-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
On a more conceptual level, the argument here seems to be the standard we set for offensive comments.
Those on one side of this debate think the yardstick for offence should be themselves - pretty hardy folk who can let these sorts of things wash over them without taking anything away from it.
The other side argue the yardstick should be the hypothetical teenaged disabled indigenous lesbian who is also transitioning - the most vulnerable of vulnerable who are affected if a falling leaf lands in their path. Worth pointing out that nobody here takes a position quite this extreme, but those elsewhere certainly do.
So when it comes to Folau, the yardstick you use for offence obviously affects how seriously you view the matter.
I honestly think the standard is somewhere in between the two, but defining exactly where is the crux of the argument.
I don't buy the argument by some on here that 'I was fine with the comment, therefore everybody else should be too'. And while I acknowledge the presence of vulnerable Polynesian homosexual teenagers, I don't think they should necessarily be the standard either.
In a small way I'm glad this may head for the courts, as that is the logical place to have these quite high-minded theoretical arguments. Well, either that or the Fern.
Offensive should be irrelevant, illegal should be the only yardstick. Trying to put some sort of measure on hurty feelings is a nonsense. And results in situations like this.
I am offended ny QANTAS actions and bullying... tough shit for me really. My hurty feelings are real, just not really relevant to others.
Nobody is denying that some people find things offensive. I have no doubt some people were heavily traumatized by his mean words. But so what? Where exactly does it all end when hurt feeligs are the yardstick and no evidence of impact is required?
I am amazed so many people are buying into this hurty feelings means something must happen bullshit.The world is fucked. The west has had it to easy for to long and has created a bunch of limp wristed pansies. Given how annoyed I am by QANTAS there is a good chance I am included in that. -
Decent article here: https://www.spectator.com.au/2019/06/our-fury-at-censorship-by-governments-and-corporations-has-burst-with-the-folau-fiasco/
This was linked from a US blog btw, so this thing is going international.
Some quotes:
"Maybe Rugby Australia did have the right to sack Folau as a matter of contract law (or maybe not, but that’s for the courts to decide). The likes of Qantas and ANZ can direct sponsorship money wherever they like, and they wouldn’t be the first big corporates to engage in such asinine virtue-signalling. GoFundMe is a private platform, and may very well have been within its rights under its own terms of service to boot out Folau’s fundraising appeal, hypocritical and selective as that may have been.
But just because those organisations could have done what they did doesn’t mean that they should have. As a matter of public policy, the Folau affair is a dead end, but as a cultural issue, it is troubling. It’s another front in what the left derisively write off as the ‘culture wars’, in a world in which what can and can’t be said (by force of law or otherwise) is becoming increasingly limited.
And here is where Phelps is dead wrong: The media feeding frenzy created by the Folau case is not a ‘rally point’ seized upon by the right. If the left are frustrated by the amount of attention Folau is getting – and no doubt they probably are – then they only have themselves to blame."
-
Thoughts?
"Imagine getting upset at someone for claiming the God you don’t believed in, said in the book you don’t read, that unless you repent of the sin you don’t care about, you will go to a place you don’t think exists."
Apologise if this has already been posted.
Obviously you have to consider vulnerable young Poly kids who are gay or struggling with their sexuality. But would Foolthou's tweets have been new info for them? I'd imagine they'd be painfully aware of this already.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
Thoughts?
"Imagine getting upset at someone for claiming the God you don’t believed in, said in the book you don’t read, that unless you repent of the sin you don’t care about, you will go to a place you don’t think exists."
Apologise if this has already been posted.
Obviously you have to consider vulnerable young Poly kids who are gay or struggling with their sexuality. But would Foolthou's tweets have been new info for them? I'd imagine they'd be painfully aware of this already.
Homophobe!
-
@Bones said in The Folau Factor:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
Thoughts?
"Imagine getting upset at someone for claiming the God you don’t believed in, said in the book you don’t read, that unless you repent of the sin you don’t care about, you will go to a place you don’t think exists."
Apologise if this has already been posted.
