens enough people aren’t going to disrupt their lives to make a difference.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

What if it was just large posters depicting torches, pitchforks, and guillotines? And everybody just stood there quietly smiling and waving? Peaceful civil disobedience?

Expand full comment
John Smith's avatar

In the mind of this regime, even peaceful protesters that stand up to this regime will be declared violent terrorist. Remember the photo op of Trump and the upside down bible. Those were peaceful protesters and they got tear gas for their trouble. Then the right wing media call those protesters violent thugs.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

And show pictures of riots in Syria, and claim it is from, the Black Lives Matter protests.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

I'm wondering how relevant a person's orientation is to asking for donations. It seems to me that in telling a potential donor about the organization's needs that the representative's personal life wouldn't even come up. So World Vision's entire reason for firing McMahon is entirely due to their bigotry, completely unrelated to their stated mission.

They would likely have no problem taking money from a gay donor, why should it matter whether or not the one asking for the donation is gay?

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Don't give them ideas. That's too entirely likely to be next.

Expand full comment
Bensnewlogin's avatar

We have laws at every level of government which forbid discrimination on the basis of religious belief, whether your beliefs or mine, in Matters of housing, employment, and public accommodations. The idea is to keep the government out of religious matters, and to keep religious beliefs from being enforced on people who don’t share them.

Finding exceptions to those laws simply underline why we have them to begin with.

This is one of many things that needs to be changed if we want to have a functioning country not torn apart by religion . It worked very well for us for a long time. Now, however, we require a strict and explicit separation Of church and state. You have the right to worship how and what you wish, but your right to do so stops at your nose, your home, and your church.

Expand full comment
Chris Titchmarsh's avatar

The stupid thing about it is that she is a Christian. But her beliefs differed from another Christian. There are at least 45,000 sects of Christianity. That is a wide variety of beliefs.

A lot of them believe every word of the Bible is truth and still have different beliefs.

Her marriage status has absolutely nothing to do with the work she was doing AND the work the organisation as a whole does. If it was relevant, they would have asked on the application or in the interview.

I think if the Democrats get in they are going to have to make some unpopular decisions to start to sort the rot out. Here in the UK, Labour are doing this after 14:years of Tory ruleand getting slammed in the press.

The Democrats might find that a lot of people who make little fuss might be pleased with the changes. The first and most obvious change, before any church state separation, is gun control. The murder rate is a disgrace for all governments who are too scared to do anything about it. I think they will find the silent majority would welcome it.

Expand full comment
Bensnewlogin's avatar

I’m 100% in agreement.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Unfortunately, the silent majority doesn't have a powerful multi-million-dollar organisation like the NRA backing them.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

🎯

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar

I'm not sure the Dems could do much with Alito leading the conservative charge. They can roll back the RFRA (and yes, that would be highly unpopular), but Alito has never referred to it - he justifies the expanded "protections" (i.e. carve outs for the christian majority) as part of the 1st amendment.

Expand full comment
cdbunch's avatar

"Hope, Joy, and Justice for ALL Children". Terms and Conditions apply. All children unless their parents happen to be LGBT2SIA+ (we really need a word for this) or quite likely if they are themselves.

Expand full comment
Chris Titchmarsh's avatar

How about calling them people? Surely that is where we should be headed. Where they have the right to love who they want and do with their bodies what is best for them.

This is the paradox of the GOP these days. They say they want small government but make what people do in private and at health clinics the business of government. That is HUGE government. Their job essentially is to set taxation policies and to decide how to spend those tax dollars, not interfere with people's private and personal choices.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

Wait until until they start with the genital inspections for the female Olympians.

Expand full comment
cdbunch's avatar

I do call us people. But the initialism to specify this particular subset of people who face extra challenges is getting ridiculous in the effort to include everyone othered for their sexuality or gender identity. I don't want to exclude anyone, but I also get tired of typing an initialism that is hard to remember and still needs a plus because there always seems to be someone it doesn't cover. I think we need a word without the prejudicial connotations of queer to cover all of us.

No other oppressed subset lacks a *word* to describe them.

Expand full comment
Zorginipsoundsor's avatar

Just cap it at LGBT+.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

I do, I 'r' one and I have no clue what the latest additional letters mean.πŸ˜‰

Expand full comment
Holytape's avatar

As a the manager, owner and high priest of God's Aluminum and Copper Mining Conglomerate, mine safety regulations are against the fundamental tenets of my religion. If the Almighty God, wanted proper ventilation in the mine shafts so that the workers do succumb to poisonous fumes, God would have not made those poison fumes in the first place. But he did. So attempting to mitigate the harm goes directly against the will of God and risks sending the miners straight to hell. Which for them is especially worrying since they are so much physically closer to hell and probably going to dead because of poor mine safety.

Expand full comment
Holytape's avatar

And if people think that a miner isn't covered a ministerial position, that is why I don't hirer miners. We only employee missionaries to the mole people here.

Expand full comment
Boreal's avatar

Bless you, good sir. You are a godly man.

https://ibb.co/81tt3R5

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Tried twice. No-go.

Expand full comment
Boreal's avatar

Maggie Smith in Murder by Death saying very tacky gif.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Ah. Thanks.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

I especially like his shoes.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

"Something went wrong. Try reloading."

