Society/Culture Andrew Thorburn - Controversial appointment as Essendon CEO. Broader discussion not for the AFL board..

[gouki88]

I don't know. You'll have to ask the anti discrimination act and the like

You mean the nonsense Review and Bill introduced by the inept Coalition government in 2017 and 2021 respectively?

They're morons for trying to put religion on equal footing as race, gender, and disability.

 

[Marcel Proust]

You mean the nonsense Review and Bill introduced by the inept Coalition government in 2017 and 2021 respectively?

They're morons for trying to put religion on equal footing as race, gender, and disability.

Protecting hindus Muslims Jews etc. Is important

 

[Soggy2112]

Wasn't Folau given millions as compo for being sacked due to his religious views? [From a skint NRL]

Will the drug cheats get sued? Unlikely but it's be interesting to see how the law views it.

Perhaps you have very little idea what gets said at alex Rance place of worship

I really don’t know, what I do know makes me guess it’s probably not particularly favourable. However, as I’m aware, he kept it private and was not out publicly preaching sermons that contradict the code of conduct of the Richmond Football Club, so he gets a pass.

I still don’t understand why Folau was paid out, he pretty clearly violated the terms of his contract regarding social media use as they were reported. Again, why is the fact that what he said was religiously motivated change the fact that it was against his code of conduct? IIRC he was even told that if he removed the post and replaced it with one that directly quoted the verse, instead of the fairly aggressive style paraphrasing he posted, they would not have fired him.

I'm of the view religious organisations should be able to discriminate in their own employment. Otherwise you end up with the situation whereby atheists or Muslims could apply to teach at Christian schools that have Christian values. That's why I have no problem with churches having a policy against employing female pastors. There are bible passages to justify that position, rightly or wrongly, and churches that allow female pastors if someone feels inclined to go down that path.

This is fair I guess, it still makes me uncomfortable that we’re basically providing a space where some laws are apparently not applicable, as long as an old book says so.

 

[Evolved1]

This is fair I guess, it still makes me uncomfortable that we’re basically providing a space where some laws are apparently not applicable, as long as an old book says so.

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

 

[gouki88]

Protecting hindus Muslims Jews etc. Is important

Including Jewish people isn't quite right given it's an ethno-religion. The others are consequences of racism in this country - stereotypical Hindus & Muslims are POC.

The ideas held within those religions ought not to be protected from scrutiny, same as Christianity and its denominations. In a similar vein, we shouldn't be bending over backwards to accommodate them by not taxing them, or letting deplorable views go unchallenged because they're ones "religious beliefs".

"Religious beliefs" in and of itself is just a nothing term. They're beliefs given some special status via being attributed to some mythical character.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I've got some idea. OP perhaps doesn't fit the technical definition but it's curious how far we allow discrimination against religion going forward.

With regards to Thorburn in particular - it benefits a football club to cast as wide a net for memberships as possible. Appointing controversial or potentially discriminatory figures eats into and works against that aim.

If religious inclusion benefits the club, fine. But if it works against club interests, then what good is it?

 

[the_interloper]

With regards to Thorburn in particular - it benefits a football club to cast as wide a net for memberships as possible. Appointing controversial or potentially discriminatory figures eats into and works against that aim.

If religious inclusion benefits the club, fine. But if it works against club interests, then what good is it?

Correct. I mean in the end Essendon haven't made a moral decision here, it's fiscal. And it's not only memberships, it's sponsorship as well, and for the reasons you mentioned as well.

 

[Gough]

Sucks to be a religious bigot these days, the invisible hand is woke.

 

[Gough]

Looking at the ongoing coverage it looks like the only ones still going on about this are the culture warriors in the media. From a business point of view I suspect Essendon would rather this never mentioned again and those who opposed his appointment have moved on.

 

[Saint]

I'm old enough to remember last week when the religious people were saying not to discriminate against people based on their beliefs.

Now a Christian school wants to know if the kids found out the teacher's private living arrangements.

 

[Nickoo]

With regards to Thorburn in particular - it benefits a football club to cast as wide a net for memberships as possible. Appointing controversial or potentially discriminatory figures eats into and works against that aim.

If religious inclusion benefits the club, fine. But if it works against club interests, then what good is it?