Obviously you have to consider vulnerable young Poly kids who are gay or struggling with their sexuality. But would Foolthou's tweets have been new info for them? I'd imagine they'd be painfully aware of this already.
Homophobe!
To clarify. I obviously meant painfully aware of his views or those of the more fundamentalist community.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel yeah plus heard in the church sermon, read in the bible, etc.
-
Do we know, with any data, if the gay community actually were offended by the tweets, or does Alan Joyce speak for all homosexuals?
My gay cousin and his mate weren't triggered at all and they spent shitloads on a house across the street from Eden Park - so they're rugby.
That's 2
-
@Siam Of my gay mates it's split evenly between, 'don't give a frick', 'what a dick' and 'which one is rugby again?'...now my straight gay ally friends were all about the petition to stop gofundme and have been quiet about it since those maybe premature celebrations.
-
@Bones said in The Folau Factor:
@Siam @Rembrandt Anecdotal.
It's called 'lived' and @Baron-Silas-Greenback says it can't be used.
-
We all live in a society that has norms and values, in theory our laws will be influenced by these. As norms and values change the laws will eventually follow. Many laws have reflected religious sins such as adultery and homosexuality. In many countries people are still arrested and even killed for these "sins".
Thankfully in western cultures views have changed dramatically, don't forget homosexuality in Tasmania was still illegal as late as 1997. Now a short 22 years later gay people can marry and have as much sex as they like.
I believe what Folau stands for is an outdated cultural view that is no longer accepted. I think the outrage is not because he is a Christian but because as a society we no longer tolerate any hateful or discriminatory speech(even if its in the bible) towards homosexuals.
I believe slavery and segregation of blacks was accepted by the church and believers found passages in the bible to support this. Once society no longer tolerated slavery people eventually stopped spreading these views even though it was once supported by the church.
I believe homosexuality is heading down the same path, that is even though it maybe in the bible as a sin, society will not tolerate any discrimination against homosexuals. This is probably the reason nearly every other christian footy player isn't posting "gays go to hell" on their social media posts.
-
@chimoaus said in The Folau Factor:
We all live in a society that has norms and values, in theory our laws will be influenced by these. As norms and values change the laws will eventually follow. Many laws have reflected religious sins such as adultery and homosexuality. In many countries people are still arrested and even killed for these "sins".
Thankfully in western cultures views have changed dramatically, don't forget homosexuality in Tasmania was still illegal as late as 1997. Now a short 22 years later gay people can marry and have as much sex as they like.
I believe what Folau stands for is an outdated cultural view that is no longer accepted. I think the outrage is not because he is a Christian but because as a society we no longer tolerate any hateful or discriminatory speech(even if its in the bible) towards homosexuals.
I believe slavery and segregation of blacks was accepted by the church and believers found passages in the bible to support this. Once society no longer tolerated slavery people eventually stopped spreading these views even though it was once supported by the church.
I believe homosexuality is heading down the same path, that is even though it maybe in the bible as a sin, society will not tolerate any discrimination against homosexuals. This is probably the reason nearly every other christian footy player isn't posting "gays go to hell" on their social media posts.
Gee I think bringing slavery into it is a bit much. It should also be mentioned that religious doctrine played a part in ending slavery as well. But regardless, it's been mentioned numerous times now that he doesn't just think gays are going to hell. He thinks pretty much all of us are all going to hell. I'm certainly going to hell apparently. Last night I drank, fornicated, gambled and I'm sure as fuck not going to church on Sunday morning. My wife died a committed atheist. She's going to hell too according to Foolmouth. Now I can choose to get all upset about that or not give a shit. I choose to not give a shit because what Fooltool says has zero bearing on my life and if anything I can't help but feel sorry for someone who is so demented in the head that he crosses himself every night and lives his life in fear of eternal damnation. For every tweet like that from Foolcow there are probably a million supporting gay rights. His opinions should be ignored and the only time the press or anybody reports on him it should be when he's actually done the one thing he actually contributes to the world, and that's catch a rugby ball. And in the end, he's not owning human beings as property, he just sent out a fucking tweet.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
Gee I think bringing slavery into it is a bit much. It should also be mentioned that religious doctrine played a part in ending slavery as well.
