-
@NTA said in The Folau Factor:
@Rembrandt said in The Folau Factor:
Thanks.
So - to go off topic for a second - how does the removal of gender in these instances affect Christians or Conservatives?
Like a good saying I heard some years back: "if you don't like gay marriage, don't get gay married". Yes?
Both Christians and conservatives put great value on the traditional family unit. They both see this trans fetish as innately harmful to society, its a weird position we are in where Christians are now standing directly opposed to science deniers. Plenty of folk both Christian and non-christian believe in the 'live and let live' principle, however when we are looking at 4 year old kids starting gender transition therapy most folk see how that is moving into the realms of child abuse. These law changes are part of that movement, people are being taught in university that gender is a social construct, this has almost zero basis in science. Changing a law gives an authority to this gender theory and there could be significant consequences to that.
Back to the matter at hand: I'm not sure that any of the things you mention will be alleviated by Folau getting richer. He's not a pilot whale for Christianity;
$500,000.00 in 3 days says he might be for some
probably his particular sect thinks most of them are venal, bloated institutions who don't serve God in the way they should.
Yes he spoke about that in his sermon. Many religious institutions have lost their principles.
In fact - besides the quoted genocide (something hardly restricted to Christians)
True however most wouldn't know that they are the most persecuted religion in the world. For some reason western media have a habit of only focusing on non-christian attacks. A great example was that Canadian girl a couple years back who had her hijab cut, somehow that was worthy of world wide news headlines and comments from heads of state. You can imagine Christians who are getting news of increased church and clergy attacks get extremely annoyed at the bias.
- the everyday impact to most Christians of Folau winning or losing, will be utterly minimal.
Yep 100%. Its not going to change a damn thing. I sympathise with his position and I understand why people are supporting him. I can't say if he is in the right or wrong here as I am not familiar with his contract and Australian employment law. I'd venture that correct process was not followed in his dismissal so that he might just win on that rather than on 'freedom of religion' grounds which might have set a precedent.
But yeah I won't be funding him even though the 'freedom of expression' issue is important to me, there are plenty of others going through the same thing currently who are more deserving.
-
@rotated said in The Folau Factor:
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
I can’t even see how that’s related.
When you contrast professional athletes with real people in tough or tragic situation it is never terribly a good look. That is what Mitchell has tried to do with his post but it just shows a lack of self reflection.
Posting the Go Fund Me is a bit tacky in my opinion, but hey there seem to be many people out there willing to back it. But I don't think for a second that he is taking money from these other causes, I don't think people scroll through the site looking to give money away at random. People have gone there specifically to donate to him as it's the primary method for collecting funds for this type of thing.
Given we don't have all the facts in the case I would prefer to see this go to the courts. If Folau were to win he would not be asking people to "pay for the consequences of his mistakes" he would be asking people to help him defend his (and in turn others) human rights.
That’s a fair assessment.
I noted above that the others may have got more traffic too, which is only a good thing.
However, it doesn’t change the audacity of the whole situation in my view.
-
@Rembrandt said in The Folau Factor:
Both Christians and conservatives put great value on the traditional family unit. They both see this trans fetish as innately harmful to society, its a weird position we are in where Christians are now standing directly opposed to science deniers. Plenty of folk both Christian and non-christian believe in the 'live and let live' principle, however when we are looking at 4 year old kids starting gender transition therapy most folk see how that is moving into the realms of child abuse. These law changes are part of that movement, people are being taught in university that gender is a social construct, this has almost zero basis in science. Changing a law gives an authority to this gender theory and there could be significant consequences to that.
What sort of s good family unit tells their gay son he’s going to hell?
$500,000.00 in 3 days says he might be for some
probably his particular sect thinks most of them are venal, bloated institutions who don't serve God in the way they should.
Yes he spoke about that in his sermon. Many religious institutions have lost their principles.
The principle of not giving gay people rights or the principle of having tattoos?
True however most wouldn't know that they are the most persecuted religion in the world. For some reason western media have a habit of only focusing on non-christian attacks. A great example was that Canadian girl a couple years back who had her hijab cut, somehow that was worthy of world wide news headlines and comments from heads of state. You can imagine Christians who are getting news of increased church and clergy attacks get extremely annoyed at the bias.
Yep 100%. Its not going to change a damn thing. I sympathise with his position and I understand why people are supporting him. I can't say if he is in the right or wrong here as I am not familiar with his contract and Australian employment law. I'd venture that correct process was not followed in his dismissal so that he might just win on that rather than on 'freedom of religion' grounds which might have set a precedent.
But yeah I won't be funding him even though the 'freedom of expression' issue is important to me, there are plenty of others going through the same thing currently who are more deserving.
Agree with the above but I’m not comfortable with this being s Christian only thing. As that is a baseless case (here).
I wonder how much would be raised if he was a Muslim spouting the same things about homosexuals.