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

Jesus in a latex catsuit and stilettos with a whip in his hands.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Kink-eee.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

πŸ˜‚πŸ€£πŸ˜‚

Oh, what a lovely sight! We need this on tee shirts and bumper stickers. What a way to piss off the kkkristers!

Expand full comment
Boreal's avatar

I have two thoughts on this:

First, more unwarranted Christian privilege on parade. People with imaginary friends and tax exemptions get special treatment. They, like libertarians, are societal parasites: using the benefits of society while contributing nothing.

Second, We see this play out time after time. As an LGBT person, I ask, what the fuck? Why do you want to work for religious cults that consider you to be an abomination?

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar

She needed telework and this offered it.

Job-hunting is not a employee's market right now.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

Has it ever been?

Expand full comment
Boreal's avatar

Looks like she will be hunting for telework again.

Expand full comment
James Clark's avatar

Legalized bigotry.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Precisely. A LOT of churches out there have wanted permission to be bigoted and discriminatory and flat-out MEAN to whomever they felt was unworthy of their support. The court just gave that to them on a silver platter.

Now watch them run with it.

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar

It's sad but there's been a general erosion of civil rights protections for private corporation employees for years. A court ruling "this position is not a minister" isn't going to stop that.

What we need - and won't get - is a reset of the entire exception-requesting system where SCOTUS puts a high burden of proof on the company to demonstrate why they need the exception to operate.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

But...corporations are people, more deserving of rights than meat people.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Citizens United was a travesty of a decision. I could ask what SCOTUS was thinking but, of course, they weren't.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

As the saying went β€œI’ll believe a corporation is a person when Texas executes one.”

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

Brib... I mean gifts whose value exceed 100 $ should be forbidden to any official, and they should be capped at 5 yearly. That's enough to cover gifts* from family and friends, they czn pool to offer a common gift. No more RVs, luxury vacations and private jets travels.

* Include jewelry, flowers, restaurants...

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

I hope you have seen the Last Week Tonight segment where John Oliver tried to bribe Clarence Thomas with this MASSIVE RV!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE-VJrdHMug&t=1605s

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

I don't watch it. Not my thing.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

A shame. It's one of John's more over-the-top routines, yet I suspect he wasn't bluffing!

Expand full comment
Zorginipsoundsor's avatar

Shame, it was only four minutes long.

Expand full comment
Lynn Veit's avatar

If Clarence takes the bait and resigns, someone even worse will be put in his place. That's the only downside.

Expand full comment
Zorginipsoundsor's avatar

The clip is from Feb 22, 2024.

Expand full comment
Chris Titchmarsh's avatar

So the private plane at $500 a year from Qatar would have taken Trump 800,000 years to have been gifted it.

Expand full comment
phelpsmediation's avatar

Unfortunately they were thinking. How to help the ruling class get more power. The members of the court are all above average intelligence or they would not become attorneys. The conservative majority is making most of their rulings based on right wing politics, ignoring statutes and precedent. They have consistently supported voter suppression laws. They are not small d democrats.

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

They were thinking of the money they could make

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

They wanted to air their right-wing propaganda against Hillary Clinton, but it was too close to the election, and the law was against it. So the Citizens United group sued and the trained seals in the S. court "orped" and gave it to them.

Expand full comment
phelpsmediation's avatar

Here they go again. The courts are reviewing a contest between a real human and an organization’s mythical beliefs, with no evidence that it is real, and the court goes with the irrational mythical beliefs over the real needs of a human. Supernatural wins over natural and we have no evidence that supernatural actually exists!!! This is why Hitchens said β€œreligion poisons everything”. The grossly backwards epistemology of religion will more often than not lead to harm instead of well being. My God is right and your God is wrong. This type of dogmatic thinking will never lead to world peace and justice for all. We must move to evidence based decision making, utilizing the scientific method, logic and rational thinking. Wishful thinking and basing decisions on faith ( you can believe anything on faith, if you have evidence and good reasons, you don’t rely on faith) will never lead to a better world for all, which we all deserve.

Expand full comment
Chris Titchmarsh's avatar

An organisation is not a person, it cannot even believe the sky is blue in the day, black at night. Never mind stuff that cannot be proved.

If her lifestyle offended, it offended people who decided to be offended. They should ask in the application or at the interview if it is relevant. Which it isn't.

Expand full comment
phelpsmediation's avatar

Chris, I do not think you understand how dogmatic ideology works. The individuals that run that church, as with most that work there, do not get offended individually, they get offended when anyone goes against their dogma, which is seen as disrespect for their GOD. They are cult members. Do you have any idea how theocracy works? Spend some time on Afghanistan, Iran, The Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, Pakistan and The Holy Roman Empire. There is one train of thought for each issue and they all follow, failure to do so can be seriously penalized. Losing your job is a minor penalty and has to do with our legal system stopping more severe penalties. Currently in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and some other countries, violating their dogma can get prison or even death.

Expand full comment
Chris Titchmarsh's avatar

I am not sure that I like the way you have worded that reply. They do get get offended individually when they feel God is being insulted or disobeyed.

Cult members are still human. And we have to treat them with the same respect as we do to each other on here. ESPECIALLY if we feel they do not deserve it. Otherwise we are no better than their cult leaders. I have been in a cult church and am talking from my experiences.

I am on the Autism spectrum and struggle with true empathy, but I feel your reply was disrespectful and borderline rude.

Expand full comment