I think it is a very good example to use, slavery was very much a part of early religion and I believe early religious text covers slaves as property and the ability to beat them until near death etc. It wasn't until society started changing that Religion changed with it. The same has happened with woman rights.
I cannot recall seeing Folau posting these versus, would it be ok if he posted all woman should obey their husbands in the name of the lord?
"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Saviour."
Ephesians 5: 22-23
"Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness I permit no woman to teach or have authority over a man; rather, she is to remain silent."
1 Timothy 2: 11-12Society no longer tolerates domestic violence or mens dominance over woman and as such the churches views have changed.
Whilst his words have no impact on you it does on many religious people. Many men still beat their wives because they believe the bible says they can. If Folau continues his promotion of homosexuality as a sin some Christians will discriminate and hate against gays because it is a sin in the bible. This is how discrimination spreads. Yes it was just a tweet but words are often how wars start and I for one do not believe he should be sprouting this outdated and antiquated belief.
-
@chimoaus said in The Folau Factor:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
Gee I think bringing slavery into it is a bit much. It should also be mentioned that religious doctrine played a part in ending slavery as well.
I think it is a very good example to use, slavery was very much a part of early religion and I believe early religious text covers slaves as property and the ability to beat them until near death etc. It wasn't until society started changing that Religion changed with it. The same has happened with woman rights.
I cannot recall seeing Folau posting these versus, would it be ok if he posted all woman should obey their husbands in the name of the lord?
"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Saviour."
Ephesians 5: 22-23
"Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness I permit no woman to teach or have authority over a man; rather, she is to remain silent."
1 Timothy 2: 11-12Society no longer tolerates domestic violence or mens dominance over woman and as such the churches views have changed.
Whilst his words have no impact on you it does on many religious people. Many men still beat their wives because they believe the bible says they can. If Folau continues his promotion of homosexuality as a sin some Christians will discriminate and hate against gays because it is a sin in the bible. This is how discrimination spreads. Yes it was just a tweet but words are often how wars start and I for one do not believe he should be sprouting this outdated and antiquated belief.
Yeah see that's where your understanding of Fonghow's religion is all wrong. He's not advocating or preaching hate against anyone. He's not telling people to discriminate or persecute. Will his tweet lead to discrimination and hate against people who drink alcohol, people who have sex outside of marriage, atheists etc? Is that going to lead to a war? This is getting ridiculous. The guy is a clown and should have been professional enough to refrain from tweeting stuff like that, but the way some people are going on you'd think he'd committed some kind of atrocity.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in The Folau Factor:
@chimoaus said in The Folau Factor:
We all live in a society that has norms and values, in theory our laws will be influenced by these. As norms and values change the laws will eventually follow. Many laws have reflected religious sins such as adultery and homosexuality. In many countries people are still arrested and even killed for these "sins".
Thankfully in western cultures views have changed dramatically, don't forget homosexuality in Tasmania was still illegal as late as 1997. Now a short 22 years later gay people can marry and have as much sex as they like.
I believe what Folau stands for is an outdated cultural view that is no longer accepted. I think the outrage is not because he is a Christian but because as a society we no longer tolerate any hateful or discriminatory speech(even if its in the bible) towards homosexuals.
I believe slavery and segregation of blacks was accepted by the church and believers found passages in the bible to support this. Once society no longer tolerated slavery people eventually stopped spreading these views even though it was once supported by the church.
I believe homosexuality is heading down the same path, that is even though it maybe in the bible as a sin, society will not tolerate any discrimination against homosexuals. This is probably the reason nearly every other christian footy player isn't posting "gays go to hell" on their social media posts.
Last night I drank, fornicated, gambled
Now that is a good night!!
-
@Crucial said in The Folau Factor:
@Bones said in The Folau Factor:
@Siam @Rembrandt Anecdotal.
It's called 'lived' and @Baron-Silas-Greenback says it can't be used.
Oh you can use it. It makes it clear who cannot accept that their evidence is just anecdotal and must use a different phrase. Lived experience lol
Sports requiring athletes to support cultural positions