And yet they sit idly by as their priests rape children. As if being LGBTQ+ is worse than pediphellia.

Not all Christians hate LGBT+ people, but those that do are vicious bastards

This ain't just Christian though, it's Catholic. I know some non-denominational, or even Methodist Churches that would be totally cool with it, but Catholics run a harder line, at least where I'm from.

I think the school should have the right to fire him. I also think it (and any other religious school or land use) doesn't deserve tax money or tax exempt status.

People deserve to have a religion that brings them comfort. But I do get your point.

What are they supposed to do, stop going to church?

I'm not sure why you think they would care.

I think that people often work jobs that don't align with their beliefs. We don't know peoples circumstances and I think its unfair to assume that everyone has a easy choice in their employer. As you said, it likely isn't a very nice place to work for him, and as such its likely not his first choice. Even if he had other options, this seems like a case of workplace discrimination, which would make him a victim.

So some people are Christians... and some people are gay... while that overlap is probably smaller than it would be if they were independent variables it still definitely exists.

One of the ways you can tell that we've essentially won the culture war is that even horrible people like Peter Thiel are comfortable being openly gay.

Because a check from a bigot still gets cashed.

The first amendment says "Congress shall make no law". Even considering courts have held it applies to state and local governments too, I don't think any have held that it applies to private entities.

Whether it's a civil rights violation is another question.

While I agree that it's shitty, I don't see how it's a first amendment issue. The first amendment is just a limit on the kinds of laws that can be passed. Privately, there can be consequences based on speech, religion, etc. For example, platforms like Twitter are not required to host speech that they disagree with.

The US has at-will employment. Your employer can ~~fire you~~ not hire you for almost any reason, including if you make public statements that they disagree with.

There are very few limits to this. One of which is that you employer cannot discriminate based on sex. The lower court found that discrimination based on sexual orientation counts as discrimination based on sex. The appeals court disagreed.

This is normally the kind of thing that the Supreme Court should settle. But given who is currently sitting on the SCOTUS, I don't think I want this case to go that far right now.

You might not understand what the First Amendment means.

This is not a law against speech. This is "private repercussions to public speech," which is absolutely allowed. Further, this is a private organization, not a governmental org. Now, there might be a case for discrimination of a protected class (not sure where NC stands on protecting sexuality), but the school will say the firing is because of social media postings and not because the teacher's sexuality.

In Indianapolis, a Catholic school fired a much beloved teacher because they found out she was a lesbian. She wasn't open about it but was in a long term relationship a woman. There was a lot of outcry, but it was legal under Indiana laws.

The first amendment only applies to the government.

Lets assume the USSC doesnt overturn this one, does that open up leftists and scientists to exclude religious peoples/groups that dont align with their core beliefs?

I feel like theres a level of abuse here thats inherently going to make USSC toss this one out, butthe Christofascist state we are heading towards may throw us a curveball.

Not the first amendment, but it's a blatant violation of Title VII of the civil rights act per the SC case Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia.