Remove this Banner Ad

Review Ex Giants player watch

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I strongly disagree with him but credit to him, he hasn't come out and complained that his free speech has had consequences unlike some of our politicians who would like to peddle the same rubbish where they feel their free speech is more important than anyone else's use of free speech to oppose them. That's not how it works.

I'm more disappointed with the description of him as "a devout Christian" in the coverage of his comments. There's plenty of Christian faiths that don't believe gay people are going to Hell, and implying that being a devout Christian unfairly tars many who just happen to have a related but not identical faith.
 
It's not as simple as to say just don't post your views online. That's saying he's not entitled to freedom of speech.

We interrupt the discussion of Israel Folau to bring you a rant on a pet peeve of mine: freedom of speech.

There is no freedom of speech under Australian law, just an implied right to political speech. There are any number of limitations to speech, including defamation and vilification laws which do not trump an individual’s right to say whatever they goddamn please.

“Not posting online” is actually a limitation on the platform you can use to express views. The internet is not the public domain where people have rights to participate freely and unfettered. Eg, you don’t have the right to call us “plastic” on Big Footy, but you can in any pub in Footscray. People post on privately owned applications and services and agree to the terms and conditions imposed by those applications. The owners (or their surrogates) of those applications can then sanction any breach of those terms.

The case law also appears to allow for employment contracts (which Folau has with the ARU) to restrict speech, particularly if it could damage the reputation of the employer.

The above is not legal advice and please consult a legal practitioner before relying on such advice.*


*another example of limitations on speech imposed by Govt in relation to particular groups.

And now back to your regular programming...
 
We interrupt the discussion of Israel Folau to bring you a rant on a pet peeve of mine: freedom of speech.

There is no freedom of speech under Australian law, just an implied right to political speech. There are any number of limitations to speech, including defamation and vilification laws which do not trump an individual’s right to say whatever they goddamn please.

“Not posting online” is actually a limitation on the platform you can use to express views. The internet is not the public domain where people have rights to participate freely and unfettered. Eg, you don’t have the right to call us “plastic” on Big Footy, but you can in any pub in Footscray. People post on privately owned applications and services and agree to the terms and conditions imposed by those applications. The owners (or their surrogates) of those applications can then sanction any breach of those terms.

The case law also appears to allow for employment contracts (which Folau has with the ARU) to restrict speech, particularly if it could damage the reputation of the employer.

The above is not legal advice and please consult a legal practitioner before relying on such advice.*


*another example of limitations on speech imposed by Govt in relation to particular groups.

And now back to your regular programming...
Fair enough
I get you're the professional but the lack of a bill of rights has been pissing me off for decades. The high court "magically" finding an implied right of free speech on political matters, was a case of legislation by the judiciary to me, but thank god they did.

On employment matters it infuriates me when an SBS journalist is sacked for expressing negativity around ANZAC Day. I've actually known many first and second generation Australians who say it confuses them, and makes them feel alienated. Open discussion is obviously a necessary step on how to fix it, to me.

Nearest parallel I can think of is Bob Carr legislating huge fines after someone speared a Blue Groper in Clovelly. If the fish or any other swims 500m to Gordons Bay it's fair game. Shooting Bambi figuratively in both cases.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

With freedom also comes responsibilty, the later is often not exercised.
More often than not people exercising their "freedom of speech" only proves to most that they are truly a Class A Butthole.
Not need to list examples.
 
For a start, we don’t have freedom of speech in Australia - and even if we did, it’s not without consequences. Being able to freely express your opinions does not stop others for calling you out on your bigoted hate speech, riddled with hypocrisy.

I mean, he’s using Leviticus now. What a hypocritical toolbag.

Israel has tattoos - Leviticus 19:28 “Ye shall not... print any marks upon you”
And tell me again, when the Waratahs play? - Leviticus 19:3 “Ye shall keep my Sabbath”

I wonder if he likes a good prawn cocktail or crab claw? Leviticus 11:10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.

These ignorant ar$eholes that cherry pick the bits they want but feel free to completely ignore other bits because it doesn’t suit them s#*t me.

Freedom of speech? Spare me. Doesn’t shield you from being called on it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Well, neither gave us as much as we wanted, but holding onto one of them would have given us more experience in the small/medium forward role than we currently have.
I was always a big WHE fan. I would’ve played him over Palmer in the 16 PF. But obviously injuries ruined his time here.
 
Carlton fans starting to see what we all (I think...) knew about Kennedy. So very slow, and not much hurt factor. Ordinary selection that.
I would guess it is more noticeable because he is playing injured, His ankle is a worry and would be interested to see what he has done to it maybe ligaments
 
I would guess it is more noticeable because he is playing injured, His ankle is a worry and would be interested to see what he has done to it maybe ligaments
Sure, and he’s not getting as much as the ball as he could if he was fully fit. But he’s still painfully slow and I don’t think he’s got the hurt factor or poise to make up for that.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Sure, and he’s not getting as much as the ball as he could if he was fully fit. But he’s still painfully slow and I don’t think he’s got the hurt factor or poise to make up for that.
11 possessions, 8 contested, his biggest issue is the lack of people to distribute to, very young and playing at less than 100%.
 
Some of Column A and some of Column B for mine. Those 'lack of hurt' factors on which GWS presumably made its decision are exacerbated with any injury such as he seems to be carrying. I still think he was over-hyped at the time because of the Victorian anti-academy crusade, and had he been more accurately assessed would be carrying less weight of expectations. Remember that he's only third year, and no Patrick Cripps!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Review Ex Giants player watch

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top