It began with an 'It's OK to vote No' Facebook filter and ended two weeks later, when 18-year-old Madeline was fired over her views on same-sex marriage.

The story of her sacking has blown up, but until she was contacted by Hack today, Madeline had no idea she was at the centre of controversy. In late August, the Christian from Canberra had publicly revealed she planned to vote no in the same-sex marriage postal survey. She was fired on Sunday via a Facebook message in which she was told "homophobic views being made public are detrimental to the business."

"I am in complete shock," she said.

With accusations flying, Hack has spoken with Madeline as well as her boss, Madlin Sims, to piece together how a company dedicated to tying balloons and entertaining children on their birthdays could become the sight of such public anger.

We've also asked a lawyer about whether Madeline can take her former employer to court.

The short answer is that she may have grounds for religious discrimination, but probably not for unfair dismissal, as she was an independent contractor.

Both sides claim they acted morally.

"It was something morally I couldn't get past," Madlin said.

Madeline said: "I simply can't vote yes without going against my god."

What happened

On August 29, Madeline added a Coalition for Marriage 'It's OK to vote No' Facebook filter to her profile photo. It was timed to expire a few days later. Although Madlin later claimed on Facebook her former employee was "extremely out and proud about her views on homosexuals", Madeline said this was her only public action.

By the time she was fired, the 'Vote No' Facebook filter had long expired.

"I'm not afraid to stand up for my beliefs and being a Christian," Madeline said.

"Everyone else is putting up these Vote Yes filters, and there's one filter that says it's OK to vote No. I thought I don't have to put this up but I don't have to stay silent."

Share Facebook

Twitter

Mail

Whatsapp Madeline's Facebook profile with 'It's OK to vote No' filter.

Around the time she changed her profile photo, Madeline began working for Capital Kids Parties (CKP), a Canberra-based entertainment company run by Madlin Sims. She was friends with Madlin's younger brother. There was no contract or formal agreement to work for a certain amount of time and she billed CKP via an ABN.

After the first shift, Madlin's brother contacted Madeline about her Facebook profile. He asked her to take it down. Madlin later posted that Madeline had refused to take the post down and "verbally attacked" her brother, but Madeline says this was not true.

"I was very calm and didn't think anything was aggressive," Madeline said.

"I told him my beliefs and my views and explained myself."

Madlin says she only learned about Madeline's profile photo on Sunday, the day of what would turn out to be Madeline's second and final shift.

"She was very subtle about [her views on same-sex marriage], but any level of it I won't tolerate it," Madlin told Hack.

Here's the message Madlin sent Madeline:

Share Facebook

Twitter

Mail

Whatsapp Madlin's message to Madeline on Sunday.

Madeline says she couldn't reply and explain her views to Madlin.

"She messaged me and blocked me on Facebook and removed me from the work Facebook site. I don't have her number, her email or anything."

After sacking Madeline on Sunday, Madlin posted on Facebook: "Today I fired a staff member who made it public knowledge they feel 'it's okay to vote no'. Advertising your desire to vote no for SSM is, in my eyes, hate speech." The post goes on to argue that Madeline's beliefs are "statistically proven to have horrible effects" on young gay people.

Here's the full post:

Share Facebook

Twitter

Mail

Whatsapp

Two days later, on Tuesday, Madlin clarified her story in a much longer post that called Madeline a homophobe as well as a racist.

Here's the top-half of that second post:

Share Facebook

Twitter

Mail

Whatsapp

Madlin later told Hack she acted out of concern for the children Madeline would be working with, including gay children and children with gay family members. Asked if it was homophobic to vote no, she said she believed it was.

Madeline said she was not homophobic, that she had many gay and lesbian friends and respected their views and loved them "as people".

"If I'm attending a party and dressed up as Minnie Mouse and the child there is same-sex attracted I'm going to love that child like I would any other child," she said.

She also said her views was based on concern for children - similar to the arguments in the Coalition for Marriage's 'Vote No' TV ads, she said same-sex marriage would lead to more 'Safe Schools' sex ed programs. She said it would "change the way things are done in school" and "the way kids are adopted into same-sex families."

You can read our fact check of these arguments here.

"I love everyone, I'm not a hateful person at all," Madeline said.

"I wish that everyone could have equality - I do believe everyone should have equality but to vote yes, to me, is something I can't do. I cannot do it."

'Why I let her go'

Madlin told Hack that none of her customers or staff had complained to her about Madeline's views on same-sex marriage. Despite this, the day she learned about the post she decided to sack Madeline as "damage control before it happens".

"I still believe having her with us would have been risk," she said.

Madlin has toned down the language of her original post when she said she "fired" Madeline. She told Hack, she "let her [Madeline] go".

Either way, she acknowledges the sacking was bigoted.

"It was 100 per cent," she said.

"What I did was bigoted.

"But is it worse for me to be a bigot fighting for the rights of homosexuals or is it worse for her being a bigot telling people they can't have equality?"

Can Madeline take her boss to court?

Scarlet Reid, an employment lawyer for Henry Davis York, told Hack there were generally two legal avenues Madeline could pursue.

An unfair dismissal claim under the Fair Work Act A discrimination claim under state or federal anti-discrimination legislation

She said that because Madeline didn't have any formal agreement with CKP, she was probably a casual employee. Under the Fair Work Act, to bring an unfair dismissal claim she would need to have completed her six-month minimum qualifying period.

"It doesn't sound like this particular person would have the necessary requirements for an unfair dismissal claim," Scarlet said.

"Another employee with longer tenure in ordinary circumstances may well have an unfair dismissal claim if terminated on this basis."

That leaves a discrimination claim. Discrimination on the basis of religion alone is not unlawful under federal anti-discrimination law, but it is under ACT law. The ACT Discrimination Act applies to discrimination on the ground of religion, as well as political conviction, which could include views on same-sex marriage.

"I'm not aware of any cases on the specific issue of gay marriage, but there have been some cases about discrimination on the grounds of political belief," Scarlet said.

With a successful discrimination claim, the victim can be compensated for economic loss as well as non-economic losses like hurt and humiliation.

Madeline said she felt Madlin had discriminated against her because of her religion, but she didn't plan to take her to court.

"I am tempted to but at this point I don't feel like it would do anything. I don't feel like it would make me a bigger and better person if I did," she said.

Madlin said she was confident there were no grounds for unfair dismissal or discrimination on the basis of religion because Madeline had never been an employee.

Audio Player failed to load. Try to Download directly (13.76 MB) Play Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume.