Vile TikTok ‘Prayer’ Triggers Instant Firing

A Massachusetts TikToker just found out the hard way that publicly “praying” for a conservative woman to suffer the “worst case of cancer anybody’s ever seen” can cost you your job.

Story Snapshot

Massachusetts credit union fires executive-level employee after her TikTok “prayer” wished brutal cancer on former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi.
Viral backlash forced the employer to distance itself from explicit hatred aimed at a cancer patient, citing its code of ethics and core values.
Case highlights growing clash between social media “activism” and workplace standards, especially when targeting conservative women.
Massachusetts history of TikTok-related firings shows courts often back employers when posts risk disruption or damage to reputation.

Credit Union Cuts Ties After Viral Anti‑Bondi TikTok

According to reporting on the incident, Massachusetts-based TikTok user @glitterandcrossbones posted a video that appeared to be a “prayer” asking for former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi’s throat cancer to become the “worst case of cancer anybody’s ever seen.”^[1] The clip reportedly went further, asking for Bondi to end up with a hole in her throat that she would have to push every time she speaks.^[1] Viewers quickly identified the creator as Caitlyn Aguiar, an assistant vice president at Jeanne D’Arc Credit Union, based on now-removed LinkedIn and Facebook profiles tying her to the institution.^[1]

Jeanne D’Arc Credit Union responded after the video sparked outrage on social media, issuing a public statement on Facebook that it had “become aware of offensive comments” posted on TikTok by an individual employed there at the time.^[1] The credit union said the conduct was inconsistent with its policies, code of ethics, and core values, stressing that it “does not support or condone this behavior” or any actions violating its standards.^[1] Without naming Aguiar directly, the institution confirmed that the individual was “no longer employed” by the credit union, signaling swift internal action once the video surfaced.^[1]

Pam Bondi’s Cancer Battle And Double Standard On Harassment

Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, a prominent conservative and supporter of President Trump, has been open about her thyroid cancer diagnosis following her time at the Department of Justice.^[1]^[2] Reports indicate she has undergone treatment and is recovering, making the TikTok “prayer” effectively a wish for her real-life suffering to intensify rather than a hypothetical insult.^[1]^[2] For many on the right, the episode underscores a disturbing culture where progressive activists feel emboldened to dehumanize conservative women, even when they are facing serious illness, under the guise of “political speech” or online humor.

Massachusetts has already seen a series of clashes between online expression and employment, especially involving TikTok, where teachers and other public-facing workers have faced discipline for controversial posts.^[2] In one high-profile case, a Massachusetts teacher fired over her TikTok videos lost a First Amendment appeal, with federal judges agreeing that school officials were “eminently reasonable” in predicting disruption from her content.^[2] That precedent shows courts increasingly accept that employers may act when social media activity seriously undermines trust, safety, or institutional reputation, rather than treating every online statement as protected off-duty speech.

Free Speech, Consequences, And What Conservatives Should Watch

The TikToker’s supporters may argue that her post was personal political expression made off the clock, but the absence of any public evidence of a different employer narrative—such as a lack of policy or no reputational impact—makes that claim hard to sustain. Jeanne D’Arc Credit Union explicitly grounded its decision in internal policies and its ethical code, not in disagreement over Bondi’s politics, and there is no released document contradicting that rationale.^[1] In practical terms, the employee’s own choice to list her job and employer on social platforms directly linked her hateful “prayer” to the institution’s public image.

For conservatives, the case cuts both ways. On one hand, many will see a rare instance where vile, dehumanizing rhetoric aimed at a prominent Republican woman actually carries consequences for the speaker, rather than being overlooked by media or excused as “resistance.” On the other hand, broader trends in Massachusetts and beyond show employers and courts are increasingly comfortable policing online speech whenever they can point to potential disruption, which could just as easily be used against pro-life advocates, gun-rights supporters, or critics of leftist ideology.^[2] Navigating that landscape means recognizing that while the First Amendment restricts government, not private employers, every post that ties a name and workplace to extreme rhetoric—on either side—can become a direct threat to a person’s livelihood.