Or he's bringing further attention to the insanity we find ourselves in by refusing to say 2+2=5 and further refusing to acknowledge that that act in itself is sufficient for him to be barred from employment.

His contempt is attending the school when he is restrained from doing so by court order. He is suspended with full pay during this time. He has conflated the court order barring him from the school grounds with his beliefs. These are two different things.

Also, at an earlier date during a celebratory church service he confronted members of the church and school.

He is purposely confusing legal issues here to make it seem he is fighting the TRA battle: he is not.

It is like continuing to go to work or school grounds when you are suspended. Or fired. What if this were a TIM insisting on continuing at a single sex rape crisis center if they had refused to hire or transferred or removed them them? Or a student suspended from campus for sexual assault who kept going on campus? The place for challenging that is the courts. This is not like the lunch counter protests or similar against sexism. Here in the US we have "at will" employment in many states. But does the ruling in Forstater apply in Ireland where he is at?

No, Forstater does not apply but Irish courts often refer to UK law.

He feels his Christian beliefs compel him to show up at the school in violation of the court order. This is issue number one.

Issue number 2 is the use of the pronoun "they". He made this into a bigger issue by disrupting a church service to celebrate the school's 260th anniversary. Also, he could have just called the student by name avoiding this altogether. He also would have signed a contract making him aware of the CofI values.

It is important to note many secondary schools in Ireland are under management of a church. So the above scenario is not unusual.