What if it’s not a matter at all? What is the religious affiliations of the CEO’s? For instance no one worries that Dan Andrews a Catholic is premier; he said last week that his Catholicism informs his every decision and that lot have extremely divisive views on same sex marriage etc and how quickly we forget sexual abuse which has as yet not been resolved fully. Thorburn’s actual utterances abd practise in large organisations is a model of inclusivity. Yet the potential for something which he’s never done is what forced him out. We’ve crossed the rubicon when a person is not judged by their character and actions but by the artefacts that surround them. And as for memberships, Essendon like Richmond and Collingwood have always been heavily supported by those of the Catholic/Christian faith.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[FredLeDeux]

What if it’s not a matter at all? What is the religious affiliations of the CEO’s? For instance no one worries that Dan Andrews a Catholic is premier; he said last week that his Catholicism informs his every decision and that lot have extremely divisive views on same sex marriage etc and how quickly we forget sexual abuse which has as yet not been resolved fully. Thorburn’s actual utterances abd practise in large organisations is a model of inclusivity. Yet the potential for something which he’s never done is what forced him out. We’ve crossed the rubicon when a person is not judged by their character and actions but by the artefacts that surround them. And as for memberships, Essendon like Richmond and Collingwood have always been heavily supported by those of the Catholic/Christian faith.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Except for the dudded customers

 

[Saint]

Except for the dudded customers

At the church or the bank?

 

[Falcon3518]

Ok people the correct answer is God isn’t real but you have to let people believe what they want and you can’t bully them into being sacked doesn’t matter how much of a victim you think you are. The end.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Gethelred]

Ok people the correct answer is God isn’t real but you have to let people believe what they want and you can’t bully them into being sacked doesn’t matter how much of a victim you think you are. The end.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Some people don't really know what's unhealthy.

 

[ElectricG]

Some people don't really know what's unhealthy.

I would like to know more

 

[Schneebly11]

For instance no one worries that Dan Andrews a Catholic is premier;

If Dan Andrews were the head of the Catholic Church it would be different.

Thorburn is the HEAD of this church, not just a mere member. And that then makes it the key factor in the decision.

If Thorburn was just a member and didn’t make public his opinions then he wouldn’t have been sacked. Paul Barry from Media Watch summed it up well:

So why did Thorburn lose his job?

Well you can’t run the Conservative Party if you’re a paid up Communist. You can’t head up the Anglican Church if you’re a Catholic cardinal.

And you really can’t expect to run a footy club that champions diversity if you chair a church that teaches homosexuality is a sin.

 

[Gethelred]

I would like to know more

Ask them for a copy of their pamphlet.

 

[the_interloper]

If Dan Andrews were the head of the Catholic Church it would be different.

Thorburn is the HEAD of this church, not just a mere member. And that then makes it the key factor in the decision.

If Thorburn was just a member and didn’t make public his opinions then he wouldn’t have been sacked. Paul Barry from Media Watch summed it up well:

So why did Thorburn lose his job?

Well you can’t run the Conservative Party if you’re a paid up Communist. You can’t head up the Anglican Church if you’re a Catholic cardinal.

And you really can’t expect to run a footy club that champions diversity if you chair a church that teaches homosexuality is a sin.

Like I said earlier it was a fiscal decision make no mistake. Your points are correct but ultimately it boiled down to loss of brand in the public, they were painted into a corner really.

 

[The 747]

At the church or the bank?

What is the difference?

 

[FRUMPY]

I still don’t understand why Folau was paid out, he pretty clearly violated the terms of his contract regarding social media use as they were reported. Again, why is the fact that what he said was religiously motivated change the fact that it was against his code of conduct? IIRC he was even told that if he removed the post and replaced it with one that directly quoted the verse, instead of the fairly aggressive style paraphrasing he posted, they would not have fired him.

Same reason anyone is paid out - would cost them more in legal fees/lawyers

 

[Saint]

What is the difference?

People probably expect their bank to try to milk money from them. It's why banks exist.

I guess the church-goers expect hypocrisy from their church leaders too. It's why churches exist.

 

[Gough]

Church organisations want the right to hire and fire based on values and yet when another organisation does the same thing they run to the lawyers. They can't have it both ways.

 

[Gough]

Christianity and intellect are polar opposites.

Some great minds have been of faith and I can understand that because looking to something otherly to explain this f***ed up place doesn't seem unreasonable, it's the manifestation of this faith, so often hateful and exclusionary that I object to. If I'm wrong and there is something upstairs I very much doubt it would be anything Thorburn would recognise.

 

[kriles76]

Christianity and intellect are polar opposites.

I think Sir Isaac Newton might have had something to say about that.