No Oppo Supporters 2022 General AFL Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Think a few, in their haste to take sides in the big picture, might have not considered just how big this is… and I’m definitely not trying to deny or push the race issue.

I’m giving the benefit of the doubt, with regard to claims of racism, to Clarko and co, as I have little doubt they would bung the same crap onto any vulnerable kid.
However the onus is on the employer to be aware and respect all cultural sensitivities… to understand that, and that just ‘cos it worked for Hodgy and that he potentially was willing to sacrifice some of his basic human rights for the sake of making it, doesn’t make it okay or mean it is legal.
As has been posted here, and I’d like to think Clarko and co. are surely bright enough to not actively force the issue of a pregnancy termination, but the mere perception of the players, in a very unbalanced power situation, that it is the preferred option, will not be looked upon very kindly by the likes of Worksafe nor the Human Rights Commission.

I’d suggest there are some some pretty serious breaches of the duty of care at very least, and that Hawthorn, thru it’s agents, will be liable for some big fines and compensation even if they are cleared of any discrimination.
What that means for Clarkson and Fagan I have no idea… what I do know is that this ruthlessness needs to be stamped out for all kids going into the system.
 
Last edited:

Think a few, in their haste to take sides in the big picture, might have not considered just how big this is… and I’m definitely not trying to deny or push the race issue.

I’m giving the benefit of the doubt, with regard to claims of racism, to Clarko and co, as I have little doubt they would bung the same crap onto any vulnerable kid.
However the onus is on the employer to be aware and respect all cultural sensitivities… to understand that, and that just ‘cos it worked for Hodgy and that he potentially was willing to sacrifice some of his basic human rights for the sake of making it, doesn’t make it okay or mean it is legal.
As has been posted here, and I’d like to think Clarko and co. are surely bright enough to not actively force the issue of a pregnancy termination, but the mere perception of the players, in a very unbalanced power situation, that it is the preferred option, will not be looked upon very kindly by the likes of Worksafe nor the Human Rights Commission.

I’d suggest there are some some pretty serious breaches of the duty of care at very least, and that Hawthorn, thru it’s agents, will be liable for some big fines and compensation even if they are cleared of any discrimination.
What that means for Clarkson and Fagan I have no idea… what I do know is that this ruthlessness needs to be stamped out for all kids going into the system.
And more mummys boys as a result
 

Log in to remove this ad.

what I do know
None of us know anything.
The Hawthorn Football Club is a professional organisation.
Let's find out what everyone is after here.
If the Hawks failed then it will all come out with out any input from any of us that do know.

We know nutting!
 
Quick glimpse?

Chair in a religious organisations that has expressed strong stances on the usual controvesial issues.

Not saying all members of the church express the same view but as the chair I would expect that he would have a decent say.

Edit: also caught up in the Banking Royal Commission....
 
Chair in a religious organisations that has expressed strong stances on the usual controvesial issues.

Not saying all members of the church express the same view but as the chair I would expect that he would have a decent say.

Edit: also caught up in the Banking Royal Commission....

Oh dear.. not one of those.
 
Quick glimpse?

New Essendon chief executive Andrew Thorburn is chairman of a church organisation which likens abortion to the operation of concentration camps and declares that homosexual behaviour is wrong.....
a sermon on the church's website declares;
Lust is a sin, sex outside of marriage is a sin, practiciing (sic) homesexuality is a sin,

....speaking at the Crichton Medal night, president David Barham described Thorburn as a “man of great integrity and exceptional vision”.
The royal commission’s final report singled out Thorburn and Dr Ken Henry – who also resigned – for harsh criticism, saying they had not learned the lessons of past misconduct, particularly in NAB’s wealth management arm that had charged $100m in fees without providing services in return.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

How does he even get employed with those views???

They are not that unusual at the top end of town.
Guy called Bruce Teele was Chairman of JB Were, arguably back in the day Melbourne's most influential stockbrokers.
He was also head of a religious cult that was ultimately declared as heretical by the Presbyterian Church and all its elders excommunicated.

'The Fellowship' had views more extreme than those listed above.
Basically 'The Fellowship' was considered more important than family, women were completely subjugated, members could not have social contact with persons outside 'The Fellowship' and their views on abortion, homosexuality were on par with Mr Thorburn's and woe betide you if any of your relatives or ancestors were Freemasons.

Even after the cult was exposed it made no difference to Teele's standing in the finance sector.
He went on to Chair a number of large investment groups.
 
Just heard him on SEN , don't like him , but like a couple on here your f d if you have different views .
Probably needs to be on the religion thread .

Definitely agree that you can have different views but when your view have had, and will likely have, a detrimental impact on a minority who are born that way then it is a problem.

With dons now having an AFLW, who have a more visible amount of those who are in the LGBTQIA could cause a few issues for the club.

Looks to be a bit of a PR furphy from the dons board.

Oh, he was also involved and on the external review committee for the dons 🤨
 
Definitely agree that you can have different views but when your view have had, and will likely have, a detrimental impact on a minority who are born that way then it is a problem.

With dons now having an AFLW, who have a more visible amount of those who are in the LGBTQIA could cause a few issues for the club.

Looks to be a bit of a PR furphy from the dons board.

Oh, he was also involved and on the external review committee for the dons 🤨
I don't agree with him at all .
 
Chair in a religious organisations that has expressed strong stances on the usual controvesial issues.

Not saying all members of the church express the same view but as the chair I would expect that he would have a decent say.

Edit: also caught up in the Banking Royal Commission....
They sure know how to pick them!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top