Freedom of speech

[Isochronous]

Another gross generalisation not supported by the facts. Islander rugby players are myriad, and many (if not most) have the same or similar cultural and religious beliefs as Israel has.

Despite your efforts to portray is as such its never been about the belief themselves, its about how Israel expressed them in a public forum. This is evidenced by the facts, many people have the beliefs, its only the one who chose to ignore many request and his own agreement not to post them on social media who is being called to account.

Israel never agreed to censor the expression of his Christian beliefs. RA asked him after he signed his new contract to agree to a new social media gagging clause and he rightly told them to piss off.

 

[tgh]

RA asked him after he signed his new contract to agree

If that is the case, what grounds do they have for sacking him ?

 

[serfty]

...If that is the case, what grounds do they have for sacking him ?

RA used an ill defined catch all clause in the code of conduct breach hearing - 'disrepute'.

 

[JohnK]

But there are certain issues where we must think the same... domestic violence cannot be accepted....racial villification cannot be accepted. Discrimination, sexual harrassment, not acceptable.

We can disagree till the cows come home on which political party is the best for our economy.

But there are some fundamentals which make for a safer and more enriched society.

I don't disagree with your points but we must have freedom of speech and freedom of thought and freedom of religion and freedom to be on any side in a debate without being judged and persecuted.

Saying someone is going to hell is not discrimination, nor is it harrassment nor is it abuse. Some may not agree with the statement but that's all it is, a disagreement.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I don't disagree with your points but we must have freedom of speech and freedom of thought and freedom of religion and freedom to be on any side in a debate without being judged and persecuted.

Saying someone is going to hell is not discrimination, nor is it harrassment nor is it abuse. Some may not agree with the statement but that's all it is, a disagreement.

But the only problem here was to specifically include homosexuals. That's where the impact is. It potentially lowers self esteem for those that are, and gives cause for those who wish to bully others. The latter group may take it out of context, but that's one of the things we're trying to proect.

 

[JohnK]

But the only problem here was to specifically include homosexuals. That's where the impact is. It potentially lowers self esteem for those that are, and gives cause for those who wish to bully others. The latter group may take it out of context, but that's one of the things we're trying to proect.

He included all 9 things considered a sin that are mentioned in Corinthians and you're focusing on one as if it was added with intent to discriminate against a specific group. It wasn't.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

He included all 9 things considered a sin that are mentioned in Corinthians and you're focusing on one as if it was added with intent to discriminate against a specific group. It wasn't.

Either it was intentional, or he just didn't give any thought to the impact of his actions. I don't think either of those alternatives paints him in a good light.

If he'd left homosexuals off the list I doubt there would have been any publicity.

 

[Steady]

RA used an ill defined catch all clause - 'disrepute'.

I guess RA are glad they had something in there they could use for such a high level breach, strange that other players were not terminated for various misdemeanours (that I consider serious and would have thought caused disrepute) - Seems those actions didn’t concern RA or the sponsors as much - just low level breaches, like beating women and men, or cheating for monetary gain.

An abhorrent post, but proverbial Folau death penalty a step too far

Amid repeated examples of domestic abuse, racial vilification and cruelty to animals meted out by professional sportsmen, does Israel Folau really deserve to be exiled?

www.smh.com.au

 

[CaptJCool]

How did someone’s literal quoting of a bible text bring RA into disrepute.

The disrepute rule in soccer is banning religious messages during the game. Eg hidden underneath a club jerseys and revealing it after scoring a goal. They are banned.

I do think this saw an enough is enough message by voting ballot that re-elected LNP

 

[Hvr]

I don't disagree with your points but we must have freedom of speech and freedom of thought and freedom of religion and freedom to be on any side in a debate without being judged and persecuted.

As a young child in Aglo-centric Australia I would bet real money that you were racially vilified because of your Greek background. Did you find that to be 'freedom of speech' or do you see it now as hate speech?

Your daughter, whom you and your wife love dearly, will sadly be subjected to racial and gender abuse as she grows up. Will you say to her that she has to accept it because the other person's 'freedom of speech' is more important than her feelings? Her physical and or emotional safety?

I don't think you would tolerate it for a second because your daughter is the most important person in your life and you would fight, both literally and figuratively for her safety and well-being.

Your freedom of religion ends where it impinges on my freedom to choose whether or not I follow a religion. Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone.

 

[juddles]

I am maybe going to make a few more enemies with this, but please try to follow the logic and not simply vilify someone who is not simply agreeing with you:

FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!!!!! (not using that as a call to the Almighty, just using an expression that is commonly understood to be a venting of frustration)

A footballer made some sort of post where he quoted some sort of religious position. He is just a footballer, yet another person. Why is this so important? The world is full of people with a trillion different views and opinions. Why is his so important?

Are people seriously saying that his words will cause harm? If that is truly the case, then it speaks much more of the failings of those offended. How can people possibly expect to be happy in this age of mass communication and internet when any fool's meanderings can cause them so much harm??

I am not agreeing with what he said. I couldn't care less about his views. But his right to feel whatever I do truly believe in. As is everyone's right to ignore it. If you, or your children, suffer from what any person says on the internet, then there is an interminable world of pain waiting out there for you.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Hvr - JohnK has already answered that. He says he enjoyed the racial banter (IIRC being called 'a wog') when he was growing up.

