Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

SouthBayDem

(32,893 posts)
Wed Aug 6, 2025, 12:50 AM Aug 6

9th Circuit sides with religious group that rescinded job offer over worker's same-sex spouse

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

An international religious ministry that offered a woman a job as a customer service representative was entitled to withdraw that offer after learning she was married to another woman, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday, citing the Supreme Court’s broad “ministerial exception” from civil rights laws.

Although the low-paying position Aubry McMahon sought with World Vision in Washington state involved only contact with donors and members of the public and would not have required her to take part in worship services, those contacts can be considered “key religious functions central to World Vision’s mission,” said the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

Unlike secretaries, accountants or janitors that perform in-house work, customer-service representatives are “responsible for effectively communicating World Vision’s involvement in ministries and projects around the world,” Judge Richard Tallman wrote in a 3-0 ruling that reversed a federal judge’s decision in McMahon’s favor.

[...]

The ruling was based on the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in the Hosanna-Tabor case in 2012 that allowed religious organizations to classify some of their non-clergy employees — in that case, a teacher at a religious school — as “ministers” who can be fired because of their race, sex, sexual orientation or other grounds normally forbidden by civil rights laws.

Read more: https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/9th-circuit-ruling-world-vision-20803414.php

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
9th Circuit sides with religious group that rescinded job offer over worker's same-sex spouse (Original Post) SouthBayDem Aug 6 OP
The legal issue, to my mind, is not about how they treat her so much as unblock Aug 6 #1
the 'legal issue' (at least clearly in the courts mind) stopdiggin Aug 6 #2
guess World Vision is not in my sight for donations IzzaNuDay Aug 6 #3

unblock

(55,569 posts)
1. The legal issue, to my mind, is not about how they treat her so much as
Wed Aug 6, 2025, 01:06 AM
Aug 6

How they treat her differently from others.

I can't speak for the church, but I'm guessing they buy a basic tenet of Christianity, which is that all are sinners. Everyone.

So in rescinding the job offer for her, they'll offer it to someone else. Just trading one sin for another. Maybe a different one or one they can't immediately identify, but some sin regardless. Hell, probably many sins. No one's perfect.

In other words, calling her a sinner isn't nearly enough. They have to come up with a compelling rationale as to why someone with different or more concealed sins is more appropriate for the job.

IMHO, such christian organizations single out lgbtq "sins" as uniquely evil, justifying vastly more cruelty and condemnation than any other sin. These people will forgive murderers who "discovered Christ" in prison but their religion of forgiveness will never give them for loving the consenting adult of their choice.

stopdiggin

(14,278 posts)
2. the 'legal issue' (at least clearly in the courts mind)
Wed Aug 6, 2025, 02:31 AM
Aug 6

is whether they have a right to discriminate, within their hiring practices - regardless of the twists and turns (or illogic) of their religious belief.
(i.e., It doesn't make a particle of difference whether it makes and sense or not. It's what they believe - and they have a right to enforce that standard within their ranks.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»9th Circuit sides with re...