Seems like he is being singled out for his outside-of-work religious beliefs. This is not a good look for those employees who believe in "inclusion".
(I jest but, in seriousness, always remember that Popper's paradox works as a justification for any side and any viewpoint, whether good or bad. That's why it's a weak argument.)
It's just about changing morals, with the idea of tolerance as the vehicle that smoothed the way. All the dichotomies dissolve when things are seen for what they are.
He mentioned his personal, religious charity at work and targeted it at all employees as part of a fundraising effort (admittedly for a good cause in this case). At that point, it's not just outside-of-work.