I am maybe going to make a few more enemies with this, but please try to follow the logic and not simply vilify someone who is not simply agreeing with you:

FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!!!!! (not using that as a call to the Almighty, just using an expression that is commonly understood to be a venting of frustration)

A footballer made some sort of post where he quoted some sort of religious position. He is just a footballer, yet another person. Why is this so important? The world is full of people with a trillion different views and opinions. Why is his so important?

Are people seriously saying that his words will cause harm? If that is truly the case, then it speaks much more of the failings of those offended. How can people possibly expect to be happy in this age of mass communication and internet when any fool's meanderings can cause them so much harm??

I am not agreeing with what he said. I couldn't care less about his views. But his right to feel whatever I do truly believe in. As is everyone's right to ignore it. If you, or your children, suffer from what any person says on the internet, then there is an interminable world of pain waiting out there for you.

There are two issues here.

One is that the wrong sort of people can take advantage of those comments and use them to confirm their own beliefs or fortify their actions in bullying others.

The second is how comments from someone like Folau (or Court) can affect those that are at their most vulnerable. Those struggling to understand their sexuality, possbily already subject to bullying, possibly already with low self esteem.

The sad reality is that people do suffer because of what others say on the internet. There are trolls out there that say terrible things. While part of the solution is to train our kids how to deal with this, that's not always going to be enough.

When we hear of a suicide our first response is not 'oh, this person should have toughened up'. The response is try and work out how to stop others ending up in the same tragic situation.

 

[DC3]

Yes. Those pulling the religious card.

Most of us were indoctrinated into the religion of our parents and as children we had no choice. A lot of hocus-pocus there. So much rubbish in the name of religion.

Some will move on as adults and work out what suits them best.

 

[DC3]

You would feel right at home in Northbridge JohnnyK:

View attachment 159951

Tourist food. But I get your joke

 

[CaptJCool]

Tom Boyd 23 quits AFL FOOTY

High draft pick for the Bulldogs

What used to be spoken of around kitchen tables and front bars now spills into social media and players get good support but also trolled.

They read the comments.

It seems to me we need to readjust the way we view ourselves - that the vitriol always existed.

Just ask any elite umpire or referee. It’s always existed and a thick skin and resilience always essential. Was worse in those small circles as mates would mercilessly bag each other without regard for the mental health of another.

Social media has amplified the bad feedback in not a good way.

So do we shut it down ? Our so called leaders haven’t led by example. .....

Politics is a battle of ideas but we play the “woman” not the ball. Until this changes the free for all continues and there is fallout.

 

[Isochronous]

As a young child in Aglo-centric Australia I would bet real money that you were racially vilified because of your Greek background. Did you find that to be 'freedom of speech' or do you see it now as hate speech?

Your daughter, whom you and your wife love dearly, will sadly be subjected to racial and gender abuse as she grows up. Will you say to her that she has to accept it because the other person's 'freedom of speech' is more important than her feelings? Her physical and or emotional safety?

I don't think you would tolerate it for a second because your daughter is the most important person in your life and you would fight, both literally and figuratively for her safety and well-being.

Your freedom of religion ends where it impinges on my freedom to choose whether or not I follow a religion. Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone.

Nobody is forcing you to adopt a particular religion, Hvr.

 

[Max Samuels]

Freedom of speech is absolute. It means you gotta take the good with the bad.
I hate football - doesn't interest me at all - but I don't care what the players do/say/behave, as long as they don't break the law. And last time I checked, it wasn't against the law to have an opinion.

This idea that people are answerable to their employer 24/7 is just dumb. Nobody could live up to that standard.
It is totally unfair that we expect sports "stars" to be some kind of pillar of morality.

What I find most amusing is that when "news" breaks of some 22yo bogan footy player getting drunk and playing up in public, everyone is like "OMG! How did this happen? Someone please protect the children"!

I have always just expected thuggish behaviour from these lads - that's why they are hired. Not because they embody the values of a gentleman. Who cares? We seem to forget that these games are just modern takes on what the Romans did 2000 years ago. Sure, we have taken the death and blood out of it.... but only just. It's still a stand-in for a violent and bloody game, with the masses cheering on from the stands.... why do we pretend it is something else?

 

[DC3]

Nobody is forcing you to adopt a particular religion, Hvr.

However, it’s the parents who do this to young children. Later, we may come to our senses

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Freedom of speech is absolute. It means you gotta take the good with the bad.

Except legally, it’s not (an absolute). and no one disputes otherwise. The debate is always ‘how far does it extend’ (not that it extends to everything).

 

[Max Samuels]

Except legally, it’s not (an absolute). and no one disputes otherwise. The debate is always ‘how far does it extend’ (not that it extends to everything).

How far does it extend? Good question. But surely even in the most limiting versions of it, having a religious opinion would be covered?

IMO, and I am using my right to free speech here, with very few exceptions, free speech is absolute. Inciting violence etc is excluded, but having opinions isn't.

"I wish that X was dead" is different to "go and kill X".