-
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
100 percent with Drew
Nah that's fucked up. Completely uncalled for. So he can't use GoFundMe because there are more worthy causes?
Who said that?
Not Drew, nor me.
Um. Yes he did.
Where?
Really? Did you actually read his entire Tweet?
Yes. He doesn’t say he can’t use it for this. He says he’s a fluffybunny for using it like this.
Same as what @barbarian says above.
He wrote: "You think you deserve donations more than they do."
Where did he even say that or imply that? Mitchell's essentially saying that by starting the GoFundMe page he's telling people not to give money to them but to him. That's fucked up. Phonglau can go hang for all I care, but Mitchell is still a fluffy bunny for saying that.
That’s not saying he can’t use it!
In some ways I’m glad he’s done it. As it’s exposed him for how, in my opinion, completely fucked up he truly is.
And it’s Drew’s opinion there are more worthy causes. Which I agree with. I actually think that the other more worthy causes would have got more traffic due to Mitchell’s post too, which can only be a good thing.
It is effectively. And of course there are more worthy causes but Fœlö never said he deserved money more than them. That was completely uncalled for regardless of how much of a FB the Fœlö may be.
-
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
@Rembrandt said in The Folau Factor:
Both Christians and conservatives put great value on the traditional family unit. They both see this trans fetish as innately harmful to society, its a weird position we are in where Christians are now standing directly opposed to science deniers. Plenty of folk both Christian and non-christian believe in the 'live and let live' principle, however when we are looking at 4 year old kids starting gender transition therapy most folk see how that is moving into the realms of child abuse. These law changes are part of that movement, people are being taught in university that gender is a social construct, this has almost zero basis in science. Changing a law gives an authority to this gender theory and there could be significant consequences to that.
What sort of s good family unit tells their gay son he’s going to hell?
Yep I'd even go as far to say from my understanding of Christianity that would be a very unchristian thing to say. A happy medium between Folau's churches views and modern progressive insanity would be best.
$500,000.00 in 3 days says he might be for some
probably his particular sect thinks most of them are venal, bloated institutions who don't serve God in the way they should.
Yes he spoke about that in his sermon. Many religious institutions have lost their principles.
The principle of not giving gay people rights or the principle of having tattoos?
Gay marriage and children undergoing gender transition. Its interesting the marriage debate was framed as a 'rights' issue. Christians regarded marriage as a religious institution between a man and a woman for the purpose of raising a family. Gay marriage doesn't fit into this definition.True however most wouldn't know that they are the most persecuted religion in the world. For some reason western media have a habit of only focusing on non-christian attacks. A great example was that Canadian girl a couple years back who had her hijab cut, somehow that was worthy of world wide news headlines and comments from heads of state. You can imagine Christians who are getting news of increased church and clergy attacks get extremely annoyed at the bias.
Yep 100%. Its not going to change a damn thing. I sympathise with his position and I understand why people are supporting him. I can't say if he is in the right or wrong here as I am not familiar with his contract and Australian employment law. I'd venture that correct process was not followed in his dismissal so that he might just win on that rather than on 'freedom of religion' grounds which might have set a precedent.
But yeah I won't be funding him even though the 'freedom of expression' issue is important to me, there are plenty of others going through the same thing currently who are more deserving.
Agree with the above but I’m not comfortable with this being s Christian only thing. As that is a baseless case (here).
I wonder how much would be raised if he was a Muslim spouting the same things about homosexuals.
Probably best for another thread but calling for homosexuality to be made illegal or even punishable by death by Muslims (or other non christian faiths) for the most part seem to avoid the lgbt outrage mobs. I'm sure the counter protesters at Anderton Park in Birmingham will show up any day now...
-
@Rembrandt That's a different unrelated issue and yes, lets not pollute this thread with that ...
@Rancid-Schnitzel cool, so you agree with me didn't say that Folau couldn't do it.
Agree he never said he deserved it more. But he put his claim right beside them, with a significantly larger target. It makes him look like a colossal self-obsessed shitbag and that is what Drew is calling him.
-
@Rembrandt said in The Folau Factor:
Both Christians and conservatives put great value on the traditional family unit.
Like Barnaby Joyce?
Facetious and anecdotal tho that statement is, religious people in general love martyrdom. After all, everyone is a sinner, right?
And NOTHING demonstrates your piety like begging forgiveness, as hard as you possibly can. That's why so many of them punch out enough crocodile tears (when they get caught with hookers and drugs) to make David Warner applaud with raised eyebrows.
@Rembrandt said in The Folau Factor:
True however most wouldn't know that they are the most persecuted religion in the world.
I find that statement utterly without meaning. Or basis, really.
If you're looking at how Christianity fares across the board, then you have to look at the richest economy in the world in the USA. The number of "Christians" who make up the 1% is disproportionate to the rest of the world.
