Remove this Banner Ad

Religion Folau

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

blackcat said:
My personal beliefs irrelevant. It's a slippery slope and will have unintended consequences giving the State unintended rights.
Click to expand...
Agree
Folau's beliefs are abhorrent to me, but he has them. So do Pauline Hanson's, but she will remain in parliament.
A couple of major issues:
1. He is entitled to his beliefs - religious or otherwise. (The fact that his beliefs are based, in my opinion, on fantasy and myth, is also irrelevant.)
2. He has not over-stepped any moral, legal or sport-based lines; just made a controversial personal point.
3. When using free speech, he has a responsibility to accept fair criticism and understand the effect on others.
4. In sport, a participant's beliefs do not run counter to any sporting code and are therefore irrelevant to it.
Simply, sport and its codes are not faith-based, but sport-based.
He should not be stood down, but should be challenged for what he says.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Echoes said:
And whilst I’m not a fan of the man or his style of politics, this is why people gravitate toward the Fraser Anning’s of this world.

For better or worse, you know where they stand. Unlike the rest of these bastards.
Click to expand...

Anning is a malignant tumour caused by the corrupt cancer infecting our society. Can’t build a monster and then cry when it steps on a few buildings. If our leaders want to build Frankenstein’s monster they should be held accountable for its actions.

People like Scott Morrison and Tony Abbott were egging people like Folau and Anning on only one year ago.
 
Recent investor relations assessments now include questions that are used to determine whether or not the company has any restrictions over the freedom of speech of employees.

Having a restriction lessens your ranking.

It is interesting that we are going in different, mutually exclusive directions.

Personally, I like have the right to say I do not agree with Folau. But that is an opinion I would feel very guilty expressing if he loses his right to speak.
 
skipper kelly said:
Thought bubble.

The bible, which Folau paraphrased from, is used to swear the oath to tell the truth in our court system.
Click to expand...

So is the Quran but my oath to tell the truth would be sworn over nan's tatty old recipe book. It has the power.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Gralin said:
Sure, but they also don't have to put up with it or stand by quietly when someone is saying something wrong.

Shrugging your shoulders and ignoring bigotry doesn't make the world a better place.

Being tolerant of intolerant views is not how you build a tolerant society.

Folau didn't post a positive message that was inclusive or loving, I have no issue with people taking offence to what he posted and letting him know.
Click to expand...

Who gets to decide what is classed as tolerant and what is intolerant though.
It’s not all black and white.

People honestly believe everything is offensive or intolerant nowadays . Eventually it is going to go too far (I say eventually but it’s already way past it ) ,people just want to ruin peoples lives because they have views they disagree with.
 
Downhill Skier said:
Who gets to decide what is classed as tolerant and what is intolerant though.
It’s not all black and white.

People honestly believe everything is offensive or intolerant nowadays . Eventually it is going to go too far (I say eventually but it’s already way past it ) ,people just want to ruin peoples lives because they have views they disagree with.
Click to expand...
Telling people that being gay is a choice and evil is an intolerant view. Allowing that view to be expressed does more damage to the community than not allowing it to be expressed.

It's pretty black and white. If someone's beliefs are designed to oppress others based on things that are naturally occurring such as race, gender, sexual orientation, then those beliefs should not be allowed to define how society acts.

If you say oh well, they are just doing that over there and not hurting me so I will tolerate it, you are allowing intolerance to stay and possibly grow.

If you want to be Christian go ahead, you can do that without being homophobic. If you want to preach love and acceptance go head. If you want to preach that being gay is a sin and sex outside of marriage is a sin and marriage can only be between a man and a woman, then you should be shut down.
 
Sirlemsip said:
Actually, if you want to follow the letter of the 'law' (bible) then you can't.

Just get rid of religion already. We have evolved past illiterate farmers who don't understand why the sun sets at night.
Click to expand...
they already don't follow it to the letter, they've been picking choosing for years, and the Churches have changed their stances on topics to keep people coming through the doors when needed
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Gralin said:
Telling people that being gay is a choice and evil is an intolerant view. Allowing that view to be expressed does more damage to the community than not allowing it to be expressed.

It's pretty black and white. If someone's beliefs are designed to oppress others based on things that are naturally occurring such as race, gender, sexual orientation, then those beliefs should not be allowed to define how society acts.

If you say oh well, they are just doing that over there and not hurting me so I will tolerate it, you are allowing intolerance to stay and possibly grow.

If you want to be Christian go ahead, you can do that without being homophobic. If you want to preach love and acceptance go head. If you want to preach that being gay is a sin and sex outside of marriage is a sin and marriage can only be between a man and a woman, then you should be shut down.
Click to expand...

It’s not all black and white mate and tolerance has to go both ways. How tolerant must we be , what views should we be tolerant of ? . Who gets to decide what we can say or what we can’t. There are already clear laws in place regarding discrimination.

You are literally preaching about being against oppression but in the same post telling someone that they have to change their religious beliefs or they should be shutdown. Isn’t that the definition of oppression and intolerance.
 
Downhill Skier said:
It’s not all black and white mate and tolerance has to go both ways. How tolerant must we be , what views should we be tolerant of ? . Who gets to decide what we can say or what we can’t. There are already clear laws in place regarding discrimination.

You are literally preaching about being against oppression but in the same post telling someone that they have to change their religious beliefs or they should be shutdown. Isn’t that the definition of oppression and intolerance.
Click to expand...

No-one is saying anyone has to change their religious beliefs. This is all about actions. If you're in a high profile position with a well known organisation, expect your social media presence to be monitored. He was given fair warning not to post stuff like he did but chose to do it anyway. That is not oppression - that is the conditions you accept when you are employed.
 
Downhill Skier said:
It’s not all black and white mate and tolerance has to go both ways. How tolerant must we be , what views should we be tolerant of ? . Who gets to decide what we can say or what we can’t. There are already clear laws in place regarding discrimination.

You are literally preaching about being against oppression but in the same post telling someone that they have to change their religious beliefs or they should be shutdown. Isn’t that the definition of oppression and intolerance.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't have to go both ways.
Oppressing LGBQTI people in the name of religion does not have to be tolerated, there is nothing about oppressing people for how they were born that is tolerant.

It is black and white in this case.

It is also the paradox of tolerance. If you want a tolerant, progressive society you cannot allow intolerance to flourish.
 
Gralin said:
No it doesn't have to go both ways.
Oppressing LGBQTI people in the name of religion does not have to be tolerated, there is nothing about oppressing people for how they were born that is tolerant.

It is black and white in this case.

It is also the paradox of tolerance. If you want a tolerant, progressive society you cannot allow intolerance to flourish.
Click to expand...

Such as intolerance of any opposing view to one's own?
 
HawkMongrel said:
Such as intolerance of any opposing view to one's own?
Click to expand...

I'm fine with people having views that oppose mine. In fact, I enjoy the discussion/debate.

But you better have something better to go on, than just "my religious book says so" to justify the position you hold and the actions you take, particularly when a given group is denigrated. And we do not need to tolerate actions that follow that logic.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom