The Israel Folau saga

[sidelineview]

His post is still up though.... it truly boggles the old noodle.

I think vast swathes of the population are confusing freedom of speech with freedom from consequence.

Think this thread has reached it's end.

With your word the last one?
And why are you so confused about why his post is still up?

 

[sidelineview]

Dear Advance Australia,

Israel Folau was not sacked for "quoting the bible".

Therefore, your questions are not pertinent.

Regards,

etc.

There might be some lawyers who would put up a good argument against that statement.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Who did Pocock offend?

The guy who was suppose to operate the bulldozer on the day Pocock decided to chain himself to it, he or she couldn't earn their living on that day.

The NSW Police didn't arrest him without reason.

But then again he hasn't done it a second time.

 

[Samson]

The guy who was suppose to operate the bulldozer on the day Pocock decided to chain himself to it, he or she couldn't earn their living on that day.



The NSW Police didn't arrest him without reason.



But then again he hasn't done it a second time.

So Poey commits an arrestable offence and still has a job, Izzy commits an imaginable offence and is out of work. Interesting.

 

[Slim 293]

No.........

 

[Samson]

No...

If you gave it a bit more thought you may come up with a considered response.

 

[Dan54]

But it's their heritage that is being referred to, not their nationality. If they live here, try to get work, pay their bills, and don't try to disenfranchise themselves, they're Aussies. POMs have pretty much the same cultural and social values as us so it doesn't come into play as often.

Out of curiosity, is it different in NZ?

No it's not KOB, where it first annoyed me a bit, I find it annoys me there a bit too. I say the same thing there too. And always remember a woman of Asian lineage telling me how upset her daughter was when going to school that everyone said she was Chinese and the kid had never been out of NZ and if I recall the mum was born in NZ. My own family have commented that I tend to say Pacific lineage on our family facebook site. As I said not getting at anyone, perhaps it me just trying too hard not to seperate people because they look different.

 

[JeepsTragic]

Two things:





and





Who did Pocock offend?



Can you give examples of the batshit crazy opinions Pocock has offered up?

















Look, I agree, but Rugby is political by its very nature. Anyone who has been around the game should know that.

Firstly this is not about Pocock. I know he does a lot of good things in the community but I don't agree with his views on climate change as an example. But he is entitled to his view as is Israel.

Nobody thought that the views expressed by Israel were those of RA. Nobody thought that he was acting as a spokesman for QANTAS. Nobody.

If RA wins then it is the start of a slippery slope. What if a regular-joe-Christian expressed their opinion in the workplace? Is it OK to have them terminated because somebody took offence? What about Israel's church? Should it be banned?

Would anyone attacking Israel dare do the same if he were a Muslim? I doubt it. Get the thought police out of our lives. Israel is entitled to is views. o is Pocock, so am I and so are you.

 

[JeepsTragic]

His post is still up though.... it truly boggles the old noodle.



I think vast swathes of the population are confusing freedom of speech with freedom from consequence.



Think this thread has reached it's end.

The Greens in the last election had a policy that would have banned "climate deniers" from TV. Is that OK? Do they deserve to be banned because they hold a different view to the Greens?

If you think destroying somebody for what they say or that silencing people for their beliefs is OK then you do not believe in free speech. If you believe in free speech then you have to risk being offended. Its as simple as that.

Totalitarian states apply consequences to free speech, not free democracies like Australia.

 

[Derpus]

The Greens in the last election had a policy that would have banned "climate deniers" from TV. Is that OK? Do they deserve to be banned because they hold a different view to the Greens?

If you think destroying somebody for what they say or that silencing people for their beliefs is OK then you do not believe in free speech. If you believe in free speech then you have to risk being offended. Its as simple as that.

Totalitarian states apply consequences to free speech, not free democracies like Australia.

Okay, that would be a state sanctioned curtailing of climate deniers 'supposed right to free speech' (which for the nth time, doesn't exist). Which is not what has happened to Israel Folau. On the contrary, his post is still up.

That another private entity wants to take exception to his remarks is a matter for them. As long as the state allows him to speak he has free speech.

 

[JeepsTragic]

Okay, that would be a state sanctioned curtailing of climate deniers 'supposed right to free speech' (which for the nth time, doesn't exist). Which is not what has happened to Israel Folau. On the contrary, his post is still up.



That another private entity wants to take exception to his remarks is a matter for them. As long as the state allows him to speak he has free speech.

so it is OK for any organisation to sack an employee for expressing their Christian beliefs? Would they do it if Israel was a Muslim? If they did (which they wouldn't) do you think that the Human Rights Commission would step in? So why is it OK for a Muslim to hold and speak those beliefs but not a Christian?

The answers are 'NO', 'NO', 'YES', and 'Everyone is entitled to their beliefs and they should have the fundamental right to express those opinions (so long as they are not inciting violence).

 

[Derpus]

Mate read the 103 pages of thread. We've all been over this many times.

 

[JeepsTragic]

Mate read the 103 pages of thread. We've all been over this many times.

Mate, the decision was made late last week and Israel said yesterday he doesn't trust RS to make a fair decision. In any case I was of the understanding that this thread was about the Israel Folau saga. Its a free country (except if you are a Christian employed by RA) and if you don't want to read or participate then go to another topic and don't worry about what is said here. Simple.

 

[wamberal]

This is an Australian rugby forum, Izzy does not play rugby in Australia any more, apparently. Maybe it is time for the thread to be closed down.

 

[wamberal]

yep. Who cares. Down south the progressives are saying all Queenslanders are stupid and selfish. Should we Queenslanders take a class action? Should we run crying to the HRC or should we say, I don't give a stuff what some progressive twat in Melbourne has to say and get on with our day?

Straw man, did you say before? Pot, kettle, black. Being called a "cane toad" or a "banjo plucker" is just a bit of a joke.

Threatening a kid who is struggling with his or her sexuality that he or she will "go to Hell unless he repents" is not a bit of a joke.


This not about "class actions" or being sued. It is about our ability as a civilised community to allow for all our citizens to live together in peace.

 

[Braveheart81]

so it is OK for any organisation to sack an employee for expressing their Christian beliefs?

No, that is absolutely not what happened.

Firstly, do you think that every statement in the name of a religion is exactly the same? Clearly they are not. Folau has made dozens of posts that have caused absolutely no issue because they don't vilify others.

There has been no attempt to stop players observing their religion and making religious posts on social media. There is a prayer circle after half the games now. It is very common place.

There is always a line between appropriate behaviour and inappropriate behaviour and Folau crossed it. Just because it is to do with his religion doesn't mean that there is no line and he can carte blanche say what he wants without repercussions.

He was then given many roads back to reconcile with RA and move on from the situation without his contract being terminated. He refused to engage at every point.

Trying to paint this as Folau quoting the bible on social media and getting fired for it leaves out so many pertinent details that it barely scratches the surface of what led to the termination of his contract. It's convenient though when you're trying to argue that this is an attack on his free speech.

 

[sidelineview]

This is an Australian rugby forum, Izzy does not play rugby in Australia any more, apparently. Maybe it is time for the thread to be closed down.

Now that the support lobby groups are gaining momentum and public sentiment is turning to support Folau's basic rights?

 

[sidelineview]

But he did refer to the Bible which does "vilify" people.

So a Christian employed by RA can only quote or refer to certain sections of the Bible which RA and Qantas approve of?

 

[sidelineview]

Okay, how about "all Jews will go to hell?"

Substitute any word for "Jews".
The context of the relevant passage of the Bible is being ignored.

 

[oztimmay]

OK we're straying into bad territory here. i'm locking the thread until something substantial arises.