"A reasonable interpretation would take into account reality"
Really now?  You honestly believe the law should account for reality?  Like when an unquestionably guilty murderer gets out on a technicality because it is what is required under the Constitution type "account for reality?"  That's something similar to "projecting victimhood" rather than a natural process of the rule of law?

Might I suggest you stop pursuing a topic you demonstrate a superficial grasp of at best?

"it is not the interpretation of the proposal that is the issue"
What was the issue raised and refuted?  "Great misdirection there Mr. Falsey. No one obviously would support a Catholic organization firing someone for being a Lutheran" or an assertion that Mr. Falsey's interpretation of a provision in the application was a "misdirection" rather than reasonable?  I'd have to say yes, it is the issue according to the point raised and refuted.