If the Christian persecution is so present, and these transgender issues are of such importance that they must be addressed, then why don't these good (and wealthy) Christian captains of industry and politics bring their significant wealth and influence to bear? Surely there is no force that could stand up to that?
TBH your statement around Christian persecution sounds precisely like Urban II calling the Crusade at Clermont.
And, like The Crusaders, the leaders feasted and made themselves rich, while the foot soldiers were duped into dying in their thousands.
-
@Salacious-Crumb said in The Folau Factor:
@NTA said in The Folau Factor:
@Salacious-Crumb said in The Folau Factor:
What’s the bullshit we’re allegedly selling?
I'm not actually sure, because it relates to some mythical "freedom of speech" or "freedom of religion" beat that has nothing to do with Folau's lack of employment to this point.
Well, that’s one perspective. Completely unconvincing. But it’s a perspective, and again, not worth losing a job over.
You misunderstand.
I'm not sure what bullshit YOU are trying to sell in supporting Folau, while mouthing platitudes to ideals that are completely irrelevant to him getting fired.
He was never denied the right to practise his religion or say what he wants - it was merely stated to him that it was incompatible with his status as a paid Rugby professional, and he chose to repeat the dose, then double down.
-
@Crucial said in The Folau Factor:
@Catogrande said in The Folau Factor:
@taniwharugby said in The Folau Factor:
isnt Folau suing because he was sacked due to his Religious beliefs rather than free speech, because IMO there is a big difference.
I'm not sure quite what his defence is but that would seem the logical avenue. To me the whole thing is quite simple and can be boiled down to;-
-
Is what he tweeted a dick thing to have said?
I think in this day and age, many people would say yes. -
Should he be able to articulate such views?
Absolutely. -
Did he violate an agreement between himself and the ARU?
Well they say yes. -
If the answer to 3 is yes does that trump his right to freedom of expression and/or his religious beliefs?
I'd guess that is what will be decided by the legal process and is really what separates most opinions on this thread. For me, the agreement (if it properly exists), trumps all.
I guess we'll see in due course.
The other point is that if he says the agreement was outside of his legal rights , did he ever make that view clear to his employer BEFORE ignoring it?
There was nothing stopping him declaring that they can't stop him making religious statements and therefore he would do so. If they want to challenge that view they can do so in employment court. ie turn the tables.
Crying after agreeing to follow an agreement is weak.All of those issues @Catogrande and @Crucial may be raised but the success of these types of matters will come down to what evidence the ARU have that demonstrates they didn’t terminate the contract for an unlawful purpose.
There have probably been two precedent setting High Court judgements (Bendigo TAFE and BHP) around termination that both explored what the mindset of the managers that made the decision to terminate.
So if I were in the Folau camp I would subpoena Castle and any other ARU execs that were involved in the decision and ask them what they thought when they saw the tweet, why they thought it and how they came to the position that it was enough to announce that they were ‘moving to terminate’. Ask them if they knew it was a religious post etc.
Regardless of the outcome, the media articles that will flow from the trial alone will put massive pressure on both parties, particularly RA.
-
-
@ACT-Crusader said in The Folau Factor:
Regardless of the outcome, the media articles that will flow from the trial alone will put massive pressure on both parties, particularly RA.
And provide massive coverage. So it's a double edged sword.
-
@taniwharugby "no such thing as bad publicity" for Rugby here?
Undecided.
-
@MajorRage said in The Folau Factor:
@Rembrandt That's a different unrelated issue and yes, lets not pollute this thread with that ...
@Rancid-Schnitzel cool, so you agree with me didn't say that Folau couldn't do it.
Agree he never said he deserved it more. But he put his claim right beside them, with a significantly larger target. It makes him look like a colossal self-obsessed shitbag and that is what Drew is calling him.
Cool, so you agree that he was bullshitting when he claimed that Folau said he deserved money more than those other causes.
But even making a comparison like that is purile. My wife had a GoFundMe page for experimental cancer treatment. There were probably more people asking for more cash for film projects or other frivolous shit. Didn't make her or me want to get pissed off at them or make the completely bullshit and unfair claim that they felt they deserved the money more than us.
-
@Bones said in The Folau Factor:
@Mokey said in The Folau Factor:
One thing I would really like to know is why Folau is wanting 3 million when even a generous estimate wouldn't put his legal defence costs anywhere near that.
Pretty obvious really...
When I see Israel Folau the characteristic I have noticed most is how readily and how often he smiles. When he does something exceptional his immediate reaction is a big happy smile, he appears as a bloke who enjoys what he does with the people around him.
I see here a childish outburst from Our Clyde which reminds me that each time I have seen his occasional pieces on rugby they are bellicose, omniscient, sanctimonious, hectoring and, in this example, employing ridicule. It seems he fancies himself as an aspiring sports writer and social commentator, in the manner of Peter Fitzsimons.
I do not think an exchange with Our Clyde would be a good conversation.
Sports requiring athletes to support cultural positions